June 18, 200916 yr We dont need an FS11, we need a fixed FSX. Think about it: a whole new release just brings a whole host of new bugs and issues to patch. FSX is the devil we know.One reason FSX has host of issues is because they have tried to keep legacy code and mix it in with current graphics techniques. Also they introduced a whole lot of revolutionary ideas into it. For example, creating an actual round earth for fsx was a very ambitious and risky undertaking. So FS11 was thought by many to actually improve bugs and performance by shedding some of the old code and fix bugs in FSX. (Think FS2000 to FS2002; it fixed a lot of bugs with FS2000). Many, myself included beleive that FSnext would have performed better than FSX on the same machine had it been developed. It could have used mutli cores better, it could have used modern GPU's better and not be dependent on CPU so much, etc. I hope they will resurrect it.Ha? YOu use FS9 for imersion? Do you even own FSX? Or are you just basing your opinion on you tube videos and net pictures? I have had FS9 with most add on's and what you are saying is not what I see in FSX. As for performance? Hey I was a none believer, but with my new system most sliders are all the way up and my sim is smoooth. Lets look at some of the items that can not be done to FS9 by add ons:1) (The biggest difference to me is this point) Add on's can not duplicate the high res ground textures. To me that is the incredible difference. This feature is coded into fsx and can not be duplicated with add ons for FS9 which has a much lower resolution allowance. 2) No Add on can create the water textures and effects that fsx has. 3)Add on's do not allow for high density autogens. Trees need to be sprinkled here and there. With FSX you can fly over forrests for a change. Again this is coded in FSX and not FS9.4)Add on's do not allow for specualar shine for effects on surfaces on aircraft, buildings, etc.5)Add on's do not allow for higher polygon allowance that FSX gives aircraft. While harder to code, the developers have much more freedom and tools to create much better models. 6)Add on's do not allow for higher animation possiblities such as wing flex, smoother flap retraction, moving jetways, etc.7)Add on's do not allow for scenery reflection onto bodies of water8)Add on's do not allow for intelligent placement of autogen in FS2004. So you still have trees scattered on top of farms instead of on the peripheries.9)Add on's do not allow for actual earth curviture (sp) at high altitute.10)Add on's can not create wet and reflective surface effects such as wet runways, or reflective buildings. 11)Add on's do not make the sky's get darker as you climb12)Add on's can not create air craft carrier operations which I have learned to LOVE13)Talk about another immersion factor: I LOVE the view of moving cars on freeways. Specially during approach. No add on can do it for FS9. 14)FSX has allowance for 4 more different regional varieties as FS9 and no add on can help FS9 on that. I beleive FSX has 14 regions vs. 10 on FS9. For example you now can have a distinct mediteranian region type that now can be used for areas such as portions of costal california.15) Add on's do not flatten roads in FS9. Roads in FSX now curve with topography.16) Add on's do not allow for bump mapping that FSX allows for surfaces (to create 3d rivets, groved surfaces, or raised concrete slabs, etc)17) Add on's do not allow for Thermals 18) Add on's do not allow for self shadowing of aircraft. Aircraft parts can create shades onto the aircraft itself in FSX.19) Add on's do not allow you to create your own missions.20) Add on's do not duplicate the improved overall atmospheric lighting of the sim on FS921)As long as we are talking about imersion, lets also add little touches such as flocks of birds, and animal in certain areas and/or missions.22)Add on's do not improve FS9 flight charactristic in turbulance.23) Head latency is a really nice touch that again can not be duplicated in FS9.24) FS9 can never be made to work with 5.1 sound system for its better sound effects.25) FSX has better intelligent and clever placement of landclass tiles, so they don't look as repetetive. (still does, but not nearly as much). As far as I know its not possible to do the same thing on FS9 unless you have photoscenery.26) FSX allows for better glass cockpit simulation. There are features that can not be used in FS9.What I really want fixed are following:NO more sunny look on the ground when its cloudy. Come on make it dark when you have layers of cloud. Everything still looks bright.No more autogen pop. Alpha fade, whatever,solid overcast are better but it needs imporvements.haze and visibility lighting still needs a lot more improvement. In fact its still aweful. Lighting can really be improved overall.I still say it, thunderstorms do not have enough up and down drafts to tear your airplane apart.Fix the snow and rain effects. FS9 was better in this area.please blend the airports into the surronding areas better.allow for more headroom by utilizing multicore and multigpu betterCloud shawdows.Never thought I would like missions, but man now I love them. Bring them on. more.Slopped runwayBetter (more gradual) weather station transitions.More improvement to ATC is needed.More improvement to ground handling is needed. (ICE Skating effect). IF possible, make the ground texture resolution even higher.!!!! I wanna see resembelance of grass, weed, grain fields when I am parked in a remote air field.edit: PS how do you make the environment darker in FS9 when cloudy?
Create an account or sign in to comment