A good day to all,First attempt in years to upload some screen shots and hope I have done it correctly. In any case, I have noticed a drastic change in the quality of all the high detail airports in FSX. I have maxed out all of the sliders for visual detail quality and have taken shots of approaches at KLAX, KORD, KDEN, and KJFK. The FPS in FSX ran from 9-12 and the FS9 shots between 25-30. The FS9 airports are all very good looking with nice detail around the taxiways and runways. The FSX shots all show kind of a generic light green grass or light sand texture that in no way matches up to the realistic look of FS9. I have a very good AGP card in the ATI X850XT 256MB. Unless I have missed something which is very possible, the quality I was expecting is missing.Any suggestions, or am I one of the few seeing this....Many great new features in FSX, But it will take me some time, effort and new hardware to getting running to match the quality of my FS9 setup.JayDubHome builtAMD Athlon 64 3500+ 90nm Winchester CoreAbit AV8 - 3rd Eye VIA K8T800ATi X850XT 256MB AGP with ATi 6.60 DriversAntec 400W ATX 12V Power SupplyThermaltake A1172 CPU Heatsink1GB Corsair DDR 3200Windows XP Home Edition SP2

That's because in FS9 MS used satellite photos of the surrounding areas of the detailed airports. For FSX, they did not.

HelloAmazing the progress made in three years, NOTI have yet to see a really convincing FSX screenshotThe small bush strips are just bright colored oblongs that stand out miles away with no attempt to blend them in.Was this done to enable the Xbox crowd spot then easier, they may as well have just put a big red cross and an arrow pointing the way.

Todd,Thanks for the information re how detailed airports set up in FSX. At least I know it is not my system failing me. This may be too much of a step backwards for me. Will continue to do most of my "Heavy Iron " flying in FS9 as the ATC is virtually the same with no improvements in FSX and I always see FPS in the 25-35 range will all sliders maxed and full MyTraffic 2004 AI. Will use FSX for bush flying in the mountains as I get very good performance and visuals in those areas. The missions add something new to do..... No regrets, I will grow into FSX eventually. Maybe 3rd party developers can clean up the airports for me..... I also had hoped that the unrealistic green or tan boxes around smaller airports that don't blend in with the scenery could have been addressed, but is was not to be. As I indicated in another post. Purchased FSX Deluxe for 48.95 US and have spent more for that on a weekend round of golf. I'm sure I'll spend hundreds of hours messing around with it....... It was still worth the investment. JayDub

Well said JayDub. I just wish I got my FSX deluxe for $48.95.:-)

I would agree, that is a huge step backwards. The sand one in particular looks terrible compared to FS9.Ouch.

The loss of aerial imagery for the detailed cities is a bit of a let-down, but here's a tip:It is possible to get it back into FSX by adding FS9scenerycitiesnewyork (for example) to the scenery library. This will give back the aerial imagery and associated autogen, but keeps the improved FSX landmarks in place, and that includes road traffic-which does follow the 'photo' roads in many cases too!In New York (the only place I've tried so far) this does work rather well! It also gets rid of the suburban stuff in Manhattan, for instance.The difference in resolution will become rather obvious though-unless your ground texture resolution slider is set lower too (5m. I think)

This is absolutely a huge step backwards! I would have never bought my copy if I knew about this. Is there a reason they did this? I don't understand..-Pablo

MartijnPleines....Problem Solved...I am elevating you to "Genius" Status. Your suggestion worked like a charm. I was able to restore KLAX airport to FS9 quality by moving the ... la ... file from the FS9 citys folder renaming it.... USA-KLAX Hi Detail airport .... Then moving it to the addon scenery of FSX and activating it..... I will move all the other detailed cities from FS9 to FSX shortly. I now have the same hi detail at KLAX that I did in FS9.......... People should take heart that almost every problem with a new version of Microsoft Flight Simulator can eventually be worked out with the help of good and knowledgable people in the community. Thanks JayDub

>MartijnPleines....>>Problem Solved...>>I am elevating you to "Genius" Status. Your suggestion worked>like a charm. I was able to restore KLAX airport to FS9>quality by moving the ... la ... file from the FS9 citys>folder renaming it.... USA-KLAX Hi Detail airport .... Then>moving it to the addon scenery of FSX and activating it..... I>will move all the other detailed cities from FS9 to FSX>shortly. I now have the same hi detail at KLAX that I did in>FS9.......... People should take heart that almost every>problem with a new version of Microsoft Flight Simulator can>eventually be worked out with the help of good and>knowledgable people in the community. >>Thanks >>JayDub Your serious? That is great news. I was thinking about this myself to see if it was possible. It doesn't crash fs10 then? Can you post some screens please when you finish it? I would like to see this in fs10.

Absolutely ridiculous! Having to go through a painstaking process one airport at a time only to get back ground textures that were in a previous version three years ago!

No doubt here: The Fs9 shots look much better.This begins now to become ridiculous, if one has to import the scenery from Fs9 to make FSX look good!Guy

People,i feel the same - i am so dissapointet with FSX. I am from LOWW and this airport in Austria looks so ridiculous. I mean the grass and the greens - also EDDF is pretty bad. Msot of all 2 issue concern me.I am flying now over 10 years and really enjoy the MS-FS products so far. There are 2 major issues that really dissapoint me extremly and i thought that FSX would have solved it.1) If you make a flight plan from Europe to US - the computer will generate a root that is ridiculuous. e.g. LOWW to KJFK - the flight planer sends your through the the southern part of the atlantic ocean close to the caribean islands and then north back up.or EDDF to KLAX you will fly through greenland to Alaska and then back south to Californa. But this porblem is not of so much importance as you can get your own flight plan build from some add ons. Still i think its ignorant from the MS poeple to not fix this problem.2) the second issue is much more important and this is the weather issue. If you go into the option - real-weather with 15 minutes update.If you have bad weather somewhere with clouds or snow at the airport - then you take off and short after take off - the weather changes immediately from overcast to scatterd clouds which is so so so unrealistic. Same as you are on an approach where you see the runway and from one sec. to the next its overcast and no visibility. I mean these changes need to be done progressively like in real world. Please tell me your opinion to these 2 issues.thanks Marek from LOWW