Just a Question

[Slider]

Yes or No. Do you feel that the main reason why people experience problems with RF sims is because of their lack of computer knowledge?

[mlm123]

I think the main reason is that it tells on the G3 package that you only need a "normal" computer as :
Windows XP, 2000, ME, 98
*Local administration access required for Windows XP and 2000
Intel Pentium 1.0 GHz or equivalent
DirectX 9 (or above) compatible video and sound card
3D accelerated video card and 32 MB (or more) RAM
256 MB RAM
1.3 GB hard drive space

But thers should be a notice that you actually realy need a:
Intel Pentium 3.0 GHz or equivalent
3D accelerated video card with 128 MB (or more) RAM
1 GB Ram
For having any fun with the sim.

Further on it should be told that if you have s very slow computer as a Pentium 1Ghz , all planes will act very funny and slow controls in the computer if you dont shut of all, terain, wind, skyes, trees , buildings, and details.

I have bought new pc and now G3 is working just fine, but i still mis to have imported the old plnes as Pits and junkermann from my G2.

Have a Nice Christmas avery body.

[FlyFast]

I agree 100%. Setting the software bugs aside for the moment, to get the
wonderful 3D video quality requires a "strong" PC with a high end graphics card.
People are loading this software only to find that they need to spend more money on hardware just to get the same performance that they probably had with G2. Please do not suggest that the reason for the problems with the software is a lack of knowlegde on the customers side!

[Slider]

Just wanted to add this.

If anyone does address a question directly to me under this thread.
I appologise but I don't want to make any reply's until this poll has closed.
This poll is open for 30 days starting from the date that this thread was started.

Happy Holidays to all...... :)

Thank you,

Adlai :)

[gflyer]

My belief is the "minimum" reqs listed for G3 are somewhat unrealistic. Are any of the video cards on the "tested" list even as paltry as 64MB, let alone 32MB? Some may say it is subjective, but if your framerate is less than, say, 10fps, most games are not enjoyable.

[W99dey]

My belief is the "minimum" reqs listed for G3 are somewhat unrealistic. Are any of the video cards on the "tested" list even as paltry as 64MB, let alone 32MB? Some may say it is subjective, but if your framerate is less than, say, 10fps, most games are not enjoyable.


I upgraded to a 6800 to get the performance that I paid for in the sim.

I think that should be the benchmark minimum!!!!!!!!!!1

Works like a dream!

What is the point in spending loads of money for a sim, if you cant realise the potential? They probably specked the lower end to make people buy.... then upgrade the video to make it work... I fell for it...........

[Slider]

I really don't want to add anymore input into this poll and want to just let it run its course naturally, but I just want to add this though.

Keep in mind that this disscussion board has been up since 2000.

Thanks again,

Adlai :)

[bentz]

Yes or No. Do you feel that the main reason why people experience problems with RF sims is because of their lack of computer knowledge?
In one word: yes!
And for a few more: I don't think a product such as this aimed at R/C enthusiasts and not necessarily computer savvy people should be subject to so many problems related to lack of computer knowledge. I for one am a computer savvy person and from looking at the posts on this forum over the years, I get the impression KE could have done better at nipping out the potential pitfalls for the illeducated. Just my 2cents. :D

[Jim L]

they will not read anything before they Dive in and box them selfs in a corner
and then come in here and Whine like all get out

i am having a ball Editing the Planes to Fly like my Real R/C Planes
i came in, and Nicely Ask for a small Problem, i had and was very fast shown my Error i over looked and wham off and running.

all they got to do is READ before they come in here Griping.

so it is not as much as the PC they have, as it is more to be them selves.
that is the PROBLEM...

[r1derbike]

I agree with FlyFast that many thought G3 would perform as well as G2 on a given computer.

However, there comes a time when software users need to educate themselves in the requirements of the software they will be using/purchasing.

Ads for G3 touting shadows and other high-end graphics such as active scenery should have tipped-off computer savvy users that DirectX 9 and a high-end machine/video engine would need to be used to enjoy the sim with maximum flexibility. It raised a red-flag for me, and I dealt with it by purchasing a 6800GT video card for my Athlon 64 3200+.

Could RealFlight have been more forthcoming with specific recommendations? Absolutely. It's a fine-line when one says the sim needs high-end computing power to run at maximum. You risk antagonizing users with earlier or performance lacking computers, who will HAVE to reduce scenery objects and features to minimum in order to run satisfactorily.

The problem was twofold; RealFlight should have been more open regarding what computing requirements were needed to run the sim in all its glory, and users griping about how poorly the sim runs on their dated machines should have been armed with the knowledge (computer savvy) about how the software would "play" on their systems.

Charles

[Airnut]

The problem was twofold; RealFlight should have been more open regarding what computing requirements were needed to run the sim in all its glory, and users griping about how poorly the sim runs on their dated machines should have been armed with the knowledge (computer savvy) about how the software would "play" on their systems.

Charles

I agree with your above statement totally. If you read the minimum requirements on the packaging, I think realflight did the consumer a great diservice. In my humble opinion the minimum requirements will just not cut it, and their optimum requirements are just too vague for anyone computer literate or no to fully understand what is required to run this sim, and unfortunately knifeedge is taking the brunt of the abuse. Hopefully they will learn from this experience

Rene

[TDistortion]

Basically the problem seems to be that KE got a little ahead of the curve.

They have produced a sim that needs a better machine than the average person has. Yes, if you disable much of the graphics capability it will run on a lesser machine, but what you end up with is a very limited sim.

I have built my last 4 machines and know them well. My machine is not state of the art, but it is not what I would call average either. I still had to buy a better card to run G3 to my satisfaction. My latest game puchase was Medal of Honor - Pacific Assult which (with my old card) I had to turn down the graphics some, but it played just fine and you didn't feel you were missing anything.

It seems that, intentional or not, this sim ended up being a high-end graphics intensive sim that requres a high-end system to enjoy completely. It also seems to have a number of compatibility problems with less than high end graphics cards.

In a year or two this will probably run on every machine sold, but there will still be machines with old cards, not enough memory, slow CPUs, etc. that will choke on it.

Ideally a person should be able to be an appliance user and still be able to run a piece of software - unfortunately that is not true of the high end graphic game/sim market.

[snwpilot]

More info at the start always helps and after everything on here i tryed a little test
A buddy had a laptop that was close to min. for running G3
So we loaded G2 and G3 on this comp and started playing
Ran G2 good with most graphics turned up
Running G3 had to have them on low except shadows at medium
G2 airports were close to same but the G3 airports in serria nevada looked much better than others both were very playable at these settings and ran good and smooth Yes G3 could have been better BUT this system was close to the min. on the box turning off shadows and clouds on G3 boosted frame rate lot

system was

Dell D600
pentium 1.3
radeon mobility 9000 32 mb
256 ram
windows XP sp2

Updates for comp. and drivers done through standard windows updates

Just my 2 cents

[Andrew Wright]

AMD 64 3200+
1 GB RAM
6800 GT video card 256Mb DDR3 RAM

Runs like clockwork - however - I also have a:

Intel PIII 1Ghz
512MB RAM
4200Ti video card 128Mb RAM

which I wouldn't dream of trying to run this on.

Like most people reading this forum - I think that the minimum specs on the box are misleading; for the Sim to run as it was designed in all it's 3D glory, it requires a very fast video card - I don't know of any 64Mb video cards that would cut it...

But on the box it says:

Optimum:

3D accelerated video card with 64 MB (or more) RAM

Don't get me wrong - love the product – I just think that you’ve put a lot of people off side by misrepresenting your product.

[Slider]

How I feel.

Since I've been doing all kinds of different simulators for YEARS.
I already take it for granted that when shopping for a simulator that if I want to really enjoy the sim that I best make sure that my computer specks are at or above the highest system specks recommended for a particular sim.

In G3's case, if I wasn't fortunate enough to have a computer that I know could handle the sim, I proabably still would have picked it up and just played around with it the best I could until I was finally able to pick up a rig that could handle it in all its glory.

There are ton's of items that can be turned off for anyone with a computer thats at the lower end of G3's system requirements.

Adlai :)

[Jim L]

Basically the problem seems to be that KE got a little ahead of the curve.

They have produced a sim that needs a better machine than the average person has. Yes, if you disable much of the graphics capability it will run on a lesser machine, but what you end up with is a very limited sim.

I have built my last 4 machines and know them well. My machine is not state of the art, but it is not what I would call average either. I still had to buy a better card to run G3 to my satisfaction. My latest game puchase was Medal of Honor - Pacific Assult which (with my old card) I had to turn down the graphics some, but it played just fine and you didn't feel you were missing anything.

It seems that, intentional or not, this sim ended up being a high-end graphics intensive sim that requres a high-end system to enjoy completely. It also seems to have a number of compatibility problems with less than high end graphics cards.

In a year or two this will probably run on every machine sold, but there will still be machines with old cards, not enough memory, slow CPUs, etc. that will choke on it.

Ideally a person should be able to be an appliance user and still be able to run a piece of software - unfortunately that is not true of the high end graphic game/sim market.

i don't understand why every body Picks on G3, on their pc not Being Fast or Good Enough.
making it like the People at KE did something BAD.
man wake up and look around you.
almose every new game of any kind has gone past all the standard Home PC.
you almost have to Buy all new Stuff, for your PC to run Most Any NEW Gmes.
not JUST G3.
and every New Game you Buy today, you have to wait for the UPdates to Finish the GAME. or just to get IT to run Right.
the People at G3 or KE did not do anything, but make a fun SIM.
It looks like your Whiners Have the Problems, NOT the G3 SIM. :cool:

[TDistortion]

i don't understand why every body Picks on G3, on their pc not Being Fast or Good Enough.
making it like the People at KE did something BAD.
man wake up and look around you.
almose every new game of any kind has gone past all the standard Home PC.
you almost have to Buy all new Stuff, for your PC to run Most Any NEW Gmes.
not JUST G3.
and every New Game you Buy today, you have to wait for the UPdates to Finish the GAME. or just to get IT to run Right.
the People at G3 or KE did not do anything, but make a fun SIM.
It looks like your Whiners Have the Problems, NOT the G3 SIM. :cool:

What makes you think I was picking on G3 - after updating my machine it runs pretty well, but if you want to be honest about this there are things that were majorly wrong with this software and some of which KE had to know about when they released it. Glass Walls and the quicksand runways for instance (which are not fixed yet). If this would have been a game - I would never have seen the updates because I would have been through with it before things were corrected. For me this is a learning tool (which is what I take simulators to be) and if it does not operate reasonably it is not the software for which I paid. Companies are not "entitled" to your money or your loyalty and the only means we have of making companies more responsive is to challenge what they do. That is not whining, it is the way the market system works.

Companies who send out disfunctional software (as defined by the consumer, not the company) get a bad reputation which hurts future sales. I suspect there are a number of folks who will wait next time (including me) until someone else "tests" the next version. That is bad for the customer and bad for KE. Microsoft learned that with Windows v.1.0. It was simply a bad product and they didn't get a lot of people to Windows until 2.0.

Anyway, maybe it is time to stop whining about the whiners. :) People have a right to their opinions (including you) and it is important that KE hear them to improve their business and their product.

[Jim L]

was no PROBLEM at all

i have been able to go in and EDIT anything, i seen to be a Problem.
Any plane that had a wookey FLIGHT. NO problem, go into EDIT and work it out.
i have even Taken the BIG-Stick, and made it FLY just LIKE my REAL Big-stick.
all the WAY to the HIMI i have on it
after 15 years of flying, and modifying,
the PLANE gained a little weight, ( like up to 10 lbs now).
the K&B 61 had to come off, and a OS-91 went on.

you can even get a copy of the changes to add to you PLANE file in the G3 folder,
here at the Forum
it is a fun slow-flyer too
fun to see just how slow you can get it to go, and stay up.

got to love that EDIT MODE.
it has fixed any thing i seen, as a problem.
From the Glass Walls to the Planes
only thing i seen that i can't fix
is that, i think the PLANES are too small.
it would have been easy for them to have made them all BIGGER. ;)

[Slider]

One thing I agree on is listing only a 64 MB 3D card under OPTIMUM for running G3. Even though it does also say ( OR MORE ).
Though this does seem to be the NORM for TON'S of sims on the market.
They always seem to under estimate.

Also I've just recently noticed a sim that had a "SPECIFIC LIST" of which 3D cards would work for the sim. < THIS IS RARE.

I also have some really good sims that I've had for YEARS and even though my computer(s) are WAY ABOVE the OPTIMUM system requirements for those sims.
I still can't run those sims to their MAX.
But also.....> Their still FUN AS HECK........ :p

Adlai :)

[Slider]

G3 gives you lots of extra eye candy for computers that can handle it and lots of options to turn off or lower the setting for that eye candy for slower computers.

Adlai