>I would personally want MS to remove Asia, South America and >Africa alltogether from the sim, and make Europe and the US >more detailed. But I'm sure there are those who would >disagree. Again, I am not sure why you would have to REMOVE any part of the current generic scenery which is definitely better than no scenery ?. Why not simply add a detailed scenery of whatever your fancy is. We can add but why do we have to subtract :-hmmmMichael J.

Nice shot of the UK in FU3 but here's one in FS2002..

Do you want a FLIGHT sim or "tour around my garden" sim?Wolfgang

>> I would personally want MS to remove Asia, South America and >> Africa alltogether from the sim, and make Europe and the US > ...why you would have to REMOVE any part...I agree with you 100% here, it is useless to remove things that we have. For the first time ever with an MSFS version can we, in Africa, finally fly over many home airports that travellers from all over the globe use as international airports in real life every day as I'm typing this! The World is the World, not just Europe or the USA! Leaving out Africa would be very stingy. That sounds like Mugabe from Zimbabwe who wants all the current productive farmers in a famine country off the land...Pieter

Very well said Pieter!It seems that for some people, the world ends at their garden fence!Think global!Regards,Wofgang

Wolfgang, you appear to have taken this a little too much to heart... relax a bit... it was only an idle thought.

Impossible ... doesn't figure in my dictionary :) It is possible, it would just require a total different approach on the software concept as well as a damn fast HB internet connection + a couple of 100 extra Gig's of HD space :)FS20.. will simply interact with the external server's data imagery and constantly update the imagery according to the coordinates your plane is flying at. Off course this would only work correctly at a minimum given altitude. In order to reduce downloadtime, the external database could take into account a given filed flightplan so that only the imagery required for the flightplan is processed.For those who haven't a clue about satellite imagery mesh just have a look at the below link. http://terraserver.homeadvisor.msn.com/ima...=23464&z=19&w=1Maybe not available in FS2004 or 2006 but it will surely will be available one day.Cheers,Smalco

Damian,I guess you are right! I thought the same, when rereading my post this morning! :-)Regards,Wolfgang :-wave

It would be excellent if MS used the data from their MapPoint software and dynamically built the scenery. MapPoint has everything: roads, hotels, restaurants, themeparks, hospitals, etc. for U.S. and Europe all in the correct location. John

Well if you're going to fit the game on to a reasonable amount of CDs, you can only have so much detail in the scenery area covered.If you have the whole world on 3 CDs, you might have 40MB for a given place, say Germany. If you had a sim with only Europe and the US on 3 CDs, you could spend, say 400 MB on Germany. Or in the case of FU3, three CDs for an extremely detailed, but small (100x100 miles) area.If you only fly Cessnas, Bonanzas, Cherokee's etc. it's kind of pointless to have the whole world since it would take you days to get anywhere. Of course, those why fly their 777 at 45 000, Mach .85 don't need any scenery at all except for at and around the airports, because they can't see any scenery from 45 000 feet anyway, and most leave their computers and let the autopilot fly the plane.Maybe with DVD, you could have higher detail without removing any scenery areas, but it seems noone wants to consider that idea, even though DVD drives are dirt cheap now.

Looks OK, but FU3 uses satelite scenery, FS2002 uses generic textures. That means that the detail in FU3 is far superior to the detail in FS2002 scenery. You can see even small villages with only a couple of houses in FU3. In FS2002, most of the scenery outside of the major cities is just a generic forest or farmland texture and a waste of HD space.

From a commercial point of view for the add-on makers it would be hell on CD. We have more then enough problems handling two versions and all the languages (I believe we are one of the few who do our software in Japanese and you don't even want to know how complex this is). Mathijs KokLAGO

>most of the scenery outside of the major cities is just a >generic forest or farmland texture and a waste of HD space. Not exactly such a waste as you might think. This is a beauty of the generic scenery that once you have textures stored the scenery takes very little space. Just look at the Landclass file sizes - I believe the whole California is less than 200 KB !On the other hand the real photo-scenery IS a big waste of disk space since there is no mechanism (yet) for texture re-use.Michael J.

The Red Arrows shot isn't generic textures but a photo overlay. If you look closely you'll see Old Warden beneath the aircraft. It's a direct screenshot with no underhand manipulation.I agree that the basic FS2002 package is generic scenery but if we are talking about potential then it's just as tweakable as you are prepared to work at the scenery.