ProPilot83 From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 598 posts, RR: 0 Posted (13 years 7 months 1 week 14 hours ago) and read 4433 times:
Flight Simulator 98 has become a real popular flight sim for all PC's. What sucks about 2000 is that it requires a Pentium III to run real good. FS98 does not require additional requirements and runs perfectly fine on my computer. I just love FS98 and well use it for the rest of my life unless a better version of Flight Simulator comes out in the near future. I have had Flight Simulator 98 over a year now and I went from a beginner to a professional flight simulator pilot. I have flown and logged over 1,000 Flight Hours and flown over 500,000 miles. Flight Simulator 98 "As Real As It Gets." Enjoy!!!!!
N139j From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 380 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (13 years 7 months 1 week 6 hours ago) and read 4361 times:
As I agree that FS98 is a great sim, FS2K is far better. I have a 300 pent1, and it runs just great! The cockpit functions, start-up/shut-down, and flight in general are all FAR more realistic. I also flew FS98 for a year, and it sure taught me a lot. However, after flying FS2K, I have realized what I was missing in FS98. But, I support both, and know that either one is the best thing to ever buy.
MikAnchovy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (13 years 7 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 4345 times:
I have FS98, and it's about time I dug it out again and got it going. I really like the piece of software, but I feel it hasn't evolved enough since FS5. Indeed, I was playing it one day in front of my parents right after they got it and they were like, "hey, it looks just like the old one!". But the online gameplay and massive upgrade in scenery are sweet, and the graphics are still good...
I still have a soft spot for my original FS5.0 though. I had it tweaked with Flight Shop, some Mallard Real Weather add-on, lots of planes and Microsoft New York and Carribean, not to mention all the freeware scenery I had. In '94, six months after buying it, at age 11, I had like seventy or eighty hours logged on it, and I was a pretty good pilot.
BH346 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3265 posts, RR: 14
Reply 3, posted (13 years 7 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 4341 times:
Yes, I agree that it takes a Pentium III to run well. I first got it for my K6 computer and is was so slow and jumpy. Then I got a new PIII with 800mhz and we added lots of memory to it. Now FlightSim2000 runs great. I agree its a lot better than '98. I really like the improved GPS and maps, the new planes, and especially the new airports. I can take off from an airstrip down the street from here.
Northwest Airlines - Some People Just Know How to Fly
Cxcx330 From Hong Kong, joined Jan 2001, 118 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (13 years 7 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 4332 times:
I agree that FS2K is better than FS98. However, for some people (like me), we cannot play FS2K smoothly. (I can't even install it. My computer is PIII, 533MHz, 64MB RAM, 16MB RAM 4XAGP TNT-2 3D card) But for FS98, we can play it perfectly. Also, compare with FS95 (or earlier versions), FS98 is improved for a lot. Like the autopilot. In FS95, there isn't any vertical speed and speed control but in FS98, we can use these controls to fly "as real as it gets". Moreover, the planes in FS98 are better than FS95/FS5. Like 3D wheels, moving parts.
One thing should be reminded is that the "flight plan" in FS2K is unrealistic. For example, you creat a plan from Hong Kong to Japan, it will fly over China Airspace. But in fact, it will fly over Taiwan Airspace.