We now know that FSX will be released as a DX9 product due to the lack DX10 hardware at the time of development. There has also been talk of a patch release once Vista and DX10 become available. If that is true, then FSX will not require an entire redesign. Is this true?It sounds like there will be substantial differences between DX9 and DX10. I assumed that to build a flight simulator around DX10, it would require it to be designed from scratch. Am I wrong?RH

Tdragger already explained that there is an interface to DirectX in the code. So to support DX10 they will develop a new implementation for DX10 (so it doesn't affect anything else and certainly doesn't mean a rewrite lol). However the DX10 one will need to include the new functions not in DX9. I believe it was mentioned on his blog a while back, correct me if I am wrong.

I wonder how work intensive the new implemention would be. DX10 is supposed to be something completely different. RH

I think it will be less intensive than you think ;) Yes theres big changes in DirectX 10 but game developers only need to worry about the programming interface to it. Theres an article about the changes to DX10 and the conclusion is:"If you follow the guidelines in this article (as well as any others you can find) then updating to be Direct3D 10 compatible (or to make use of its features) should be fairly straight forward"http://www.gamedev.net/reference/programmi...rview/page2.asp

It sounds like you are saying that it won't be much of a problem going from DX9 to DX10 in FSX. Let's up they have a plan in place to do so. We will all benefit. Thanks for the info.RH

One of the biggest selling points of FSX *IS* it's planned use of DirectX 10. Indeed they do have a plan, and if it's not coded directly into the product upon release at the end of the year, then it will come along very shortly thereafter with the public release of Vista (or thereabouts)-Greg

That will be great!RH

I hope they realy beat up on lighting and shaders in the DX10 implementation. The possibilites!

Which is why i will be waiting for the dx10 hardware to come out before i build a new system to run FS10. that leaves me about a year to play with fs9 still. cool :)

Why would anyone wait another year to buy FSX, it makes no sense. You know your eventually going to buy it, so why not buy it the first day so you can enjoy it for longer. It's not like you have to uninstall FS9 or anything.

I am not purchasing it (FSX) unless I know that the motherboard I intend on using will eventually accept a CPU powerful enough to run it with "reasonable" framerates all of the necessary additional programs required with most (if not all) settings maxed. If that means that I have to wait a year until the quad core CPUs come out, then I will do it.Hopefully, since we will have had three years (and not the usual two -- like between 98-2000-2002, and 2004) the hardware will be available (cross fingers).I don't want to keep playing this hardware catch up game.RH

Can't wait for DirectX 10 ?Here, take a good look of a video demo of DirectX 10 in the game of "Far Cry 3". And let your jaw drop, then imagine how good your FSX or FSXI will look like or feel like...http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=84...87&q=DirectX+10If that doesn't impress you, then I don't know what to tell ya.

>I don't want to keep playing this hardware catch up game.>>RHI think we are all in for hardware catch up until such time that we have . . .1. Very high resolution (1600x or better on a 19" screen) with true photoreal quality . . . from 75,000 ft down to 10 feet off the ground--as sharp as a nice digital photograph.2. Frames at a steadfast 60fps, so that you are talking realtime full motion video in HD or better and then perhaps then adding stereo viewing & surround audio. Once these specs will run on your machine, you will no longer have to play the hardware catch up game. I think we are a long ways off from here unfortunately. At one point I thought I'd for sure see it in my lifetime, but I'm not so sure now. Who knows though, a quantum shift in how to solve the problem may arise from some development team and catch me by surprise. I hope!Noel

I should qualify that and say at least 20 FPS across situations.RH