Which addon would you guys reccomend for ground textures, FsScene or Birds Eye View? I looked at both of their websites and I am having a hard time deciding. While BEV looks nice, they only have summer textures out now. FsScene has all the seasons and even includes other countries besides the US but their textures don't look quite as good as BEV. It is hard to tell from screenshots though. What are your guys thoughts?

Both are excellent. FScene is ahead in the number of seasons and countries, but BEV is way ahead in the alignment of the autogen on the textures, making the autogen realistically positioned.

I have had FSScene for quite a while now and loved it, however I think BEV looks much better (summer so far). Right now I use FScene for all seasons except summer, and as BEV seasons are released the FScene texures will be replaced by BEV as I like BEV that much more.A couple of things I like about BEV is the buildings are more relaistically placed (for looks) instead of the FS9 default haphazard way, and same for trees along roads. You can have a line of trees along a street instead of randomly placed, and this looks great in places like central USA

Ruud is working hard to create adjusted landclass files for his work.The first one (USA/Canada) has already been released, check the official support forums at http://forums.simflight.com .Other continents to follow in the coming weeks.

I also use both But you should know that BEV install has some serious performance problems and instead of allowing you to choose what you want installed on your machine by default, BEV installs and overwrite files without warning. And it has an buggy configuator so when you think you uninstalled it there are some files left behind. Other than that it looks good. And so do Ruud seasonal textures.Bill M

So it sounds like the main complaint is that the autogen doesn't line up as good in FsScene as in BEV. However, looking at the FsScene website, they have released a patch which makes the autogen line up correctly. With the autogen lined up correctly in both, I guess it comes down to which has the most realistic looking textures. Hard to decide which looks most realistic though; they both look very nice.

>I guess it comes down to which has the most>realistic looking textures. Hard to decide which looks most>realistic though; they both look very nice.For me there is no competition since BEV looks so much more realistic (I never bought FSScene even before knowing about BEV because I thought their color are over saturated, looks like "Disneyland"). But of course, as always, it is always your own choice.Michael J.WinXP-Home SP2,AMD64 3500+,Abit AV8,Radeon X800Pro,36GB Raptor,1GB PC3200,Audigy 2http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpghttp://www.hifisim.com/images/asv_beta_member.jpg

I have been thinking about buying the BEV textures, but after reading that other long thread on the '.net' problems that people were having, I have been hesitant. Is my hesitancy warranted?

You get a 30 Day $$$ back if you don't like. But Be warn, back up your textures folders before you install BEV. I will take a dip in performance compared to FScence textures.Bill M

I see absolutely no performance difference between BEV and the defaults - no idea what you're talking about... What (apparently) happens on your system doesn't mean it happens to everyone. How much RAM do you have and what video card?

> I will>take a dip in performance compared to FScence textures.>Sorry, but this is simply made up, don't spread misinformation. There can NOT be any performace difference because their textures are of identical size to original FS9 textures.Michael J.WinXP-Home SP2,AMD64 3500+,Abit AV8,Radeon X800Pro,36GB Raptor,1GB PC3200,Audigy 2http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpghttp://www.hifisim.com/images/asv_beta_member.jpg

I had some FScene and they are nice .... but I think I like the BEV ones better. The city textures are nice too and buildings line up well somehow.FScene (Quebec)BEV (Oregon)

wow that DOES look nice.

I don't have FSScene, but I do have BEV and I'm very happy with it. As for the .NET stuff, that's a tempest in a teapot as far as I'm concerned. They're just runtime libraries for the .NET frame work. Visual C++ and Visual Basic have runtimes too. But in anycase, the configurator is being rewritten without .NET in reponse to the fuss.

If you have XP you have the .NET framework installed anyway. The installer might see if you have the latest version and upgrade it if needed but that's it.And if you don't have XP you more than likely have .NET installed as well as ever more software requires it.Rewriting something to not use .NET if foolish, as Vista most likely will support nothing else (at least not optimised).