Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 3:01 pmWith more of us getting FSX I thought it would be interesting to see what features people have/do find to be there favourite. This isnt the definitive list, but hopefully a good sample for people to choose from.
Page 1 of 1
Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 3:01 pmPosted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 3:25 pmI voted for VC's - the defaults are amazing for what they are. I don't like the whole airport vehicles all that much - anyone tried turning airport vehicles up to full and going to NZWN? Big mess.
Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 3:34 pmyeah I like the VCs too, mostly the way your "head" will move around, yes it can be anoying when your trying to click on switches but usualy its not constantly bobing around..
anothor thing I like is the turbulance, looking at the wing view in ruff wind can be prety realistic
haha if I did that Itd tkae forever to load then just crash
anothor thing I like is the turbulance, looking at the wing view in ruff wind can be prety realistic
anyone tried turning airport vehicles up to full and going to NZWN?
haha if I did that Itd tkae forever to load then just crash
Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 5:34 pmwheres the all of above ?
Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 5:56 pmronwestnz wrote: wheres the all of above ?
Whatwhatwhat?
Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 9:49 pmThe all of the above question is in the poll entitled, what questions did Jon leave out, its on the forum somewhere
Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:08 pmDefinitely the VC. In FS9, I would only fly the 2D panel, because most of the VCs were unreadable., and it really annoyed me when vital switches and displays were hidden behind an unshiftable yoke. Of course, in FSX, I've mainly flown "stick" types -- the gorgeous RealAir SF260, and Rick Piper's new Chippie. So I may yet cuss at that bl*&%y yoke!
All the visual effects stuff -- light bloom, funky water (still looks unrealistic IMO without bow waves...) etc are a "one step forward, two steps back" deal, that stops the sim from being flyable, and makes it into a screenshow generator. Fine if you pause for a screenie, but then switch it off to fly the plane!
Actually, one thing I really DO like that's not in your list, is the ability to reconfigure, add and remove scenery without having to restart the sim
All the visual effects stuff -- light bloom, funky water (still looks unrealistic IMO without bow waves...) etc are a "one step forward, two steps back" deal, that stops the sim from being flyable, and makes it into a screenshow generator. Fine if you pause for a screenie, but then switch it off to fly the plane!
Actually, one thing I really DO like that's not in your list, is the ability to reconfigure, add and remove scenery without having to restart the sim
Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 11:20 pmi chose VC's but now i realise i love the advanced animations (esp. the wing flex). watching the wings curl looks just stunning B)
Posted: Sun Jan 14, 2007 1:26 amG-HEVN wrote: Actually, one thing I really DO like that's not in your list, is the ability to reconfigure, add and remove scenery without having to restart the sim
True, makes life alot easier I have to say.
Posted: Sun Jan 14, 2007 11:31 amG-HEVN wrote: Actually, one thing I really DO like that's not in your list, is the ability to reconfigure, add and remove scenery without having to restart the simÂÂ
Wow I didn't realise...thanks for the pointer!
Given my FS9 takes about a half hour to reset, and FSX ultimately will be loaded to the gills too, this goes to top of the list for me as well.
Posted: Sun Jan 14, 2007 2:57 pmmm hmm, X has all sorts of neat tricks up its sleeve, u just gotta look for them. B)
Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 10:38 pmI also voted for VC's.
In the time I have had FSX installed on my sluggish system, the only thing that has stood out to me with my medium low settings is the amazing quality of the default aircraft over FS9, and the enhanced realisum in the VC view... apart from that I'd be pleased with ole fs2004 any day
In the time I have had FSX installed on my sluggish system, the only thing that has stood out to me with my medium low settings is the amazing quality of the default aircraft over FS9, and the enhanced realisum in the VC view... apart from that I'd be pleased with ole fs2004 any day
Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2007 1:16 pmI like the scenery rendering especially.
You could basically describe my job/profession as 'Flight Sim with no aircraft'- using the power of computers to model, predict, remember and plan the real world in a 'virtual world'
The software we use to accomplish this costs many many tens of thousands of dollars. One aspect of my job is 3D visualisation (i.e. showing people a part of the earth, as realistically as possible, without actually needing to go to that place....it saves a lot of money) but the tools we have had to do this with havnt been anywhere near the visual quality that FSX can muster.
Cloud/object reflections on water, dynamic hill shadows, weather effects, object shadows.....all rendered beautifully in FSX...and all for a hundred dollars.
Its amazing.
You could basically describe my job/profession as 'Flight Sim with no aircraft'- using the power of computers to model, predict, remember and plan the real world in a 'virtual world'
The software we use to accomplish this costs many many tens of thousands of dollars. One aspect of my job is 3D visualisation (i.e. showing people a part of the earth, as realistically as possible, without actually needing to go to that place....it saves a lot of money) but the tools we have had to do this with havnt been anywhere near the visual quality that FSX can muster.
Cloud/object reflections on water, dynamic hill shadows, weather effects, object shadows.....all rendered beautifully in FSX...and all for a hundred dollars.
Its amazing.
Posted: Sun Aug 23, 2009 1:22 pmVC for me also.
Close behind is the missions, adds that extra excitement and challenge. I will purchase the SAR mission pack next.
But personally FSX is just far superior, and with the add ons supplied by the fine people here, realism has never been so close. All I need now is to find a force feedback seat.
Now that would be awesome
Close behind is the missions, adds that extra excitement and challenge. I will purchase the SAR mission pack next.
But personally FSX is just far superior, and with the add ons supplied by the fine people here, realism has never been so close. All I need now is to find a force feedback seat.
Now that would be awesome
Posted: Sun Aug 23, 2009 9:03 pmI wanted to vote for all of the above!
Posted: Sun Aug 23, 2009 9:38 pmFunny first time ive seen this one ,mine is ditto all of the above but ive gotta say scenery enhancements and the same reasons as timmo really ...
Posted: Sun Aug 23, 2009 10:56 pmI have no idea why this thread has come back up? As you can see my post was over 2 years ago?! 
Posted: Sun Aug 23, 2009 11:00 pmYeah was alittle weird when i noticed it this morning and looked at the post dates ,all good though i missed it the first time around anyway and voted today lol.. forum does the darn est things
Posted: Wed May 19, 2010 2:04 amJust shows ya ... i did,t put any input back then .. now Why would that be ? .. one simple answer 