The one thing that is bugging me about the runways that follow the contour is the accuracy of the data that is used.  OK, perhaps not accuracy but how far apart each data point is.    Seattle is one example and it is in the demo.   When coming in on runway 16, especially the left two if you touch down where all the tire marks are it's like hitting a brick wall, the slop is so large.   Too large to think the actual runway is like this but I understand how the software could make it this way if just past the runway there is a bank or slope etc.   At that point the somewhere on the runway is then going to make a beeline directly down to  the next lowest point.     Looking at this photo it 'appears' that the runway could be on a slope given how it looks to change angle at the beginning.  How steep that slope is I don't know for sure but I am wondering of part of the data used to determine the slope on the runway included somewhere higher in the photo, thereby exaggerating the slope of the runway itself.   I am not sure if I am explaining my thinking clearly but I can think of runways that are higher than the ground surrounding them and this is likely to be taken in to account because the data is not accurate enough.   Complete speculation I know, but as nothing is looked after by hand I can't see how this wouldn't be an issue in places.   What was it like in XP9?

If you were not sure what I was on about here I just tried to land at lukla. Given the short runway and the accuracy of the mesh half of the runway is at 60 degrees and you cant spawn on the runway without the plane falling to bits.