Oh well, it only looks like two of these or these two:01) More dynamic scenery, e.g. ground vehicles at airports, vehicles on main roads (or at least the illusion of ground traffic from a height), and trains.02) Improve scenery view from high altitude (i.e. not just big squares).We know we have the above from prior comments. So, now it looks like we can erase the following from the list:04) Improved airport specific AI logic (e.g. like features seen in AISmooth):- AI holding patterns- AI follow SIDS and STARS- AI can declare emergencies (user can configure how often) and divert03) ATC interacts with SIDS and STARS04) An updatable navigation database (like Navdata but for FS). 07) Region specific ATC accents!!!However, hopefully FSX is designed in such as way as to allow the above to be implimented by third party products.RH

You missed the wink. It means "actually you got 6 or 7 but I can't tell you that because of the NDA" :)

I did miss the wink. I'll have to go back and look at it.RH

I'm hoping for native support for widescreen displays. No more oval gauges in 2D view.

It really means that you got zero and flunked out. :( :( :( Jimhttp://www.hifisim.com/Active Sky V6 Development TeamActive Sky V6 Proud SupporterHiFi Beta TeamRadar Contact Supporter

> It really means that you got zero and flunked out. :( :( :( Ok you better tell us the answer then ;)

Nope!! :-lolJimhttp://www.hifisim.com/Active Sky V6 Development TeamActive Sky V6 Proud SupporterHiFi Beta TeamRadar Contact Supporter:

You can certainly accomplish this today with updated panel art. The problem with 2D view is that video drivers are not very consistent with non-4:3 modes. Many have odd aspect ratios. Therefore it doesn't really make sense for us to invest in 2D panels that aren't 4:3.

They certainly aren't consistent at all. I kept getting crashes in FS9 running a widescreen monitor in DualView with the latest WHQL Nvidia drivers because it was set up as the secondary monitor in my system ( I also use a 4:3 LCD).Only when I changed it to primary did It ever stop crashing.Regards,

Well, let's see, while we are brainstorming (and realizing this won't make it into FSX and is probably a complete software rewrite), how about...The background does not necessarily have to be contained by the limits of the screen. Designers would create backgrounds that go to some (arbitrary) limits of widescreen ratio. FS would automatically detect the screen ratio (or the user could enter it) and only show that portion of the background that fits in the screen ratio of the display. Of course this would change how the gauges are positioned (would now have to have a somewhat screen independent coordinate system). I'm sure you've already figured this out and there are reasons why you didn't do it, but I figured I'd throw it out here.Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com/FC_StartJava.html] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)

Yeah, we thought about that. In fact the panel and window system is already resolution independent. The problem is that 4:3 is still the predominant aspect ratio in use by our cutomers. So there are two problems: either you author the panel for the narrowest aspect ration and when displayed on 4:3 it is too small to be readable or you author it for 4:3 and then can't place any gauges near the extents because they'd be clipped. (If that makes sense.)The net-net is that it's currently more practical for 3rd parties to provide wide-screen versions of their panels because their customers are the ones most likely to be running in wide screen.Naturally with the VC these issues go away entirely. ;)

>Improving terrain from high altitute has been done. Look at>some high altitute pictures so far!Also what about the square shaped cloud shadows?http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/147164.jpg

That's an ocean texture problem, since cloud shadows aren't in FS2004.

So is it possible to display the main background and gauges so that some are not on the screen?I'm thinking it is ok that some gauges are not visible, or that there is real estate on widescreens where there are no gauges. For example, most 2D panels for Piper Cherokees do not show the suction gauge on the right side (they may fake it in someplace else), some don't even show the radios.For instance, the Carenado Archer II, if I'm not mistaken, does not even show the radios, or at least not the whole radio stack. It was designed so that to access the radios, you pop up a radio stack window. But a widescreen version could show the radio stack by showing more of the background in the X direction. My point is, I think with smart panel design, if you can control what portion of the whole panel is shown depending on the aspect ratio of the screen (which I think you can do today, but maybe not, it's been a long time since I did any panel design), you could design flexible panels that can be easily configured for any aspect ratio by changing a variable or two and having a portion of the panel hidden on the lower aspect ratio screens, compensating by having windows with the missing gauges as above. True, different aspect ratios will show "different" panels (5:3 will show more of the panel than a 4:3), and perhaps that is not something you wanted to deal with in terms of the complaints you might get from customers. But really, I think it is doable and more acceptable than dealing with the complaints of oval gauges. Certainly, there are already tradeoffs as to which gauges to include and which not, as shown in the Carenado example above. The 2D panels aleady don't have "all" the gauges, so I don't think that is a viable reason to use. Allowing more gauges to be visible for wider aspect ratios is a plus, as long as you design a minimum of gauges to be visible for the 4:3 ratio.Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com/FC_StartJava.html] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)

"02) Increase and decrease selection for zoom view often freezes and I have to cycle through views for it to work again