Page 7 of 9

Posted: 18 Oct 2006, 20:55
by Ed Walters
PeteP wrote:
Ed Walters wrote:The ATC HAS been improved ... They've also added in a few other functions, such as warnings of aircraft on parallel runways.
Oh, wow, that is good news. Now it'll be just like the real thing... won't it? :wink:
I'm not saying it's just like the real thing or anything near it - clearly that would require a major overhaul of the system - just addressing the specific issue that was mentioned above, as there has been this perception that nothing has been done to the ATC, when it has been tweaked and tuned in certain areas.

Posted: 18 Oct 2006, 22:08
by PeteP
Ed Walters wrote:I'm not saying it's just like the real thing or anything near it
No, I know you weren't, Ed. I was being - or, perhaps I should say, attempting to be - humorous. :wink:
PP

Posted: 18 Oct 2006, 22:18
by Ed Walters
OK, no problem Pete :wink:

There just seems to be an attitude amongst some people of hang anyone who thinks FSX has potential from the highest yard arm :shock:

Posted: 18 Oct 2006, 22:30
by airboatr
biplaneflyer wrote::think: Shouldn't this thread be in the payware section? Unless of course your all getting FSX for free?
I think at this point, FSX reviews are a free for all :dance:
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Posted: 18 Oct 2006, 23:03
by airboatr
Ed Walters wrote:OK, no problem Pete :wink:

There just seems to be an attitude amongst some people of hang anyone who thinks FSX has potential from the highest yard arm :shock:
Ed
FSX does have potential, but only at a cost
(and by todays hardware standards a big cost)
plus the addons are a problem.... and so on and so forth
I Just don't see the point anymore of getting the latest and
greatest sim when I and most others don't have the
Engine to run it, thats all.
like the saying goes "You throw your money down , you take
what you get."
after reading the reviews, I pretty much know what i'll get
from FSX on my system so I'm not throwing my money down this time.
to those who do I wish them well.

ATB

Posted: 21 Oct 2006, 12:08
by ukmil
Just installed FSX on my rig

took nearly 2 1/2 hours to install, and the first run took nealry 15 mins to fire up

after eventually getting it going, i immediatly turned down the autogen, as this seems to be the Top Tip, and then did a quick flight in the Baron around scotland. It seemed flyable, but this was with very little scenery.

will give it some more testing

Posted: 22 Oct 2006, 14:02
by chockhead819
not impressed at all, when every i select a flight, it acts like the game has crashed the screen disappears & i see my desktop about 10sec later it comes back on. After using it for about an hour, I went back to FS9.

Posted: 22 Oct 2006, 15:18
by Nigel H-J
Having read all the points put across about whether some are to buy or not to buy I always beleive it to be good practise to hold off and wait.

This does not just apply to FS but with anything new that comes onto the market that catches my eye. For I much prefer to wait six or even 12 months before purchasing an item rather than being the 'first kid on the block with it' the simple reason being is that usually over this period of time any niggly faults can be ironed out and improvements made by the manufacturer also, this gives time to see as to how successful the product is on the market and through reviews etc.

Flight Simulator X

Posted: 22 Oct 2006, 15:22
by Tomliner
Does anyone know if the VOR Radial capture has improved in FSX?.Most aircraft seem to have a problem with this although the PMDG 737 seems to overcome it in FS9.ATB EricT

Posted: 22 Oct 2006, 16:42
by Hot_Charlie
I'm getting to like it.

When I first installed it, even with low steeings and autogen it was struggling to remain in the top end of single figure FPS. Now I'm on dense scenery and autogen having added/change 4 or five lines of the FSX.cfg, and I'm getting a steady 20-25 or so. Putting the vis at 20 miles has helped too...

As an aside, apart from the gauges, the PD Spit works nicely too...

:smile: