It's not unreasonable to think that FSX will have cloud shadows. There are a number of screenshots that show buildings and clouds being reflected in the water, which if you think about it is a much more sophisticated effect than displaying shadows on the ground (although similar in nature).

Actually water reflections are much easier since we're only rendering one surface. Ground textures are composited from terrain, roads, airports, etc.

Just stating the obvious--that's how we eventually get to ship.

> Actually at this point FSX will likely be cutting features, not adding them.The cloud shadows are essential ;(

>> Actually at this point FSX will likely be cutting features,>not adding them.>>The cloud shadows are essential ;( To expand a bit on Mike' point which was pretty much in response to the post that said:"Please do not forget: FSX is in early development stage. FSX will be released in a bit less than a year. This is very long time in game development and I believe there is enough time to add tens of new features and bug fixes":I've talked a little bit about the remaining time we have here:http://blogs.technet.com/pixelpoke/archive.../06/417087.aspxIn the time left there is a list of features we'd like to tackle. Each feature has a degree of depth to which we'd like to reach in order for it to be successful.The nature of what we build (a rich, immersive, aviation oriented world) means that we will *never* run out of features. What we *have* to do then is prioritize. So when Mike says "FSX will likely be cutting features" he's absolutely correct.Before you start freaking out though...There's a lot of new feature work on the schedule (including some of what's been asked for/speculated about on boards like this), and a lot you guys have'nt seen yet. There's a lot of work ahead to finish what you've glimpsed so far (which includes new code *and* bug fix time). When we cut work, it's done so that we can: a) finish necessary feature work, :( fix bugs, and c) stabilize features so we can do SDKs (which gets you 3rd party content)Cloud shadows are high on our list, but you won't find us promising stuff will be in the product until it's actually in the product...Cheers,Jason

ok thanks for the explanation. All we can do now is wait (and pray)..John.

And yet, somehow, we've managed to live without them in the past 5 "modern" iterations of MSFS. :-)

Well, just do it with ray casting.... :D I'm sure we can all get SG workstations to push 2 FPS with it. Now that you mention it, with all the terrain, roads, buildings, other planes, etc., that would be a lot more processing to get it done. If it gets done now, great. If not, maybe in the next version, we'll have the CPU power to git er done! Great work, btw. And it makes a world of difference to me to have you guys in here answering questions and commenting on your work. It's hard to find developers like that. And MS is the last developer I'd expect to (not MS bashing, just the whole corporate attitude...). Great work, guys. Really.

I think its pretty dang cool that some guys from the FS team itself are in here talking with us. Thanks Jason and Mike (hope I got the names right).

IL2 Sturmovik features cloud shadows. The technology is definitely available.I remain hopeful.James

This reminds me of of the pre-hype to FS2004 and ppl b*tchin for 'realistic' landing lights - it seemed thats all that mattered!!! Does anyone remember that??It's funny how ppl focus so narrowly on one area (cloud shadows for example) I don't think this represents fairly what the wider community really wants in an aviation simulator, sure it would be nice but by no means would I rate this as the absolute be-all and end-all in what I'd like from FSX.Just my humble opinon, I'm an aviation fanatic and just love watching and flying in those big metal birds. I'm the eejit that stops in the middle of the street as soon as hear the faint rumble of a jet plane and stare at the sky and poeple just don't quite get that:) FS2004 is the only reason I have a PC so for me its about realistic aircraft handling, scenery but the most important is the 'ambiance' - hard to describe as it is a combination of things - sound, vision and feeling of flight. The best sim I have found that brings all these together very well is Combat Simulator 3 - it 'feels' like you're in a cockpit - the windshield and the clouds as you fly through them is what I'm talking about in particular.FS2004 has alot of great things but for me, AI and ATC brought it up so many levels and for FSX to hit the top of the pops, I would like this feeling in the sim. Please :)Thanks for reading.

Cloud shadows??????Honestly I am not looking forward to them. I even turn off all shadows in FS9 - they are way too dark (such shadows you can see on the Moon!!). Unless they can provide nice realistic soft shadows (which would probably bring every today computer to its knees) I can easily forget about cloud or building shadows.Michael J.http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/pmdg_744F.jpghttp://sales.hifisim.com/pub-download/asv6-banner-beta.jpg

>I'm the eejit>that stops in the middle of the street as soon as hear the>faint rumble of a jet plane and stare at the sky and poeple>just don't quite get that:)That was YOU!!! I thought they were beeping at me for doing the same thing and not being aware that the light had turn green! :-)Carmine http://forums.avsim.net/images/wave.gifhttp://img155.imageshack.us/img155/7118/phoenixtp8mg.jpg

I hope that they keep the better lighting effects. Having the VC light up when the sun is "behind" you is quite ridiculous. Especially when you pan around and look at the part of the VC, behind a wall, where the sun is, and get a light in your eyes!!!I understand this is the time to cut features... but how about cutting unecessary features instead of light, which is a big part of flying. In the VC, you get such a sense of being there, having to deal with light in your eyes, and having realistic lighting of the VC would be a major part of "being there" for those of us who enjoy practicing a job or hobby some of us cannot afford, or even practicing a job or hobby as a training method.

<>Hmm, if they were unecessary then they wouldn't exist in the first place and could therefore not be cut, no?