Hey guys, I've searched and searched but could not find any detailed discussion of any word on what ground texture resolution FSX will support. According to the Gamespy preview here:http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/flight-simulator-x/679528p1.htmlthey say this:"Thanks to the fact that the game will be released only on DVD (rather than the 4+ CD-ROM releases of the past), the developers were able to make everything up to 16 times more detailed this time around."Does this now mean that we will be able to use approximately 1m resolution photoreal textures in our project (actually, I guess it would technically be 1.48m/pixel) as opposed to the 4.8m/pixel default in FS9? If so, this would be awesome, except for the fact that our file sizes are gonna' be huge! What do you all think? From the screenies, it certainly looks like they are now using 1m to 2m textures, the detail is really amazing. I guess I better start getting all my ground textures stitched and edited....my Raleigh-Durham project now may take a lot longer than I thought.

I guess we really need to wait for better information before we can answer this one :). The screenshots indeed look very nice and look better then the 4.8 meter resolution. But if it is 2.4 or 1.2 or something else that makes it look better, I don't know. Only MS knows at the moment I guess.

http://blogs.technet.com/pixelpoke/archive.../21/417847.aspxMake sure and check out the "eye chart" at the end....Yes,yes, yes!!!!!!!!This is indeed good news guys.....this is the holy grail of photo-scenery in flight simulator, and now we have what I would consider confirmation of the approximatley 1m/pixel ground texture resolution!Ok, I'm gonna start my project over, as it will now take 16 times longer to complete!! (well, not really, but much longer).

This is a great link, and something that will be a great bonus for us ultralight enthusiasts :)I will be moving this thread to the new FS-X forum--many are reading (and wondering) about FS-X's new featurers there. I don't know whether this link's been posted there yet, so just in case.....-John

<>Only 16 times? Sure the images Jason showed are nice but did he really say that's what FSX will do? And even if it does, what makes you think 1m/pixel is the highest it will go? ;)

> what makes you think 1m/pixel is the highest it will go? ;):-eek OMGGG, don't tell me.......

>:-eek OMGGG, don't tell me....... No worries. I can't. ;)

I can see so clearly I have 20-20 vision :-cool

>what makes you think 1m/pixel is the highest it will go? ;)Brain.....about to.....explode!

Hummmmmm...well, I think any thing higher in resolution photoscenery over a large area would bring most computers to a standstill. As it is, I am worried about the 1mpp res. I know some have created scenery in small areas using textures this size, but not over several hundred square miles (that I am aware). Well, maybe someone has tried it? Curious what the computer performance is like?

>Hummmmmm...well, I think any thing higher in resolution>photoscenery over a large area would bring most computers to a>standstill. As it is, I am worried about the 1mpp res. I>know some have created scenery in small areas using textures>this size, but not over several hundred square miles (that I>am aware). Well, maybe someone has tried it? Curious what>the computer performance is like?I don't think huge textures will be much of a problem in just 2 years, which is probably going to be when FSX has finally entered most of our houses and is already loaded with add-ons. :) (Not to mention some talks from people about FSXI :( )