<>Respectfully, I would agree on the far fetched part. There are LOTS of FS9 users with fairly old hardware. What they don't do is load up their systems with frame-grabbing scenery, excessive AI and/or weather.Wanna shoot low approaches on a budget? Set viz to a half mile and clouds to ZERO.Lots of ways to use FS9 with more than acceptable results without a screamer rig.On a value per minute basis computer games are about the cheapest form of mass recreation on the planet...including add-ons...which are incredibly cheap for the value offered.Think of it. A huge number of people pay just about what we commonly pay for a payware aircraft for a new release movie DVD. ONE MOVIE that will never change. You have to watch the exact same thing over and over forever. Not so with an add-on aircraft that provides almost endless variations in functionality. Or, you could rent the movie and pay about $2.00 per hour of viewing time. Which one of us would like to pay that fee for our time on the sim?(Before those of an argumentative nature bust my chops, the above assumes the inevitable...which is that the simmer already has a computer/monitor)Regards,Jim

Let us not forget that we here are not Microsoft's marketing target.FS-X will have to be capable of operating on a typical PC and not just on high-specification specialist gaming PCs if it's to achieve significant sales.

couldn't you say the same thing about FS9 though? Sure with default addons it could perform pretty well on a typical machine, the problem is once you throw lots of addons into the mix, it performs horribly. You are still their marketing tool, but also an extra set of eyes. In my experience dealing with external tests they were 99% a marketing tool and 1% compatability testers, but it looks like its more 50/50 here, which is good considering the source. Microsoft is well known for not listening to anybody

Developers will adapt just fine now that there is a large market for add-ons. If they have to do major tweaking to make it compatable, they will just charge you for the upgrade and generate more revenue for them, using existing add-ons. I would think that that would be something they would look forward to, not shun.The thing I am not going to like (well, my wife won't like) is forking out money for a new system to run FS X as I am sure (as all previous versions have) it will take serious horsepower of the latest technologies.

From the screenies I've seen (speculation in 5. . . 4. . .3 . . 2 . .1 . .) I think MS has only added some eyecandy, and maybe some non flight related improvements (i.e. weather, AI). So I have a feeling that the old addons will work, and the graphical goodies, such as wet runways, will actually improve performance a bit, as those effects look like a lot of DX9 stuff that our video cards do with aplomb.In other words, the framerate impact will be only due to added scenery complexity, nothing more.

>On a value per minute basis computer games are about the>cheapest form of mass recreation on the planet...including>add-ons...which are incredibly cheap for the value offered.>>Think of it. A huge number of people pay just about what we>commonly pay for a payware aircraft for a new release movie>DVD. ONE MOVIE that will never change. That is SO TRUE!!! I

>In my experience dealing with>external tests they were 99% a marketing tool and 1%>compatability testers, but it looks like its more 50/50 here,>which is good considering the source. Microsoft is well known>for not listening to anybodyIt should be clear by now that ACES (MS's Game Studio) is not locked into the same paradigm that you are accustomed to, Alex.You have had ample proof that not only do they "listen to {you}," but even respond! ;)Granted, they might not always say what one might want to hear or believe, but you've been around long enough by now that you should be able to recognize that there has been a serious paradigm shift in Redmond, and that - barring anything forcing a change in attitude - the nice folks at ACES will be much more open and forthcoming than in the past.Like all such new ventures however, it will take time and a lot of good will from everyone to bring it to full flower... ;)

Sorry but an artist explaining if the producers listen to external testers just doesn't do it for me. They may listen to them more than other games, but because you get the build late in the process, if it isn't a CTD bug, 99% of the time it will not be addressed.

Someone brought up the point of upgrading their pc's now. I for oneam waiting for a timetable for when fsx comes out so I can plan my nextbuild around it. I think getting a new pc just for fs right now will not even be close to be worth it. By the time fsx comes up your pcwill be on the low to med end of best out. Heck if it's true about fsx using dx10 we all going to be missing something since dx10 hardwareis not even out yet.Kinda funny on one of the AMD forums someone posted a question statingthat fsx is going to be able to use dx10 and is there any hardware outyet. Guys came back and said there is no hardware of now that supportsdx10 and it would be almost a year before any game would use it afterdx10 comes out. I guess they forgot that Microsoft makes fs.

>Sorry but an artist explaining if the producers listen to>external testers just doesn't do it for me. They may listen to>them more than other games, but because you get the build late>in the process, if it isn't a CTD bug, 99% of the time it will>not be addressed. I give up, Alex. Continue to live in your own world of blissful intractability...You had a reply to your incorrect statements directly FROM one of the folks at ACES who's responsible for the product, yet still aren't convinced. That's known theologically as "Invincible Ignorance."

Alex:We don't have producers. I certainly see how your opinion has been formed by past experience.ACES doesn't use the producer model (like EA) to build games. We use a matrix team approach (example:http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/leader/leadtem2.html)We have leads: Dev, Test, program management "PM", Art, user experience "UX", Audio, etc. Feature team areas address bugs until the "end game," where a bug triage committee sits twice a day. The committee is comprised of leads. I sit on the commitee.The committee doesn't act unilaterally: feature teams are invited to provide input.All members of the team have access to the bug database *and* to the Beta message forum, where team members interact directly with external testers.Cheers,Jason "happy New Year to all!" Waskey

Thank you Jason for the very cogent and comprehensive explanation. I hope that puts the arrow on target... ;)Happy New Year to you and all the nice folks at ACES!

Hi there Jason let me add that it's a very good thing that you and the team that's developing FS10 are able to show how much co-operation goes into getting something like this "out the door" I work in 3D for a living and I know how the many different talents have to come togetherto create what we all enjoy so much. Just think of all the different skill sets needed to create something like F.S. All of the modeling of complex physical processes that go into everything one sees,feels and hears would simply blow the mind of most of the people who use software like this. Things like fluid dynamics,fractal mathmatics that go into just createing the weather alone are amazeing. Add to this one needs people who have a strong sence of art to create all of the visuals and then perhaps you can start to understand how complex anything in 3D really is. Anyway I for one am lucky to get to enjoy what you and the team that you are a part of create. Dan Martin Team Flight Ontario

Yes, and that's why I believe FS-X will be similar for the same sound marketing reasons. I doubt that delivering a version that will cope with "lots of addons" out of the box would increase Microsoft's net revenue at all. The enthusiasts who post here are an almost infinitesimal part of Microsoft's market. After all, less than 2000 people responded to the vendor and demographic surveys here.