Well, it's been several weeks since the release. Anyone heard of pending fixes?Also, Has Microsoft created an "insider" user site for FS9 like they did for 2002?Thanks to all who comment!

The only rumor I've heard about a patch is that there are no rumors.:7 Jan

Hi there:you want rumors - how about this one?http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho..._id=16748&page=Cheers, HolgerP.S. With "Insider" page, do you mean this one?http://www.microsoft.com/games/flightsimulator/insider.asp

Another rumor about a rumor....Kinda reminds me of my kids playing the "telephone" game :-lolI'm pretty darn certain that there is no patch, if it is, it's called FS2006.http://fsgateway.com/frank/fs9paibeta.jpg

"I'm pretty darn certain that there is no patch, if it is, it's called FS2006."I'm pretty certain that if the autogen (xml) issue isn't addressed, for many there won't be a FS2006. The community will be setting itself up for disappointment every release, and lose long standing members each release, if it accepts by default the concept of the "paid patch".... I won't argue about show stoppers vs. non-show stoppers...I don't fly with autogen much and I wouldn't have known of the autogen issue without reading the forum here.But Microsoft's example that it will set dealing with this issue will probably decide for many where they pour their future simming dollars--especially with X-Plane being embraced by the English VFR scenery project. I exclude the fanatics like myself who blindly plunk down the dollars for MSFS just to see what each release holds.... But I do think it's interesting that Microsoft was more likely to patch minor problems when we had Fly!, Flight Unlimited, and Propilot out there as alternatives....Also, I'm not trying to start a flame war--I certainly haven't flamed Frank here, whose opinion I respect. I'm just offering my own opinion and, having been part of the beta, would consider my own personal attitude about a patch (won't bug me one way or another) an unfair representation of the hobby in general or this sim specifically. -John

One of the joys of forums John, we can always agree to disagree, as amigos! :-wavehttp://fsgateway.com/frank/fs9paibeta.jpg

post appeared twice :-roll

i'd love to see a patch...i had to give up on fs2004,and am back with fs2002...but realism makes me say this:i too think the patch'll be called fs2006.and MS can afford to loose some "hardcore" simmers...this game still is in the top ten sellers,as the vast majority of people who buy this game are not "hardcore" simmers...heck,they're not even casual simmers :-lol

>I'm pretty certain that if the autogen (xml) issue isn't>addressed, for many there won't be a FS2006. One day..................soon,I'll have to find out what this "autogen bug" is..I guess I just havn't noticed it yet, and havn't read up on it; to know what I'm missing. :) And I do use autogen quite frequently, like 99% of the time.L.Adamson

"I guess I just havn't noticed it yet, and havn't read up on it; to know what I'm missing. :) And I do use autogen quite frequently, like 99% of the time"I wish I could repeat it, but I never had enough system to run autogen with the fast food joints, etc... anyway. I'd say you're in a minority only from what I've read though--many have basically said the process of flying back and forth over a congested area (such as one might do on downwind and final) is causing the autogen objects to get "stuck" in memory.All I can say is without autogen, there is no memory leak in COF that I can find (at least under 98SE). I logged twelve hours last week, including one transcon six hour hop, and I started each session with 155 megs free, and had that much free at the end of the session (before exiting COF). My fps numbers were also consistent at start and destination. I can't say what autogen would do, since using it with the default.xml there cut my fps to an unacceptable 15 fps. I'm long known for giving up eye candy for more fluidity, and autogen doesn't do anything for me in the flight levels anyway.... My COF setup is pretty solid now given my system. Don't think a patch would give me anything I don't already have...BTW--I have a "bone" to pick with you! I posted some screenshots of Erick's MD-90 along with Jim's repaint flying into SLC..... I thought you'd at least comment, considering the SLC area has been material for many of your great screenshots :(http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho...id=87539&page=3

>BTW--I have a "bone" to pick with you! I posted some>screenshots of Erick's MD-90 along with Jim's repaint flying>into SLC..... I thought you'd at least comment, considering>the SLC area has been material for many of your great>screenshots :(>Nice "shots"!..... JohnActually, a few weeks ago, I deleted my URL's to the forums. When I once again looked for the Avsim Screenshot forum, I didn't see it listed (even though I just found it right towards the bottom of the list), and thought maybe it was "scrubbed" again. Therefor, I just havn't looked at any screenshots for weeks!! :)On the subject of auto-gen, I use it frequently for back country mountain areas & havn't run into the "bug".L.Adamson

Hi John.With autogen, there is no memory leak. The only leak we have detected is the one caused by having a landclass in a scenery folder with a twin texture folder, that does not include ALL the textures accessed by the landclass. The best solution is to have no twin texture folder.In FS2002, a misplaced landclass would simply refuse to be shown. Is this a bug? Yes. But we have found the simple work-around, just as we did in FS2002.=======================================The autogen issue is simply one of too many polygons for some systems to tolerate. There are several new forms of autogen placement in FS2004. Some are associated with landclass textures; some are placed as VTP vectors; some are placed with a new XML controlled format.The XML format places hundreds of complex library objects in the scenery. JimmiG has found that by deactivating these XML placed objects ( by renaming the "default.xml" as "default.bak" ) our framerates are much more consistant, and much better, in congested suburban areas... where most major airports are found. There's nothing magic here. Deleted complex objects = higher framerates.Is that a bug? No. It's just MS ambitiously providing us with more scenery objects than we can display with some of our systems. How odd that we complain about MS being too generous with scenery objects!The newer PCs one year from now will display them all just fine.For older systems, we can delete or deactivate files, or turn down the autogen slider.===================================Autogen bridges? They are VTP 2-point lines. Some of these suffer from bad data, just like the sunken or raised lakes found in the sim. Bugs? Yes... but don't expect a patch for them. We can patch them ourselves. It's too bad they made it to the final version, and maybe the design team needs to tighten up quality control a bit concerning the visual display of these lines and polys. Double checking never hurts. ( remember FS2002 Prince Edward Island? or the world encircling trench at about N70* ?)MS never patched that stuff, and I doubt they will patch any of this.By using JimmiG's XML "fix" and installing the WindowsXP SP1 USB update, many simmers are enjoying FS2004 without much care for framerates.Dick

I also haven't experienced this autogen problem and I run autogen at full right slider except when practicing manuevers. I do wish avsim would do a survey on how ms2004 works for everyone-I suspect the problems are with the minority and not the majority-but would be interested to really know.I also don't find fs2004 to be any more or less perfect than any other version I have used since fs1. There is increased realism, new features, and of course some bugs , and remaining areas and reality that can always be improved .Just another evolutionary step. I don't see that long standing community members are lost by each release of flight simulator, but I do see long standing community members who are leaving at an alarming rate for other reasons. http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/Geofdog2.jpg

a big issue for me is the see-thru heavy overcast while above it. Yes, I know that you can set it up (with a quite a bit of work) so that this does not occur, but that applies to User Advanced wx only. This should be fixed for both the Static and Dynamic downloaded wx.

i too run autogen at max and have yet to see this "bug"don