Being a fan is generally a positive thing. "Fan boys" are usually those fans that take it one step further to the point where they can see no bad done by their chosen idle of worship and uphold it as the be all and end all of whatever field it may be in.

Yep, and some take it as far as a religion and at least one guy goes that far sure here.Apparently :)

+1The definition should also include ... "often used then a poster will not change their point of view to another posters point of view" ... you dont agree with me, therefore, you are a a really excited user

Very true too ... I can be guilty of this ... at least I concede :)

I myself suspect it is...why? because if Flight look like Hawii all over the world who will need to buy add-ons, I mean seriously will you buy addons to cover Hawaii as it is right now in Flight?? Hawaii main airport (default as seen in the pics.) look like a good add-ond, so if the rest of the Flight world look like Hawaii I sure won't need any add-ons for it....I asked this question before but nobody want to give me an answer so I'll ask again...phew....If only Hawaii look that good in Flight is in it a bait and swicth "kinda" deal and if Flight look like Hawaii all over the world why in hell will you buy add-ons for Flight?Now knowing that MS is opening a store for add-ons do you really think that Flight will look like Hawaii all over the world?

So you dont think this part of Hawaii that they seem to keep featuring in the preview shots is just going to be one of the default "detailed areas" in the same manner FSX had a few "detailed areas" like Rio, Oshkosh, St. Marteen and Las Vegas (speaking of regular non-Accel FSX)?I agree that the whole world for obvious reasons wont be as detailed as what they have shown, but I wouldn't be surprised if a few more of these "detailed areas" are included with Flight as they had been with FS9 and FSX. Perhaps more detailed areas will be available for purchase in the "market" if you so choose to buy them, similar to the way Accel added a detailed Edwards, Red Bull race course(s), the F-18, etc.I would be surprised if they left the rest of the world stripped and void of any detail for it to be purchased piece by piece. In other words, I imagine that major cities with still have the main buildings and landmarks like they do in FSX without having to purchase a NYC or L.A. area to get those items. Does that mean that they will be as detailed as what has been shown as Hawaii? Probably not, but I doubt it will be bare bones either.I guess we really wont know until MS reveals all the product details, but I dont think the default version will be a whole lot different that FSX was. We will most likely still need to buy better land class products, better mesh, and so fourth, be it from the MS Market or other 3rd parties like we do now.

Yep, and some take it as far as a religion and at least one guy goes that far sure here.

Come on, really? Just stop. It's not getting you anywhere, it's not proving anything....I could go on, but I'm more mature than that.I see the problems with Flight. It can easily be a failure. Do I think it will? No...same with many others here. Doesn't mean we're all fan boys. None of us are worshiping Microsoft. (at least not to my knowledge. :()

... so adding autogen to it will make this kind of scenery very huge GB wise, ...

The size differential between photo and photo with autogen is minimal, as all that is being added with autogen is "placement code", as in at Lat/Lon place this tree.One other general comment about Flight being previewed using Hawai'i and it's effect on the rest of the world. As I posted elsewhere;"Hawaii boasts 11 of the 13 climate zones in the world, each with unique ecosystems and weather characteristics."http://www.to-hawaii.com/climate.phpIf you are looking to see how revised (?) textures works, Hawai'i would be a great sampling point.

At the end of the day I can see the OP's point from a historical fun sort of perspective .. you had better bet your your sweet ganoochie the screen shots today should be better than what was released when FSX was on the go in its inception ... but when the infamous FSX DX10 screenie was released by a person from MS Studio's ... well into FSX SP1 as I recall ... you still have to remember the lies that can come out of that camp.Yes it later transpired this was an artists impression ... but I can assure you, we were led to believe this was ibso facto for many many many months.So yes, MS have been guilty of deceit before and I dare say only the most dedicated a really excited user would say they cant be guilty of deception again.Fool Me Once .. shame on Me ... Fool me Twice ... shame on you.We all know the drill by now.

Anyway .. its been about two months, what is the usual appraise from PC Pilot about the forthcoming MS Hawaiian sim? ... I'll not be down the street to buy this months bi monthly magazine for at least a week.Aint it great to have the Internet :)

At the end of the day I can see the OP's point from a historical fun sort of perspective .. you had better bet your your sweet ganoochie the screen shots today should be better than what what was released when FSX was on the go in its inception ... but when the infamous FSX DX10 screenie was released by a person from MS Studio's ... well into FSX SP1 as I recall ... you still have to remember the lies that can come out of that camp.

That screenshot was actually not meant to represent the final product. It was more of a goal for the team, as in, may or may not match FSX. They never got to go through with their plans and add the "god rays," amazing water, and all the other edited in effects. Can't remember where I read this...was recently, I believe on a former ACES member's blog.

Anyway .. its been about two months, what is the usual appraise from PC Pilot about the forthcoming MS Hawaiian sim?

Didn't know an MS Hawaiian sim existed, but there is this MS Flight thing that we've all been discussing lately. :(

So you dont think this part of Hawaii that they seem to keep featuring in the preview shots is just going to be one of the default "detailed areas" in the same manner FSX had a few "detailed areas" like Rio, Oshkosh, St. Marteen and Las Vegas (speaking of regular non-Accel FSX)?I agree that the whole world for obvious reasons wont be as detailed as what they have shown, but I wouldn't be surprised if a few more of these "detailed areas" are included with Flight as they had been with FS9 and FSX. Perhaps more detailed areas will be available for purchase in the "market" if you so choose to buy them, similar to the way Accel added a detailed Edwards, Red Bull race course(s), the F-18, etc.I would be surprised if they left the rest of the world stripped and void of any detail for it to be purchased piece by piece. In other words, I imagine that major cities with still have the main buildings and landmarks like they do in FSX without having to purchase a NYC or L.A. area to get those items. Does that mean that they will be as detailed as what has been shown as Hawaii? Probably not, but I doubt it will be bare bones either.I guess we really wont know until MS reveals all the product details, but I dont think the default version will be a whole lot different that FSX was. We will most likely still need to buy better land class products, better mesh, and so fourth, be it from the MS Market or other 3rd parties like we do now.

We are saying the same thing with different words, of course MS can add other part of the world looking as good as Hawaii and of course they will have the main building in city like FSX did, what I'm saying is if Flight look like Hawaii all over the world who needs add-ons? and if the rest of the world don't look like Hawaii a lot of peoples will fall of their chairs thinking that MS is showing Hawaii as if Flight will look like Hawaii no matter where you are flying.I'm just trying to put all the pieces of the puzzle together, why do we only see Hawaii? I mean seriously, after seeing Hawaii main airport looking as good as any add-ons airport for FSX + the way Hawaii look all over from what we saw already who's "gonna" want to cover it with add-ons....not me.... so what's left for the add-ons developers....other part of the world right? So what do I think exactly?....I think Hawaii is an enhanced part of Flight, as far as I know MS is focusing on performance (that's what they said, they said nothing about focusing on visual) but we can see that Hawaii (default) does look better than FSX Hawaii default....so for me knowing that MS will open a store for Flight's add-ons I am 99% sure that the rest of Flight's world will not look like Hawaii does, and again you'll ask why? Fair question, so how long do you thing it would take MS to make Flight's world look as good as Hawaii including all airport? Way to long, it takes a developers over one year sometimes just to make a good airport and MS will cover the world with airport like the main airport from Hawaii in two to three years??? That is why I think we are only seeing Hawaii from MS and we will see the rest of Flight's world in the store from severals developers, developers who have the time to make add-ons for Flight.Just my 2 cents.

That screenshot was actually not meant to represent the final product. It was more of a goal for the team, as in, may or may not match FSX. They never got to go through with their plans and add the "god rays," amazing water, and all the other edited in effects. Can't remember where I read this...was recently, I believe on a former ACES member's blog.

I'd be interested to know where you read that too, especially as you never seemed to be about ...around about then ... boy you would have had a ball :)No its common opinion MS dropped the ball on that screening and just plain lied to us ... AGAIN.

Didn't know an MS Hawaiian sim existed, but there is this MS Flight thing that we've all been discussing lately. :(

I just wish they would show a bit more than Hawaii at this stage ... what have they got to hide?Stay safe ... I do respect you ... I'm a Flight Sim Fan too.

I'd be interested to know where you read that too, especially as you never seemed to be about ...around about then ... boy you would have had a ball :)

I did some searching, and I think this was the blog post I read. Not entirely sure, but it could have been. Anyway, basically says that ACES releasing the DX10 screenshot was a mistake. I also remember reading that it was their goal, but I don't know where I read that.:Thinking:http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ptaylor/archive/2007/10/02/acceleration-and-sp2.aspx?PageIndex=1

Good to see you can concede mistakes from the mighty MS ... lets just hope Flight is not a mistake too.

At the end of the day I can see the OP's point from a historical fun sort of perspective .. you had better bet your your sweet ganoochie the screen shots today should be better than what was released when FSX was on the go in its inception ... but when the infamous FSX DX10 screenie was released by a person from MS Studio's ... well into FSX SP1 as I recall ... you still have to remember the lies that can come out of that camp.Yes it later transpired this was an artists impression ... but I can assure you, we were led to believe this was ibso facto for many many many months.So yes, MS have been guilty of deceit before and I dare say only the most dedicated a really excited user would say they cant be guilty of deception again.Fool Me Once .. shame on Me ... Fool me Twice ... shame on you.We all know the drill by now.

Unless this was not releated to this picture this question was asked and Phil answered it as a fake screen shot...antonism964 Oct 2007 8:55 AMFinally an update! I was waiting for it!In the new DX10 screenshot, I don't see much difference from DX9, the only changes I can see is the frame rate and the water reflection. I hope you add the new effects soon.Will also SP2 give and more performance enchancements?Also the bug fixes you said on DX9 are available on DX10?And one more question : 1 or 2 months ago of the release of FSX, there was a picture announced which showed FSX on DirectX 10. Is this image fake? Because the DX10 patch isn't completed yet, even after a year of the picture release!Answer......Phil Taylor4 Oct 2007 9:06 PMAntonism:see the link I posted for JazzSelect on the whitecaps, you dont get that in DX9.SP2 has exactly what I said, no more or no less. Of course we made the same fixes for both DX9 and DX10, that part of the post was just to point out there was value for DX9 users as well.Anything months these shots is by definition a fake.==================================================================================================================Also... http://www.flightsimulationguru.com/site/2008/02/18/directx-10-in-microsoft-flight-simulator-fsx-%E2%80%93-amazing-graphics-or-a-load-of-hot-air/

Pretty much says it all:"Hater (slang), a person who expresses intense feelings of hatred or spite, when the reason for this is perceived as unreasonable or spurious."

We all know it was a fake screen shot, it took a while for Phil Taylor and somebody associated with the camp to recuctantly admit that though.My point still stands ... MS have been guilty of fake screen shots before, why are they exempt this time around?But I protest too much ... really I do enjoy MS FS more than any other genre ... I've built a high end PC just for Godamn FSX :)I pray MS Flight is at least as good as MS FSX ... yes I love FSX :)Honest appraisal is always good though.

We all know it was a fake screen shot, it took a while for Phil Taylor and somebody associated with the camp to recuctantly admit that though.My point still stands ... MS have been guilty of fake screen shots before, why are they exempt this time around?But I protest too much ... really I do enjoy MS FS more than any other genre ... I've built a high end PC just for Godamn FSX :)I pray MS Flight is at least as good as MS FSX ... yes I love FSX :)Honest appraisal is always good though.

Don't get me wrong, I'm with you on this one...MS need to repent, only them can do it and if they deceive us again...well.....