Flight Sim X is better than Flight Sim 2020.

[Sagittarius A*]

Definitely not in graphics. The satellite and Bing map data ensure that Flight Sim 20 looks just absolutely amazing.

That said, Flight Sim X tops the successor in almost every way possible. From the variety of aircraft available, the actual missions, the badges, and better sense of accomplishment.

Flight Sim 20 does multiplayer, weather, and scenery better. That's about it. Sure there's landing challenges, but these do not compare to the missions and challenges that FSX presented.


Flight Sim 2020 looks good, but is seriously just a shell compared to what FSX had to offer.

[ArnMan]

Remains to be seen I think. I have yet to see a review of 2020 that isn't just a explanation of the features and endless gushing over the graphics.

[gspectre]

So far, I do agree with you. I do not have a PC that can run FS2020 but what I like most about FSX are those Missions, Awards and challenges.

When you past the training lessons, you even get a Certificate to print out. I really liked those little touches.

[Sagittarius A*]

Originally posted by gspectre:

So far, I do agree with you. I do not have a PC that can run FS2020 but what I like most about FSX are those Missions, Awards and challenges.

When you past the training lessons, you even get a Certificate to print out. I really liked those little touches.

I've not done any of the 172 or cessna ( or whatever the training missions are) in Flight Sim 20. I don't really need the training lessons. The landing challenges are an interesting thing, but don't hold a candle to the missions that FSX has.

[gspectre]

When I was flying around the US, I was enjoying the Postcards (from a 3rd party add-on), that can be earned from about 250+ locations when you land at certain locations. Each one was a historical type Postcard that showed interesting landmarks near or in those cities and towns.

[grreed1124]

Thats why I am in no hurry to get 2020. In four years or so it will be an entirely different Simulation than it now is. Bugs worked. a wealthy of freeware, and a wealth of payware mods and addons. Possibly even better optimization so one doesnt need a liquid cooled super PC to max everything. I have FSX maxed on mine with UT North America and Active Sky and still get 45 fps with a demanding plane like the Carenado TBM 850.

[gunshotlead]

It took almost over a decade and a half to get FSX to where it is today. I just came out of the FS 2020 fiasco - it's staying on the hard drive for now, but I actually bought the FSX SE as my latest PC build can run it without a hitch. Ironically, it can barely run 2020 even though it meets MS/Asobo minimum specs. While I don't have the download and other fiasco troubles that are plaguing the launch, it's just not as fun right now. It's great to be able to run FS at 60-70 fps in places where two PC builds ago, it would have been a slide-show.

[Coolgoos3]

Here I'm back too...for the same point and more!..Top PC ownwners with Ultra fast Graphic Cards and the latest Procesors , with 32 RAM...and 4K monitors ...are talking there about investing 1000 U$D or more in hardware..and not to tell you how many software you will need to put on payware aircraft and scenery....

[K-Koy]

It’s still a cake with no icing. Someday those addons will come. What I am waiting for though is A2A Simulations to make their first move.

[Kormega]

Originally posted by gspectre:

When I was flying around the US, I was enjoying the Postcards (from a 3rd party add-on), that can be earned from about 250+ locations when you land at certain locations. Each one was a historical type Postcard that showed interesting landmarks near or in those cities and towns.

What add on was that?

[sinistar]

Originally posted by EternalStoic:

Definitely not in graphics. The satellite and Bing map data ensure that Flight Sim 20 looks just absolutely amazing.

That said, Flight Sim X tops the successor in almost every way possible. From the variety of aircraft available, the actual missions, the badges, and better sense of accomplishment.

Flight Sim 20 does multiplayer, weather, and scenery better. That's about it. Sure there's landing challenges, but these do not compare to the missions and challenges that FSX presented.


Flight Sim 2020 looks good, but is seriously just a shell compared to what FSX had to offer.

What? FSX when released didn't have much content either, except for added helis. Wait a year or so and the MSFS 2020 market will be full of stuff.
MSFS2020 tops FSX is every way, except for the amount of add-ons. And yes, I do have MSFS2020 Prem Deluxe, FSX, FSX SE, FS 2004, X-Plane 9 to 11, FS2, DCS, and $10000 worth of add-ons to all of them.

[sinistar]

Originally posted by grreed1124:

Thats why I am in no hurry to get 2020. In four years or so it will be an entirely different Simulation than it now is. Bugs worked. a wealthy of freeware, and a wealth of payware mods and addons. Possibly even better optimization so one doesnt need a liquid cooled super PC to max everything. I have FSX maxed on mine with UT North America and Active Sky and still get 45 fps with a demanding plane like the Carenado TBM 850.

Just land on Heathrow (from the add-on), and show me your 45fps then!

[Coolgoos3]

Agree, MFS2020 is the Future,
and I belong to the "Here and Now"'...At my 70 years old age, have no chance to wait for any 10.000 $ ,or ten more years of development.... even not to get used to a tremendous change in all the Keboard conf, after all those years doing FSX or Prepar3D....I been working for hours , mapping KB and mouse and Joystik , running Afterburner MSI , checking for all last drivers for every thing...and getting 4 to 12 FPS when I fly over London, Manhattan or Dubbay.
i7-9700
GFX 1616 Super
N2 SSD
16 RAM......200 Gb Internet....Is not good enough? Not at all!

[gspectre]

Originally posted by Kormega:

Originally posted by gspectre:

When I was flying around the US, I was enjoying the Postcards (from a 3rd party add-on), that can be earned from about 250+ locations when you land at certain locations. Each one was a historical type Postcard that showed interesting landmarks near or in those cities and towns.

What add on was that?

Postcards From Around The USA Mission:
http://flyawaysimulation.com/downloads/files/5919/fsx-fsxa-postcards-from-around-usa-mission/

[LHookins]

I recommend FSX for newcomers because it has more and better content for the new simmer. Once you've done all the lessons, done all the missions you want to do, collected all the badges and rewards you care about, then it might be time to move on.

Try MSFS with Game Pass, $1 for the first month, and buy it if it is what you want. Try out the other games as well. :)

Hook

[FlyingDutchy]

I had been been looking forward to getting MSFS2020. I bought Xplane late last year. Planes excellent - scenery laughable. I did read the reviews and was warned about that.
Now I have MSFS2020. I was looking forward to the great looking scenery. The planes appear to be very good. The scenery is pretty good on the grand scale but when you look at details it's pathetic. e.g. Sydney Australia. Everybody knows about our Sydney Opera House. The presentation of this is very "plasticy". The world renown Sydney Harbour Bridge is bloody awful. It is shown as a plain deck bridge without ANY other features. Other major bridges were given the same treatment. Even Xplane is better than that. FSX in comparison is beautiful. FSX also shows other Sydney land mark such as football stadiums and the Olympic Stadium. There is no such detail shown in MSFS2020. POI s ? Got to be kidding.
I don't know what they were thinking of. It is clear that very little research was done.
Amsterdam - where I was born. Equally pathetic. A very ordinary presentation of the iconic Central Railway Station. The only other POI is a Church . The presentation of the buildings is crap. The Royal Palace, a great feature, gets no mention. POI s - should be ashamed of themselves.
VERY DISAPPOINTING.