Hey GuysThis post was not intended to become a pissing contest. We aleady know that FSX has some issues and adding many addons at this point that are "heavy" i.e require considerable CPU attention are going to affect an already somewhat crippled environment, and I think most everyone already knows that. Every 3rd party developer knows what they are up against when they commit to an addon for FSX. Carenado, which most of us know, produce a fairly framerate friendly product. Eaglesoft on the other hand offers a more sophisticated weighted product which by its very nature will not be as FR friendly. There are choices, and that is a good thing. It is really not fair to slam any contributer just because they offer a product that requires more CPU cycles than another. What I would like to see personally are more 3rd party developers chiming with their input since many have had direct relationships with MS during the development.This knowledge that they have would be valuable for us as a community. Maybe scenery developers have had a chance to look at the SDK's and do know where the limits are or no where the walls are or maybe have some ideas on how they may be able to improve certain functional areas within the sim. These guys that give us these great products do know what they are up against. Instead of saying "your product sucks" How about congratulating them by saying it's a beautiful contribution but it's not for me right now. The community will decide what works and what doesnt work.RegardsBobRegardsBob

"The community will decide what works and what doesnt work."Excellent viewpoint Bob! Glad to hear your reasoned approach:-)

>You are the exception...the majority of our users enjoy the>aircraft and have no such negative feedback regarding sim>performance in EITHER sim version!:-)its not me who is the exception as im one of those who refuses to pay all over again after purchasing the fs9 variant just a month ago, so i havent had the opportunity to try it out in fsx personally......however as one reads through this thread up to this point there are 5 people voiceing their concerns regarding addons vs fps performance in fsx and 3 of those are from actual Eaglesoft Liberty owners who are complaining about poor performance, one of which is actually offering some numbers to go by showing that the liberty cuts fps roughly in half on his setup. We also have to remember that this is only 1 day after its release and only from those who actually take the time to read the whole thread here and then also bother posting to it. The fact is that there will always be many you/we will never hear from at all.So to say that the majority will not have any performance issues with your planes in fsx i think is a real stretch. Yes there will always be users with a great setup and then others who appreciate eye candy and will like the product even with poor performance...but to say that is the majority?...and even if it were true, lets forget about this 1 plane for a moment because thats not what this post is focusing on anyway...what about all the other planes we have for fs9?...if the Liberty is going to be a tough call for some then you can safely assume that larger more complicated planes from yourself and many other developers will fare even worse in most cases. This cant be much of a surprise for most users and especially the devs who have had access to betas, etc.Lets try not to make this a play on words where we have to defend our positions. Instead let the thread speak for itself and hopefully help to shed some light to give devs some sort of insight to adjust or improve things in anyway they can so the majority can enjoy their wares at performance levels more equal to the stock fsx aircraft.Dave

> What I would like to>see personally are more 3rd party developers chiming with>their input since many have had direct relationships with MS>during the development.This knowledge that they have would be>valuable for us as a community.Yes good idea too...make it more constructive to our benefit is the whole point. This should be about how to improve all fsx addons for better performance and not just 1.Dave

>>If your review was fair and balanced why not post it to the Avsim review thread?What is the definition of a 'balanced' review?

>Another question would be for those who do own FSX, would you>be willing to buy an addon now? >Would you be willing to buy and addon in one form or another>that may fix an issue(s) with FSX? Simple answer: Absolutely!I have a mid range puter myself (2.8GHz; 2Gb DDR RAM; gForce 6800GT) and I really enjoy FSX. Having dragged the sliders as far to the right as I can and still achieve good enough performance at most times (15+ FPS) FSX looks and feels SO much better than a default FS9. My only gripe is that there's no add-ons for it. I miss all the great add-on planes from FS9 and I just hope the developers of each will offer a reasonably cheap upgrade because it simply won't be acceptable to spend the same amount of money on buying them all over again. While the default planes are better than their FS9 counterparts they are still too simplistic system-wise and the VC's (I never fly in 2D) are flat out ugly in most cases.Currently I love the FSX world but that's only because of the lovely missions. Without those I would soon be extremely bored with the default airplanes and that's the dilemma, righ there: Going back to the ghost world of FS9 would feel very "vintage" and, still, that's where all the great planes are. Not sure what I'll do once I run out of missions!?Guess I better read up on how to transfer add-on planes to FSX wherever possible...Cheers

>>>If your review was fair and balanced why not post it to the>Avsim review thread?>>What is the definition of a 'balanced' review?A review that doesn't just say the product is rubbish/fantastic without explaining exactly why it is so and doesn't give the impression that the reviewer hated/adored the product prior to even seeing it because it was from a publisher they disliked/wanted to sleep with.Perhaps a look at the official Avsim reviews may help you.

I had the impression that it was GMAX gamepack missing not 3d Studio Max SDK, but I never did a plane or plan to do one, so usually that is a SDK dark side.Went ahead and bought the plane. I can't confirm the FPS hit that others are reporting (of course there is a hit but nothing above of what I was expecting).Since the planned destinations don't envolve any big city, I'm very pleased with the 15-17 that I can achieve.Jos

Real Air is nice an all. Really!. Their VC is outstanding.However, their aircrafts have been simple non system aircrafts. I wonder if they can pull the same for say... a PMDG 747 like aircraft. Or even a Cirrus with an Avidyne system.;)Manny

"Went ahead and bought the plane. I can't confirm the FPS hit that others are reporting (of course there is a hit but nothing above of what I was expecting)."Thanks Jose, glad to hear you are enjoing her:-)

"Went ahead and bought the plane. I can't confirm the FPS hit that others are reporting (of course there is a hit but nothing above of what I was expecting)."Thanks Jose, glad to hear you are enjoying her:-)

HiI was just thinking after I saw Eaglesoft's posting of their converted Liberty for FSX and a couple of questions came to mind.Is FSX in that bad of condition that either 3rd party devs may not commit to a project because of the FSX situation, or on the other hand will the community be hesitent to purchase? Another question would be for those who do own FSX, would you be willing to buy an addon now? Would you be willing to buy and addon in one form or another that may fix an issue(s) with FSX? RegardsBob