What's the probability that FSX will look this good around complex airports?www.fscloud9.com/php/projects.php?lang=EN&id=138RH

or how about this too... http://www.flightscenery.com/phpBB2/viewto...dab82cba8ca6ec6Considering the immense amount of time the authors of these sceneries put into them I don't think it would be feasible for MS to include airports of this detail.

Wow, there were a couple of those that I had to stare to figure out if they were real or not. Yeah!...that's what I am talking about. Your example is better than mine. MS has had an extra year to work on this stuff, and they can employ full time folks to do just that...hopefully!RH

>What's the probability that FSX will look this good around>complex airports?>Probably nill considering that all this stuff is built by hand over hundreds if not thousands of hours per airport (ask guys from FlightScenery). Michael J.http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/pmdg_744F.jpghttp://sales.hifisim.com/pub-download/asv6-banner-beta.jpg

Guys,I think that a short answer for the original question is "no", it is very difficult that with the time of development and the HUGE ammount of things to work on, the developers are going to have time to produce that kind of Eye candy. However, I think that they are going to give 3rd Partys new tools to create even better stuff that we see now. Just imagine the new options, Especular reflection, Dinamic traffic, Increased Scenery resolution, bump mapping, and I don't know what else to play with.

If I was MS I wouldn't do any detailed airports since noone appreciates the time invested. Take FS9 it has some fairly detailed airports such as KLAX and KDFW which probably took longer than average for the guys and what does everyone do, complain they are not detailed enough, LOL (look at the KLAX thread in general discussion). I'd just leave it for the 3rd party guys to take the heat!Personally I don't do tubeliners so I don't own any of the flytampa ones, but love the Flightscenery products and would love the whole world to be like that.....but then it would be called FS 2110.Regards, MichaelKDFWhttp://www.calvirair.com/mcpics/mcdcvabanner.jpgCalVirAir International

But guys, you know they are going to include detailed airports and improvements are going to be made. I guess it is just a matter of which improvements will be made. To me the FS2004 detailed airports are close to being satisfactory.RH

WOW look at those textures! What are the frame rates on an airport like this? gotta get 512k video card when I get my system!

>WOW look at those textures! What are the frame rates on an>airport like this? gotta get 512k video card when I get my>system!flight scenary works great.. no FPS loss... Its a masterpiece.Manny

>>To me the>FS2004 detailed airports are close to being satisfactory.Then I would say your demands are relatively modest.Michael J.http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/pmdg_744F.jpghttp://sales.hifisim.com/pub-download/asv6-banner-beta.jpg

>But guys, you know they are going to include detailed>airports and improvements are going to be made. I guess it is>just a matter of which improvements will be made. To me the>FS2004 detailed airports are close to being satisfactory.>>RHI feel the same way and hope that instead of upgrading the High Detailed Airports in FS9 they leave them alone and add to those. That added with what 3rd parties are doing will help cover the world in my opinion.Jack

A little upgrade would not hurt..At least for the dinosaur-sized airport gates. Man, looking at these sceneries, the FS team was preparing hard for the A380-900 or A380-1000...:-)CheersCedricSame for pushback trucks... ;-)

>Same for pushback trucks... ;-)Now THAT is something I would like to see in FSX!! People always whine about realism.. but how realistic is it to see a 747-400 "backing-up" out of the gate as if the pilot had put it into reverse?Bring it on, Microsoft!!:-lol Alex

I just want gates to fit the aircraft and a few more building around the airports to be included.RH

Okay.