>636mb for poxy demo - shove it MSI'm not sure what you meant by this but it didn't sound good.They shrank it down to fit it on a single CD.If you think 636MB is large for a demo these days then you need to get out of the rock you've been under. Seriously, all due respect but that's small.

>So are we getting 'position and hold' to the ai after an a/c>lands, or do we have to wait to clear the rwy. And no I>haven't tested out AI, I've just run the CRJ landing mission. >Will we really get to hear 'World Travel Two-Sixty-Eight?' At>this point, I'll take anything ATC-wise.No that verbage is just in the missions. ATC is exactly like FS9. I haven't been able to tell about the position and hold issue though, which you make a good point. I haven't seen enough AI to tell.

They should have shrunk it down to 0mb and made people wait for the real thing. Sounds bad - meant to sound bad.Totally unimpressed.Aybe

#### it :(

Glad to see head latency. The other thing that warms my heart is the ability to have more than one visibilty layer in the weather and when you climb out of a layer it stays put so you can look down on that layer. No more climbing out of a fog for it to become suddenly unlimited vis below! Ground textures are much better than FS9 default but I can't wait to see what the GE PRO boys will do with FSX. It'll be stunning. On the whole it peformed well on my middling system.

>I'm hoping that the utter crap ground and building textures in>the demo are simply due to size limits on the downloadable>file... even with texture resolution all the way up, the>textures are unbearably blurry. The roads are just blurry>grey lines that kind of melt into the surrounding terrain. >The building textures are basic four black window and a door>and look exactly like default FS2k4.>>On top of that, there are Autogen buildings overlapping roads,>and hanging half off hills. The cars are neat, but half of>them are missing textures and are just black polygons driving>around at about twice the speed they should be.>The water is allright... better than 2k4 except for some of>the strange lighting effects (most likely driver issues). >Absolutly nothing on say Pacific Fighters though...1. I think it's pretty obvious that they had to use lower res textures to get the demo size down.2. Read the readme, the autogen exclude isn't working properly yet and the cars are supposed to be like that with just the chassis (saves space). And you can edit their speeds in the config file.3. I love the water! Unless I'm sitting on it. Then it just looks baaaad. I agree pacific fighters looks much better when you're right on top of the water but at higher altitudes I'd have to say FSX looks better.

Thanks guys -- will do what it takes to enjoy. Fun in the past - fun in the future.Will be first day buyeer as usual. ;-)Regards,BobS

>Thanks guys -- will do what it takes to enjoy. Fun in the>past - fun in the future.>>Will be first day buyeer as usual. ;-)>Regards,>BobS>Same here.I've never had this happen in FS2004, as I didn't try to land in water that often, but I set the Beaver down pretty hard, took a rocking bounce of the water, and in my frantic attempt to correct, tipped the plane on one float.So, of course, splash, my wing goes into the water, and instead of getting a crash message as I expected, I just slowed while trailing myself in a lazy circle with my wing dipped into the waves.I thought that was pretty cool, but like I said, I don't know if it's real.Also, I think people may have been too spoiled by add-ons. I've been playing an awful lot of vanilla FS2004, and this looks nothing like it.

The demo seems quite impressive. Obviously there are a few bugs in the graphics ... e.g. AI cars that disappear into the sand :-lolI also checked whether my beloved addon planes work :-lolPOSKY 747 ClassicPOSKY A340Mike Stone's A330MelJet's 744FFX DC-10All of these planes suffer from transparent textures, which is down to the Alpha Channel in the bitmaps. The control surfaces work fully :)

>Giant FPS hit from lumeblooms (even without AA)"Bloom" isn't in the Demo. ;)

By the way.. Have I missed something, or has the "Visibility distance" slider been removed entirely? I was going through the settings, maxing everything to see how good the engine can look in DX9 mode, when I realized that I couldn't increase vis distance.All I can see is the cloud draw distance slider.

>I love it!!!!!!!:D Here are my pics>http://www.fs2004.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=86184&st=0Whats your FPS? just curious..Andr

Being a Demo, my impressions.*same old ATC voices, not good.*same problem with water tiles changing at dusk/dawn, not good.*sky-clouds-sun-land-water, very nice.*bet ya, airports still have to be FLAT!What could this demo look like with Vista with DirectX10?Hopefully with frame rates exceptable at my naitive 1680x1050 rez.All said for a 1 to 10 for this demo with my system,...7KeynoP4 3.02Nividia 6900 1289.0c

>>I'm hoping that the utter crap ground and building textures in>the demo are simply due to size limits on the downloadable>file... even with texture resolution all the way up, the>textures are unbearably blurry. The roads are just blurry>grey lines that kind of melt into the surrounding terrain. >The building textures are basic four black window and a door>and look exactly like default FS2k4.>Not on my rig, 3700+, 2 gigs ram, 7800GT (77.79).>On top of that, there are Autogen buildings overlapping roads,>and hanging half off hills. The cars are neat, but half of>them are missing textures and are just black polygons driving>around at about twice the speed they should be.>Did you read the readme? It specifically said the autogen exclusion code is not working in the demo. It also said the cars were incomplete.Rhett

Well, I downloaded and installed the demo last night without a hitch. My computer specs are as follows:P42.41GB RAM6600GTNot exactly a measley system, but far far from beefy. I'm able to run a good many games maxed out but FS9 in the upper third with payware addons. First impressions. For me I had the FPS locked at 20 with sliders at Medium low. I got the weird brakes message as it took me the entire length of the runway to get in the air. But the first thing I noticed in the Baron were the great cockpit and the sounds are very much improved. Switching to spot view, I noticed the Navs and strobes looking much more real even though they didn't seem to line up with the model. The new views took some time to get used to. Frame rates seemed to hold steady at 20 with one or two drops to 17 or so. I did have noticable stutters on my system while switching to spot view, causing the plane to disappear and reappear quickly sans cockpit. The ground looked pretty darned blurry at medium low settings. No TrackIR support in the demo, bummer...I really enjoyed flying the Beaver even though I couldn't find a waterbase in the menu to take off from. Just a quick slew and I was good to go. I really like the animated pilot too. His hand moving the throttle was pretty neat. But the main feeling I got was that the sim felt more "Alive". Overall, although somewhat impressed of what's to come, I'm still on the fence. I've gotten FS9 really looking and running well after a reinstall last week to get rid of a lot of files cluttering the system. My biggest concern here when the full package comes out is PERFORMANCE. The min specs detail a 1ghz processor, 32MB card and 512 RAM. That's seems pretty weak to get this beast to run smoothly and I, with my lowly system, am barely able to push the default stuff at 20FPS smoothly with minimal eye candy. Time will tell. To get this sucker bug free and running like butter by October, I hope Red Bull is bringing in truckloads of its liquid crack to Redmond.