Not at all, Dave. In fact, there's a ton of space between the two ( the entire Seattle area and its surroundings ).

30 Day refund policy should allow even the most skeptical users an opportunity to see for themselves without the least bit of risk. Just try it. This scenery and FZ01 are the reason that FS2004 are still on my system.

>>I too was a little skeptical of the glowing reviews this>>scenery gets. I finally went out and took the plunge and>let>>me say...>>>I didn't find any reviews. Where are they?>>>Anyway, this scenery is great. The hit on fps is very>>reasonable and the detail is amazing. It is also great for>GA>>and heavy iron flyers as well, as it has a few smaller GA>>airports along with KPDX. >>>>What is reasonable -2 fps? So I can fly afast plane into this>area without blurries like whay we have in megascenery?what is the point of asking questions then ridiculing every answer you get? if you dont want it, dont buy it. simple as that. you even get a refund policy but I guess that isn't good enough. and why do you continue to compare megascenery to flightscenery? flightscenery is detailed airport scenery with surroundings added in, megascenery is strictly photoscenery of big metropolitan areas with nothing else

Hi,The "Vancouver" on the map above is Vancouver, Washington - a few miles north of Portland. You are probably referring to Vancouver, BC (in Canada). As stated above the entire state of Washington separates the two.Hope this helps,--Tom GibsonCal Classic Propliner Page: http://www.calclassic.comFreeflight Design Shop: http://www.freeflightdesign.comDrop by! ___x_x_(")_x_x___

>A lot of that depends on your machine. If your machine is a 2>gigahertz machine then no you'll see more than a 2 FPS drop. >If your machine is mid-range or higher than you will hardly>see any FPS hit.>I noticed they my system is very similar to yours. Same mb and CPU but only at 3200+. Same amount of dual channel RAM. But I have different graphics card a nvidia 6600GT 256M DDR3. Do you got DDR3?>What do you consider a fast plane? If you mean fly 300+ knots>200 feet from the ground and don't have a mid-range machine or>higher, then you might get a bit of blurries... >Say for example the LDS767 or a twin prop.

>But what about performence? I ask since I have Scandinavian>Airports II and discovered that they lowered my fps with about>eight and introduced stutters. Can I have the best looking>airports without low fps and stutters?The author did an exceptional job with LODs in his models, so the framerate hit is minimal. From a distance, the models have fewer polygons to draw. The complexity goes up as you get closer, when it counts. The result is that you get some of the most exceptional scenery available and it shouldn't bog down your system.I've played around with some scenery design and found out how important LOD transitions could be. I put in miles of chain link fence around an airport, but the model had no LOD changes. FS was trying to draw every polygon from 20 miles out where you couldn't even see the fence and there was a huge drop in fps if the airport was in view.There are tons of polys in FZ02, but they only get drawn when it matters. I haven't compared the stock FS9 KPDX with FZ02, but I'd would be surprised if I saw a 10% framerate hit. If nothing else, I consider this scenery worth the money as a work of art :)

>>What is reasonable -2 fps? So I can fly as fast plane into>this>>area without blurries like whay we have in megascenery?>>>what is the point of asking questions then ridiculing everyRidiculing answers?? I don't know what you are talking about!I'm just asking some questions and have no other intention than to ask them.>answer you get? if you dont want it, dont buy it. simple asI was trying to find out if I want to buy it.>and why do you continue to compare megascenery to>flightscenery? flightscenery is detailed airport scenery with>surroundings added in, megascenery is strictly photoscenery of>big metropolitan areas with nothing elseI don't compare them but asked if the same problems can show up in flightscenery

yes you did ridicule, by not listening to peoples examples of better performance compared to megascnery, by claiming it is a very limited area (it is the metro area, much more than other airport scenery so again you seem to be comparing megascenery and flightscenery for some strange reason), asking if "reasonable" FPS is around 2, not wanting to go find the numerous reviews, among other things

As far as I can see the original poster is just trying to find excuses not to buy it.. and yes you have discredited every reply to your questions.Its already been mentioned numerous times that Flight1 offer a 30 day money back with no questions asked.. so ultimately this thread is pointless as you can just test it all out yourself. If you don't like it for whatever reason just get your money back.

>yes you did ridicule, by not listening to peoples examples ofNo I had no intention to ridicule any answer.>and flightscenery for some strange reason), asking if>"reasonable" FPS is around 2, not wanting to go find the>numerous reviews, among other thingsNo asking if by reasonable was -2 fps i.e a decrease in fps by 2 and saying that I hadn't found any reviews yet.

How about we all put this down as miscommunication a la internet and be nice to each other then?

Thanks for that Tom, I must admit, living in the UK I was confused.Thanks also to Jeff....................just love your video's :-)

ONE REASON, and one reason alone for why FZ02 hasn't been praised or talked about nearly enough:FSX.With FZ02 releasing just before FSX, a lot of people went into a purchasing freeze. A lot of people started using the Demo and FilePlanet beta, and scrapped FS9. When FZ02 is FSX ready (I believe we expect that to happen sometime in the reasonably near future), we'll see more buzz about it. -Greg