crap FS2004

treefroginometry wrote in message
...
"Nick Name" wrote in message
...
one needs a state of the art ultra high end gaming machine to run this
FS2004 PALES in comparison to FS2000 thats right FS2000
Save your money

Total rubbish!
Thats right FS2004 total crap performance wise.
rotten code.
what ELSE is out of whack besides the bridges?
By the way the scenery away from major cities is still fs2000/2002.
The lear jet panel is untouched from 2002
Simple over looked **** like this gets me.
The 2D lear panel should be photorealistic by now ect.

On 18 Aug 2003 07:52:38 GMT, (Pja419) wrote:

FS 2004 is junk compared to 2002. Cities are still not bright enough, ILS
approaches are off at many airports. Not much in improvments compared to 2002.
Better weather , ATC, and GPS. Thats it.


Told you!


Jerk & Jerk-OFF

On 18 Aug 2003 07:53:20 -0500, Dr. Speedbyrd
wrote:


It doesn't work, for one thing!...

Says one who hasn't got it...

--
Alan White
Twenty-eight miles NW of Glasgow.
Overlooking Loch Goil and Loch Long in Argyll, Scotland.
http://tinyurl.com/55v3

"Nick Name" wrote

By the way the scenery away from major cities is still fs2000/2002.

Really? It still isn't good as 1977 Flight Unlimited III (for eastern CA).

The lear jet panel is untouched from 2002

The Learjet panel isn't good as Flight Unlimited III?

Jack Straight wrote
"Nick Name" wrote

By the way the scenery away from major cities is still fs2000/2002.

Really? It still isn't good as 1977 Flight Unlimited III (for eastern
CA).

Sorry, I meant "western..."

On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 Jack Straight wrote:

Jack Straight wrote
"Nick Name" wrote

By the way the scenery away from major cities is still fs2000/2002.

Really? It still isn't good as 1977 Flight Unlimited III (for eastern
CA).

Sorry, I meant "western..."

I'm fairly sure you meant 1997 as well

--
Kev
__________________________________________________ ________________________
"My mother always made it clear to my sister and me that men and women
were equal -- if not more so." Al Gore