I fly both IFR and VFR, but seeking different kinds of satisfaction.
IFR is fine for the engineer in me, there's a lot of technical stuff, especially when complex SID/STAR are involved, like having NAV frequencies properly prepared, intercept the localizer at the right spot and moment etc etc.
By the other hand, as I always liked finding my way with a map, VFR is nice as FS provides the biggest map in the world! It is true that default scenery (and mesh) is somehow dull and far from 100% realistic, but in most cases it may be just accurate enough to provide for visual orientation.
I started the world tour some months ago with a good mind to do it 100% VFR, that is no instruments at all, only bird's eye and Google Earth, and I can assure you it works. I just completed leg 38 (ok, I know there are quite a few still remaining to get to 150) and I am still on track...
Moreover, by flying VFR I get from time to time unexpectedly nice landscapes (even with default scenery), especially in places I do not know anything about. For instance, during the same tour, the Baffin Island mountains in the polar night half-light were simply breathtaking.
And with higher-resolution meshes (a lot of freeware ones are available), it only goes better! The one I have permanently loaded is... Romania, of course, and it is realistic enough that I can recognize most of the mountain ranges, subranges and peaks
Andrei