I just installed the new KPDX scenery from FS and boy is it awesome.I already had his KPVD scenery but this tops even tops that.My question is how come a new FS cannot look and act like his work ,and he has accomplished this by himself without the big $$$ of MS behind him.I know this is only the scenery aspect,but come on ,,,,,Andy

He was working on one location, MS was doing the whole world and 25,000+ airports.

>I just installed the new KPDX scenery from FS and boy is it>awesome.I already had his KPVD scenery but this tops even tops>that.My question is how come a new FS cannot look and act like>his work ,and he has accomplished this by himself without the>big $$$ of MS behind him.I know this is only the scenery>aspect,but come on ,,,,,>>AndyCome on think about it for more than 5 seconds, put emotion aside and think logically. Do you think they can do the entire world like that or even 20 airports? FS is a platform they do the best they can with the entire world. We get it and we make it what we want.

>>I just installed the new KPDX scenery from FS and boy is it>>awesome.I already had his KPVD scenery but this tops even>tops>>that.My question is how come a new FS cannot look and act>like>>his work ,and he has accomplished this by himself without>the>>big $$$ of MS behind him.I know this is only the scenery>>aspect,but come on ,,,,,>>>>Andy>>>Come on think about it for more than 5 seconds, put emotion>aside and think logically. Do you think they can do the>entire world like that or even 20 airports? FS is a platform>they do the best they can with the entire world. We get it>and we make it what we want.Yes MS could; but then there wouldn't be much to add on to FSX.Plus the product would be much more costly to us.

http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho...62645&mode=full

If we are all prepared to pay 3,000 dollars for the next version of FS, I'm sure MS would be prepared to have that kind of scenery in it :-)

KPDX took how long to make after KPVD was released ??But really - KPDX was designed for the somewhat cylinderical world in FS2004 with pure flat airports.FSX is a round world and the airports are "almost" flat. The differences are very subtle to users, but very real to designers.Plus there is not a good method yet to replace the older FS2002 background polygon method which made airport ground areas look so good.The ACES team was working on it, but apparently upper management did not see the lack of this capability as a show stopper.Scenery designers face some real challenges with the move to FSX and it's new world, higher resolutions, etc.We/ they knew that changes were coming, but the exact changes of course cannot be verified until the final product actually hit the streets.There are some extremely talented people working on this, and I have no doubt they will find a way around any shortcomings in the MS SDK and basic game.

Let's see. $39 US for the Portland Scenery and $69 for FSX and something like 24000 airports. Why is that so hard to figure out? Do the math. Craig

>>FSX is a round world and the airports are "almost" flat. The>differences are very subtle to users, but very real to>designers.>As a long time scenery dabbler, I need to install the SDK, whichever DVD it is on, and take a look at all of these things. I'm not sure what you mean by the round earth model affecting airport scenery. But when I think about it, likely it affects lat/longs of scenery objects, which would change enough to make most FS9 sceneries not port over too well.RhettAMD 3700+ (@2.5 ghz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (94.47), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2 GB Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8, WD 250 gig 7200 rpm SATA2, CoolerMaster Praetorian

Couldn't MS come up with a auto-gen program (or whatever) that would simulate the FZ02 environment? I mean, they are supposed to be the smartest people in the world.If the whole FSX world looked like FZ02... wow!

There is a folder in the first DVD in the Deluxe version with the SDK install.But you probably need to go into the SceneryDesign forum above this one, and visit some sites like FlyTampa's support forums and UK2000 for more detailed information.

Hi,I'm sure they can... Let's see... KPVD is about 550MB in size.There are worldwide about 20.000+ airports. 20.000 x 550mb = 11.000GB or 11TB.(Let alone all the non-airport scenery)FSX comes one 2 DVD's and a full install is about 15GB.FSX 'a la KPVD' comes on 2.000 CD's. Install time for each CD is 15 min: 2.000 x 15 min = 500 hours install time.Better start saving pennies for those 25 required disk drives (incl. SAN).

To be fair, by the time they finished making it, it would be 2013 already and we'd have PCD's (protein coated discs) that hold 50TB each.(PCD is the possible successor to Holographic VD HVD, which is the expected successor to blu-ray/HDDVD which are the successors to DVD. See here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein-coated_disc )

I think all of u need to rethink this !!!!Its all BS to me so BS-MSAndy

Landmass area of the earth = 150,000,000 km^2 (roughly)Landmass area of FZ02 = less than 1,000 km^2 (but let's use this as a first approximation for ease of calculation)So, the entire landmass area of the world is to a very rough approximation 150,000 times the size of FZ02. Noting that:Time to complete FZ02 = 1 team-yearSize of FZ02 = 550MBWe can see that it would take roughly 150,000 team-years to represent the landmass area of the world to the same level of detail as FZ02 and the finished product would weigh in at 82,500,000MB.Clearly, MS chose not to go down this path out of sheer laziness.