(1) Microsoft spends significant development time Optimizing FPS especially with AI Traffic, Weather, and airport scenery.(2) ATC sequences AI traffic correctly (not overtaken by AI aircraft on final)Or:(3) Develop FS 2006 for the XBOX II, optimizing for this platform. Most of us spend a few hundred bucks on upgrading hardware anyway. Then they can really optimize for the platform. The only major requirement is that XBOX II supports USB devices (controls, etc). Then we could spend time flying and not tweaking. Can you imagine, everyone's FPS would be the same out of the box.If they do nothing else, I would buy the next version for these reasons alone.Just my thoughts. Would like to hear others.Barry

1) FS2k4 is ALREADY optimised for AI, Weather and Airport Scenery. There is no problem with the defaults. I have to assume you are talking about stuff you have added on then. You don't actually expect them to be able to anticipate all the demands a particular 3rd party addon is going to make of the sim do you? That's obviously the job of the 3rd party addon creator. IE there would not be a problem with AI if all the packages used several LOD models.2) That would be something that could stand to be fixed.and3) Do I REALLY need to comment on this one? Suffice to say I don't own an XBox and I don't intend to by a newer version either.Just MY thoughts :)

My opinion for #3A new xbox with a copy of fs... $350. Rudder pedals for xbox. $110. Yoke for Xbox- $120. Most of us probably dont own xblock, and wont go out to buy it. Plus with the near 600 bucks I just spent I could have bought the best of the best video card, extra 512mb ram, a new mother board... Oh yea- then pray all of my addon planes and scenery work.

Hi, "(1) Microsoft spends significant development time Optimizing FPS especially with AI Traffic, Weather."They are already optimized and you forget that's the actual highest computer on the market now, will be entries level at that's time. You can expect already a boost on performance without change anything from the actual weather. I doubt you will see major change on weather unless some fix here and here. The newer Ms Windows is actual tested in beta with a 3.2 gHz and run acceptable figure. You will probably see Fs fs2006 using 3,4,5GHZ with higher video cards.There is no real solution unless you downgrade the weather visual like fs2002 and it's a major step back to take, specialy from 2003 years and above. The amount of 3d clouds and type details and layers you can't really optimize this unless to downgrade to 2d total mode clouds with all the lower implementation like fs2002, but this is getting very OLD technologie and not acceptable. Even with fs2002, I still receive email about better clouds performance for fs2002 and how many fps post I have seen for fs2002 before at that's time.Ms will receive 100x faster your which here [email protected]. ThanksChris Willis[link:fsw.simflight.com/FSWMenuFsSim.html]Clouds And Addons For MsFs

AI traffic I can live without as I fly mostly online .XBox I will live without- it doesn't make economic sense.The thing I think that is probably most important to most people is scenery - get the scenery right ( ie: missing bridges , rivers that flow uphill etc)and ensure that having a reasonable level of scenery settings doesn't bring the average PC( I know - what is average now or in two years time - no one can really say) to its knees. A few nice tweaks such as wet runways when it rains( surely can't be that difficult) would be nice.Overall I'd be happy to see small visual improvements with better performance for all , rather than giant steps in scenery realism that only the top 3 or 4 % of users can take advantage of.Dave

Do you realize how crappy FS would look on an Xbox? Unless they design the Xbox II to display on a computer monitor, your gauges won't be readable. The resolution of a TV is not even close to the lowest resolution supported by FS (800x600). HTDV is closer, but still not up to the resolution supported by your computer monitor.

""1) FS2k4 is ALREADY optimised for AI, Weather and AirportScenery. There is no problem with the defaults. I have toassume you are talking about stuff you have added on then. Youdon't actually expect them to be able to anticipate all thedemands a particular 3rd party addon is going to make of thesim do you? That's obviously the job of the 3rd party addoncreator. IE there would not be a problem with AI if all thepackages used several LOD models.2) That would be something that could stand to be fixed.and3) Do I REALLY need to comment on this one? Suffice to say Idon't own an XBox and I don't intend to by a newer versioneither.""I agree 120%!!!!!!FS9 out of the box is great, it's all the stuff we all add that bogs it down. I would like to see MS design it with more headroom for addons.XBOX, no way, no how. I own a PS2 that I never touch, hate console controls.Regards, MichaelKDFWhttp://www.calvirair.com/mcpics/PBTMCa.jpgCalVirAir International VACougar Mountain Helicopters & Aviation[link:www.cgrmthelos.com]Cougar Mountain Helicopters

What puzzles me is how people can judge if certain aspects of FS2004 are optimised or not. Anyone seen the source code?Comparing to other landscape viz apps, I would guess (just judging from imagery and fps) that certain aspects can be optimised more than they are now. But that always raises the question optimise for what? Faster CPUs? Faster GPUs? Older systems? Maybe something to think about before starting flame wars that clog up avsim space...Christian

Not to burst anyones bubble but we'll be lucky to see a FS2006.

>Not to burst anyones bubble but we'll be lucky to see a>FS2006.An your basis for this assumption is.....???? Hmmm, maybe I'm supposed to be a mindreader.Jim

Money. It's that simple. MS can barely break even with FS. I'm not saying there won't be one, I for one just wouldn't be super surprised if there isn't a FS10

1) I agree definitely about FS being optimized. I just yesterday installed it new, cuz my old installation with all addons somehow started crashing, so I decided to reinstall... just out of pure curiosity, how it will run now on the newest drivers and optimized system... I was basically astonished that with all sliders full, few M$ AI aircraft still was getting pretty decent frames, even at the big airports - LAX, ORD... not talking bout smaller ones, EGLL - over 60 fps... :) It's what you nicely like to add in the FS that kills it...2) no comment, never use internal ATC - try flying VATSIM, boy! much better and much more realistic!3) :-xxrotflmao oh man, you are making me laugh. :) Simply put: will never happen, and should never happen.

Interesting:MS can barely break even with FSWhere can we read more?!Let us know.

Christian,"Comparing to other landscape viz apps"If you compare sky rendering with others, Il2, lomac,fly x-plane, fs2000, fs2002 etc. You will conclude, the only way to improve fps is to reduce the amount and the type of clouds on the sky and use simple few cumulus clouds with 2d stuff

Most AI Aircraft models are poorly made; too many polygons & too few LODs. A well known commercial AI package uses these FPS killing planes.Try replacing them with AI Aardvarks & you should get a performance gain of around 5-10fps. Beats waiting for a Intel to make a 5Ghz cpu :)www.ai-aardvark.com