HyFlyer
Members +
Then something else is going on. I include some old testing pics where you can see the readings in the lower left, of me putt putting along at 400FPS and above.
-
There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.
If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.
Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.
The Staff of SOH
~ Screenshots -- IPACS Aerofly FS2 ~
- Thread starter boxcar
- Start date
Then something else is going on. I include some old testing pics where you can see the readings in the lower left, of me putt putting along at 400FPS and above.
Yes, have indicated a few times already in this thread that my practice is to lock at 120 fps, though
my measurements of anything else mentioned here were when AFS2 was unlocked/unchained.
IMHO, it's ridiculous to run at hundreds of fps. Wastes power, creates extra heat.
Better here than at the IPACS forum, where posts disappear after having put much respectful effort into them, not just some of my posts... which is okay in itself, except that the relevant observations and issues are subsequently not addressed either, just ignored. It also seems to me since last Wednesday that one of their moderators frequented this board in years past as well as at FlightSim's forum as a minor moderator there (under a completely different name), which would explain a few initially bewildering things to me.
AFS2 is in many ways incredibly immersive, displaying graphics that are sometimes so real that it's dizzying, seriously...
but there's no AI, no ATC, no autogen buildings, no rain and weather, no hanger-wide cold + dark, no FMCs, no multi-player, no plenty of other things. It's presently a very lonely flight simulator once the initial novelty of those amazing graphics of the tricked-out areas wear off. Once these needed things get implemented into the sim then performance will be taking a significant drop, though it will still likely be way smooth at, say, 60 fps or at least 30 fps. I along with many other simmers want a 60 fps and a 30 fps locks available in AFS2, and to the best of my knowledge we have never received anything more back from IPACS than "We know what you guys want. You tell us all the time here at the forum". They want feedback... yet they don't want to hear it. They're like 2 people wrestling in a potato sack over it, apparently consumed over what other flight simulators we might compare AFS2 with. So be it.
My Aerofly FS 2 is still being enjoyed though it's all but on the back burner now until it matures more, having returned to my beloved FS2004 for the time being. My FSX was dressed-out well with planes and scenery a-plenty and it still was less than 50 Gb on my drive. In comparison, have got relatively few areas of Earth spiffed up in my AFS2 and it's almost completely filling a 250Gb drive already. FS2004-ACOF has virtually everything I want in a flight simulator and it has already for a decade and a half now. Of all 8 of my flight simulators, FS2004 remains the clear favorite. It allows me the wonderful luxury of employing something that's never wanted to be lost: .Imagination
.
AFS2 - out on the howling plains of nowhere
.
FS2004 - ditto
.
.
.
my measurements of anything else mentioned here were when AFS2 was unlocked/unchained.
IMHO, it's ridiculous to run at hundreds of fps. Wastes power, creates extra heat.
Better here than at the IPACS forum, where posts disappear after having put much respectful effort into them, not just some of my posts... which is okay in itself, except that the relevant observations and issues are subsequently not addressed either, just ignored. It also seems to me since last Wednesday that one of their moderators frequented this board in years past as well as at FlightSim's forum as a minor moderator there (under a completely different name), which would explain a few initially bewildering things to me.
AFS2 is in many ways incredibly immersive, displaying graphics that are sometimes so real that it's dizzying, seriously...
but there's no AI, no ATC, no autogen buildings, no rain and weather, no hanger-wide cold + dark, no FMCs, no multi-player, no plenty of other things. It's presently a very lonely flight simulator once the initial novelty of those amazing graphics of the tricked-out areas wear off. Once these needed things get implemented into the sim then performance will be taking a significant drop, though it will still likely be way smooth at, say, 60 fps or at least 30 fps. I along with many other simmers want a 60 fps and a 30 fps locks available in AFS2, and to the best of my knowledge we have never received anything more back from IPACS than "We know what you guys want. You tell us all the time here at the forum". They want feedback... yet they don't want to hear it. They're like 2 people wrestling in a potato sack over it, apparently consumed over what other flight simulators we might compare AFS2 with. So be it.
My Aerofly FS 2 is still being enjoyed though it's all but on the back burner now until it matures more, having returned to my beloved FS2004 for the time being. My FSX was dressed-out well with planes and scenery a-plenty and it still was less than 50 Gb on my drive. In comparison, have got relatively few areas of Earth spiffed up in my AFS2 and it's almost completely filling a 250Gb drive already. FS2004-ACOF has virtually everything I want in a flight simulator and it has already for a decade and a half now. Of all 8 of my flight simulators, FS2004 remains the clear favorite. It allows me the wonderful luxury of employing something that's never wanted to be lost: .Imagination
.
AFS2 - out on the howling plains of nowhere
.
FS2004 - ditto
.
.
Last edited:
HyFlyer
Members +
Right now, I'm part of the Great Eastern diaspora, fleeing 12 in deep snow drifts and an acute lack of electricity.
Sitting with my family in a hotel, my main focus has not been on aerofly recently so I haven't been on the forums that much.
What I seem to be gathering from your post is that you had something deleted on the ipacs forum, and this is a synopsis of the deleted post?
Sitting with my family in a hotel, my main focus has not been on aerofly recently so I haven't been on the forums that much.
What I seem to be gathering from your post is that you had something deleted on the ipacs forum, and this is a synopsis of the deleted post?
Wing_Z
Charter Member 2011
We're of the same vintage, then. I lost my beloved FS2004 when the WINXP box died, too much trouble to rebuild a decade worth of tweaks!
AFS2 came along at the same time as a major computing upgrade for me, and remains a toy to amuse.
They do what they do, and mostly it is hugely entertaining.
In no way is this a replacement for the juggernaut we jokingly called FS9.5 (due to the amazing ongoing work which made it essentially a new sim).
It is till on a backup HDD for use when time permits more simming, and/or AFS2 runs out of amusements.
For now, AFS2 never ceases to entertain as IPACS plays with new and interesting bits and pieces.