|
Post by harmsway on Dec 31, 2008 18:36:13 GMT -5
My love for Golden Wings has kept me happy with FS9 for a long time. The Holidays and the unwrapping of paper has changed all that now. Now getting acquainted with FSX... until Acceleration was added.
Yes I got the Gold Edition and everything I read in the forums says Acceleration is an improvement on FSX. Removes bugs and improves performance. Yet my install created planes without landing gear. No evidence of like discussion in these forums has led me to believe I screwed up the installation. So currently I'm uninstalling/reinstalling everything.
It's not just missing landing gear. Other control surfaces are wack too. Anyone else have such problems?
Oh..Hello everyone. I'm new here, well truthfully, I've been lurking for years.
Gene Harm
|
|
|
Post by harmsway on Dec 31, 2008 19:38:46 GMT -5
Yep, the uninstalling/reinstalling everything worked like a charm. Never mind.
Is there a list somewhere of Golden Wings planes that run with FSX? Any new Golden Age stuff released?
|
|
|
Post by Tom Constantine on Jan 1, 2009 1:12:23 GMT -5
Hiya Gene- Welcome to the Hangar. Sadly most of the FS9/GW3 aircraft do not import well into FSX, but there is a growing selection of old crates available. I don't think there's a definitive list yet. I recommend (and I think it's a consensus) leaving GW3 installed for the aircraft and scenery that you already have and just install native aircraft in FSX.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2009 12:57:13 GMT -5
hmmm Gene, I am one of the many who bought, installed and deinstalled Acceleration. It doesn't solve problems - it creates them. The only reason you might want it is if you want to run in DX10 Demo mode (and why would you want to do that as it doesn't exist yet and when it does it will inevitably be totally different from what you currently see???) or you are desperate to have a bunch of kids' 'missions' or you can't live without a not much better than average Merlin helo, F16 fighter (unless you are running a Cray computer if you try to fly it low and fast you'll find you just get graphics texture problems) or yet another Mustang (yawn) when there are already so many excellent and free models out there already. Due to an Aces cock up, the terrain glitches that were present in the original release of FSX and corrected in SP1 were reintroduced in SP2 and Acceleration because the twerps used the original faulty files in the 'updates'. Also you will find that by staying just with SP1 the majority of the Golden Age aircraft that you have and love will still be fine in FSX with at worst minor prop disc/cloud transparency issues, most of which although not fully correctable, can be modified until they are almost unnoticeable. More and more Golden Age aircraft are being converted or remodelled from scratch to make them compatible with FSX but it's pretty obvious that many of our favourite designers will not, for many reasons, be able or even want to take on such a massive task with their existing creations. Also, many (most?) of the FSX native models that are coming out seem to me to be payware and there must be a lot of folks like me who just cannot afford to go down that road much as we would like to support the guys who put the work in to make them. I'm always deeply cynical whenever Microsoft bundles software and takes control out of the users hands. Usually (like Vista) it means that it's naff and they want to make you buy it. I personally would not have gone for the 'Gold' version but obviously it's too late now Better to have gone for the original FSX RTM (which is being flogged off dirt cheap now - that's why they have the so-called 'Gold') and downloaded SPs 1 and 2 for free and decided which flavour suits you best. From your comments it sounds like SP1 and a week or so adding your GW aircraft to see if they work or not would have been the way to go. Just my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by Tom Constantine on Jan 1, 2009 15:44:05 GMT -5
And there is the other side of the FSX coin. R has nailed most of the problems the end user faces with what is essentially an aberration. There are eight! different possible configurations of FSX which is pure madness. Many BAD decisions were made during development. Given the difference in people's hardware there are an infinite number of stops on the road to satisfaction. I prefer to use FSX on it's own merits and make do with the few native aircraft that are available. Golden Wings will remain Golden FS9 for me. I won't spend a lot of money on addons ever again only to have to give them up for the next aberration.
|
|
|
Post by harmsway on Jan 1, 2009 16:10:03 GMT -5
Thanks for all the good input fellows and rest assured that FS9/GW3 is still resident on my machine. As was the case before GW3 is still my primary sim. Yet in time FS9 will fall behind.
Gene
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2009 5:42:23 GMT -5
Tom is right. They eventually decided that the hole was deep enough and they had better stop digging so they put a total block on any more work on FSX. So what we've got we will have until FS11 comes out ie a bit of a dogs dinner but which contains the building blocks and foundations on which FS11 will be based. Sure, lots of bad decisions must have been made during the development of FSX but if we try to see their point of view, maybe it was just too big a task to move in one giant bound from the old game engine to an almost totally new one.
One of the best things about TOH is that over here we're mature enough to realise that and those of us who've taken FSX on (and that's not everyone by any means) have set about playing the various compromises off to get something we're happy with. Like I said, I've stuck with SP1 and I still get to fly many of my much loved FS9 (and in some cases FS8) aircraft in FSX. I'll be happy to stay like that until FS11 comes out. It means that I can't install some new native FSX models that are now coming out but I can wait and hopefully by then there will also be many more FSX compatible Golden Age aircraft for me to savour as well. And don't forget that the other side of the coin is that the more 'software updates' you install the more you also end up spending on hardware (notably your mobo/cpu, memory and graphics card). So I'm now not aiming to go down that road again until FS11 arrives and we get some sort of idea of what will be needed to run it - and what will actually be available!!
|
|