In the absence of evidence to the contrary there is no other conclusion to be made.

Nope, in the absence of evidence, the conclusion must be inconclusive. There is no evidence to disprove that JFK was shot by aliens from Venus, it does not mean we must therefore conclude that is what happened.Al

You and Alain seem to be so invested in repeating your confidence that Flight is just an enhanced FSX to the point of arguing with the head developer of FSX. Phil (the person you are arguing with above) was hired to lead the ACES team to extract as much performance out of FSX by creating SP1 the SP2. If MS now comes with a FSX enhancement to speed up FS flight to run on ordinary computers as they claim, then you are arguing that Phill and entire ACES could not do what the new team is doing now. I don't think so. To run on the run of the mill systems, Flight needs to be truly multithreaded. (We all know clock speeds have not gone up). To create a multithreaded Flight, the engine needs to be redone. So please stop this unsolicitated opinion that you two repeat over and over again in so many threads . Lets just agree to disagree.

I'm not arguing??

If these things are fixed in an enhanced FSX engine then I will be very happy.

Every sequel is an enhanced version.It's how sequels are made, and why dev teams love sequels most - IMO it's their best work.Scratch work seriously limits what you'll accomplish...and very much so.But this is game code, it evolves as components.I know I'm sort of pollyanna here, but we do want the same stuff :)- like good cloud shadows ;)

Frankly, I don't give a rats bee hind if Flight has new this or new that. I'll even take it one step further: As long as Flight fixes *all* the bugs in FSX and gives me solid 30 FPS in KLAX, and does so without requiring me to purchase the most expensive CPU and video card when it is released, I'm a happy camper. And I don't care how they do it either, and I even don't care if Flight is FSX SP4 in disguise.Actually I would even prefer it were, to guarantee compatibility with the loads of scenery and wonderful aircraft I have purchased over the years and that I would be more than happy with if I could get decent frame rates and not have CTDs along the way (or if I did, that Flight could assist in identifying the offending add-on so I could zap it foerever into binary oblivion.)

I absolutely agree!If Flight uses an enhanced FSX engine and it fixes most of the problems/deficiencies that are present in FSX then I would be very happy too.Even if all they fix is the over-sized autogen bug and add cloud shadows that will be great!And I think that's what they are doing, using an enhanced FSX engine and fixing the issues/adding new features. It makes sense to build upon the great FSX engine rather than start again from 'scratch'.

I absolutely agree!If Flight uses an enhanced FSX engine and it fixes most of the problems/deficiencies that are present in FSX then I would be very happy too.Even if all they fix is the over-sized autogen bug and add cloud shadows that will be great!And I think that's what they are doing, using an enhanced FSX engine and fixing the issues/adding new features. It makes sense to build upon the great FSX engine rather than start again from 'scratch'.

Amen, that's what I was saying from the beginning, 5%-10% or 50% > improvement...who know?I, like others here, was trilled when Flight was announced, I was thinking "new engine from the ground up" DX11, hyperthreading, SLI, PhysX, and all FSX bugs fixed, maybe all of this will happen, we don't know but one thing for sure is it will not be done from a brand new engine, I'm still trill about Flight itself, I'm just not sure I'm trill about the direction MS is taking Flight.....more to come.....

Even if all they fix is the over-sized autogen bug and add cloud shadows that will be great!

Learn how to make scenery and stop complaining about the stupid autogen. If it's so bad, you can make custom autogen objects at the size you want.

And I think that's what they are doing, using an enhanced FSX engine and fixing the issues/adding new features. It makes sense to build upon the great FSX engine rather than start again from 'scratch'.

I really don't know what you are trying to accomplish now. You kept whining about how you think Flight is using this or that of the FSX engine, then you go and say that you like the idea of them doing that. Your posts have no solid evidence that Flight uses the FSX 3D engine. Please stop forcing people to read your repetitive opinion.

Learn how to make scenery and stop complaining about the stupid autogen. If it's so bad, you can make custom autogen objects at the size you want.I really don't know what you are trying to accomplish now. You kept whining about how you think Flight is using this or that of the FSX engine, then you go and say that you like the idea of them doing that. Your posts have no solid evidence that Flight uses the FSX 3D engine. Please stop forcing people to read your repetitive opinion.

You need to re-read/understand what I said.

Please, please, tell at MatthewS that Flight is an FSX improved engine, not new, so he will finally stop with all that. You know you are really boring with all your argues?

I present evidence as to why Flight is using the FSX 3d engine.

No you haven't because there isn't any evidence - merely your opinion.

No you haven't because there isn't any evidence - merely your opinion.

Been through all that, not going to explain it again. Like I asked Phil you could try telling me why you think its a new 3D engine (and not an enhanced version of FSX) based on the released screenshot/videos.There's a new Flight video here, http://forum.avsim.net/topic/338043-ms-flight-webisode-4-explore/still same 'near field' autogen popup / lack of cloud shadows as FSX etc, oh but of course a new engine rewritten from scratch would exhibit these same 'failings' too? No I don't think so.

Been through all that, not going to explain it again. Like I asked Phil you could try telling me why you think its a new 3D engine (and not an enhanced version of FSX) based on the released screenshot/videos.There's a new Flight video here, http://forum.avsim.net/topic/338043-ms-flight-webisode-4-explore/still same 'near field' autogen popup / lack of cloud shadows as FSX etc, oh but of course a new engine rewritten from scratch would exhibit these same 'failings' too? No I don't think so.

uumm... so you are a graphic guru? why don't you ask MS to hire you so you can do a better job?

uumm... so you are a graphic guru? why don't you ask MS to hire you so you can do a better job?

We are discussing if Flight is using a new 3D engine or is using an enhanced version of the FSX 3D engine. No one has given a single reason why the released screenshots/videos suggest that its a new 3D engine, not even Phil Taylor. On the contrary myself and others have given several reasons why Flight appears to be using the FSX engine (albeit enhanced).

quote name='MatthewS' timestamp='1308645223' post='2002877']Been through all that, not going to explain it again. Like I asked Phil you could try telling me why you think its a new 3D engine (and not an enhanced version of FSX) based on the released screenshot/videos.You must learn not to put words into other people's mouths - it's intellectually dishonest.I never said anything about the type of engine. Read my posts

Been through all that, not going to explain it again. Like I asked Phil you could try telling me why you think its a new 3D engine (and not an enhanced version of FSX) based on the released screenshot/videos.

You must learn not to put words into other people's mouths - it's intellectually dishonest.I never said anything about the type of engine. Read my posts

Not sure what words I'm putting into others mouths, can you please explain/give examples?In any-case nobody gives reasons based on the evidence (ie the screenshots/videos) that Flight is using a new engine 3D engine. Does it matter that Flight is using an enhanced FSX 3D engine, probably not if MS fix most of the issues with it, though the latest video (released today on Youtube) still shows Flight without cloud shadows and with autogen popup at close range to the camera, so alas there are still issues.

We are discussing if Flight is using a new 3D engine or is using an enhanced version of the FSX 3D engine. No one has given a single reason why the released screenshots/videos suggest that its a new 3D engine, not even Phil Taylor. On the contrary myself and others have given several reasons why Flight appears to be using the FSX engine (albeit enhanced).

so you can see how a software is coded only looking at a screenshot?? AMAZING... YOU REALLY ARE A GURU THEN!In my more than 20 years of software developer I never understood how do it... please enlighten me....MatthewS, stop digging a hole or you will fall inside..