Are you proposing that Microsoft design this simulation to run at "full" sliders on a modern computer at the day of it's release

At no one in particular :)I’m not sure we really understand what we’re asking for.Why limit the display sliders like this?If right slider draws 10,000 trees and your system can only draw 5,000 trees.You’re saying right slider should max out at 5,000 trees.That’s what you’re saying.Reduce the display capabilities of the program to match your current maximum.Well someday you might actually want 10,000 trees…or 50,000 trees.But you made slider only go to 5,000 :(Max slider is an arbitrary number set by the designers…it could be 100,000 trees.Why should display sliders be lowered to limit max performance to your PC today? Maybe get over the idea of always trying to max the sliders. :)Max display sliders should be set ten times as high – then no one runs max.But we’ll all always have the option to draw more and more trees.Keeps in mind, the sliders could easily be handled by the program internally.It could look at your PC and say sorry you get 5,000 no more.You only get 5000 until you upgrade.Then no one could complain about sliders. :)Display sliders are bad because the user thinks if they’re not maxed something is wrong.It's like they are a little game people want to win.MS could fix this in many ways...and it's all about UI design not actual performance....these sliders go to eleven.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UeOXsA8sp_E

1. Sloping runways (most real runways slope to some degree)2. Better Windsocks (or at least allow addon developers access to wind velocity and wind direction variables in scenery objects so they can make their own without having to use hacked FS9 models)

Hi all,My wishes :- Better performances : Flight will be working at high settings with best hardwares on release date.- Better Ground, like TILEPROXY : download tiles to get real and good quality of the world,

- Better sky, like REX : real weather, with cloud shadows and better light and tunderstorm effects like rain, lightnings, sounds level in Virtual Cockpit view.- More life : birds, animals and people in the streets, airports, tarmac, in planes. Paraglyders in montains (we could pilot like gliders ?)- Better ATC, including interaction with weather conditions, AI traffic, SID & STARs...- Better autogen : Various, adapted to location, with real size for trees, houses, car and trucks speed, real AI traffic altitude for General aviation- More sensations, like EZDOK : more views, better effects, TrackIR, better sounds effects- More work, like FSPASSENGERS : flight planner, missions generator like air freight or VIP carrying, rescue, or just arrive on time to your destination to get customer satisfaction. We could be all managers or pilots for Virtual companies to earn points or money with a world ranking according to your career...Don't forget crew management, maintenance.- and... please real CRASH EFFECTS and aircraft damages for fun.Thanks for listening !RegardsEric

I would like to see something that is focused on widening the appeal of flight sims, to ensure its longevity as a series. For example, to incorporate a genuine first person view, i.e. the ability to have a character walk around in the manner of an FPS game. This has been done in games such as ARMA, where your FPS character can board various vehicles, including aircraft, and it does add a lot to the feeling of actually 'getting on board and being inside' an aircraft. Aside from the mere novelty of being able to do that, the vastly expanded capability for missions and activities in a sim, whereby you can actually 'get in or out' of an aircraft would certainly broaden the appeal of Flight, for example, it would be nice to walk around an airport, perform a proper aircraft inspection, or genuinely visit a hangar or place of interest that you have flown to. If MS want it to be successful, then broadening its appeal would certainly be no bad thing, and such a capability would undoubtedly do that.Al

Well someday you might actually want 10,000 trees…or 50,000 trees.But you made slider only go to 5,000 :(Max slider is an arbitrary number set by the designers…it could be 100,000 trees.

I think you are confusing configuration files with sliders. Configuration files contain the settings that apply to the sim. The sliders are a convenience for the user to easily scale multiple configuration settings with one control. Recall how the number of trees and autogen objects in FSX were found in a config file? People were able to tweak the config file so they could enjoy all the other things that came with higher slider settings without having the number of trees and/or autogen objects slow their system. That is an example of how the configuration file should be the limiting factor and not the slider.As you say, let the designers set the maximum for trees at 100,000 so the sim can grow into the future, but set the configuration file so the best hardware at the time of release can run at max sliders. Users are happy when the sim will run at full sliders and when power users discover how to adjust config settings, everyone thinks it is a bonus and the sim appears to be even better.

1) Cloud Shadows2) Better lighting over all! (I want the environment and the ground to be dark and menacing when cloudy for example)3) Sloping runways.4) Less cartoony autogen 5) realistic visibility transitions. 6) Solid over casts7) Bring on more world scenery8) More missions9) bring back a lot of photo realistic airport surrondings10) Bump mapping to create iced runways 11) Blowing snow , smoke (smog) effects12) Create ability to make the sim to a "world" simulator.

Recall how the number of trees and autogen objects in FSX were found in a config file? People were able to tweak the config file so they could enjoy all the other things that came with higher slider settings without having the number of trees and/or autogen objects slow their system. That is an example of how the configuration file should be the limiting factor and not the slider.

A minor explanation …of course when I say ‘trees’ I’m referring literally to Autogen density slider.I’m pretty sure you got my meaning, but just want to remove any possible confusion.And really any of the Scenery tab sliders is a good example. If I understand, you’ve effectively reduced the ‘Extremely dense’ parameter by editing the config.And this change allows you to run the slider at max.You can imagine why in my mind this is a ‘Spinal Tap’ solution of sorts.But I am interested in what you mean by, ‘…enjoy all the other things that came with higher slider settings’I take that to mean, proportionally you’re drawing more of the kind of objects you want.Like less tress and more houses. If that’s true, it’s an important tweak.Very likely it’s not giving you an advantage on pure draw speed.Ultimately the sliders on ‘Scenery’ tab quickly allow us to control vertex count, pixel count, and render passes.Obviously, the more of each; the longer the draw time. The slider factor is rather arbitrary. All I’m concerned with is render time. I can bring any game, even the most efficient, to its knees by feeding it content.I’ll admit that I’m not that versed in tweaking FSX sliders and config.So I’ll defer to your experience on that…and I’ll accept that a high slider factor may very well have other benefits.Particularly with 3rd part add-ons that don’t conform to the same budget constraints.I do have good experience with managing content budgets, and frame rates as a game developer.So I’m sort of fanatical about all this. However I'm more than occasionally wrong :)I’ve always thought the Display Slider UI in FS, didn’t present the problem very well.So I agree with a lot of what you’re saying.And I agree any performance gains we get are awesome.Sorry back on topic...

• Better display slider UI
• Better in-game performance feedback for tuning.

My number one wish is the same as it's been for the last several versions. I hope that the development team is not so beholden to backwards compatibility that it prevents risky but rewarding innovation. If it means redesigning the sim from the ground up leaving nothing from the past able to work, that's fine. FSX and FS9 work just fine for current addons. It's time to look to the future. Keep an open-ended platform for future addon development, but lose the albatross of the past.

I would like to see something that is focused on widening the appeal of flight sims, to ensure its longevity as a series. For example, to incorporate a genuine first person view, i.e. the ability to have a character walk around in the manner of an FPS game. This has been done in games such as ARMA, where your FPS character can board various vehicles, including aircraft, and it does add a lot to the feeling of actually 'getting on board and being inside' an aircraft. Aside from the mere novelty of being able to do that, the vastly expanded capability for missions and activities in a sim, whereby you can actually 'get in or out' of an aircraft would certainly broaden the appeal of Flight, for example, it would be nice to walk around an airport, perform a proper aircraft inspection, or genuinely visit a hangar or place of interest that you have flown to. If MS want it to be successful, then broadening its appeal would certainly be no bad thing, and such a capability would undoubtedly do that.Al

I agree with Al on this one we need to widening the appeal of flight sim even if it mean's putting stuff like a 3d character walking around. as long as the sims has options for the hardcore guys. and of course, it would be very cool! :( dont think its something that hard for ms to do. Other things are basically like most users have mentioned. if ms is truly using in enhanced version of ether the fs9 or the fsx engine. and recoded it to take advantage of the latest tech and take out legacy code that is brining down everything. Take the weather and enhance it even more! make it easer to mod the atc system or do something at least with it. but being that there going for online I doubt it. Since it has been discussed many times before there is no way that they have built a new engine. in such a short amount of time, hopefully they got rid of what was causing performance problems. and redesigned the things that didn't work well. things that the aces team wanted to change but didn't have the time too with fsx thanks to ms pushing for them to release.

My request is very simple. Performance. That should be on top of their list espically after FSX which still cant be run fully to my knowledge on todays top of the line comps. MS really needs to make this one perform ALOT better.

Are you expecting a new engine that will somehow allow 7cm textures to run faster than 30m ones, and thus allow you to move everything to the right? Not going to happen.. no ones done that except for iD software at this point. I doubt they're willing to share it :)

Are you expecting a new engine that will somehow allow 7cm textures to run faster than 30m ones, and thus allow you to move everything to the right? Not going to happen..

Why not? The last FS engine is still based on things from FS98 (that's pre 1998). I think a massive performance increase is a given, assuming this will be a brand new engine. We don't know this for sure of course but I think it is a reasonable assumption.

Maybe also a place where they read http://forums.gamesforwindows.com/t/14337.aspx

FS11 needs better coding. I dont even want to have to worry about how many trees are showing. I want an adaptive simulator to my computers performance and more gpu loading.

Again:Full,DX11TessellationMulitcoreSLI-support

Don't forget Hyperthreading and PhysX.......:(