Greg, would an FSX patch released in, let's say, February, that addresses DX-10 (and other stuff), change your mind?You bet it would, Tom. But I would hope that "other stuff" includes multi-core CPU and SLI. To be honest I don't see that happening for the current FS franchise (and nobody hopes more than I that I'm wrong about this).Alot of folks blame MS/ACES for the current state of affairs of our sim experience. I don't. I place most of the blame on the hardware folks who are marketing the wonder of multi-core (when few apps can truly make use of the technology to enhance performance) and the brilliance of SLI (when a whopping 1/2% of serious gamers-- SLI's target market-- have bought into the technology).There is at present a disfuntion between the multi everything hardware development and software that is difficult to code for multi anything. The software and hardware guys need to get their combined act together to take advantage of multi everything or else they'll both pay the price when consumers simply refuse to see their money wasted.But I'm excited to see what happens in, let's say, Feburary. Hey, I'm not one to ever give up hope.Greg

>Greg, would an FSX patch released in, let's say, February,>that addresses DX-10 (and other stuff), change your mind? :)>To be completely frank, rather than Greg (:)), I would only change my mind if that patch performed a miracle - oh, and and they GAVE Vista away so we might make use of it!DX10 will not - cannot - be the `fix-it-all` solution. There's more going wrong than simply graphics bandwidth. We have already been primed by ACES not to expect Vista to be a panacea, that DX10 is intended to allow the introduction of new features not revisit old, and the engine is incapable of being successfully patched to suit the current and future generations of multiple-core processors. So why would an FSX patch released in Feruary make us warm and fuzzy unless such a patch first addresses the performance shortcomings on todays hardware, rather than simply move the hardware upgrade goalpost still higher up the cost equation?I don't care if its February or September, so long as the performance is doubled on the hardware I have today. I'm not spending another penny on FSX - hardware, software or addons - unless and until the upgrade path is clearly defined, the results match the wallet and the ACES team deliver more than just promises and apologies. Sorry, but they've made an UNbeliever out of me.After all, this is a business as much as a hobby. If ACES try and combine the DX10 upgrade - which will require a huge hardware investment for most - with the performance-enhancing patch that we deserve for free then they lose me forever as a customer.Patch now, upgrade later. They can take a year to do the DX10 upgrade, the longer the better. We will all have a much clearer understanding of the technology by then, prices will have fallen, and the benefits proven.But first they must deal with XP, DX9 and FSX.Allcott

I would only change my mind if that patch performed a miracleI'm too old to believe in miracles. But something to make me actually see light at the end of the hardware hype tunnel would ne nice. For me now, the tunnel is dark and full of wasted money.But first they must deal with XP, DX9 and FSX.Now that would be a nice touch for FS hobbyists. But then, how would doing that get you and me to buy Vista? :-) Greg

Wasn't sure of the attitude of the smiley. ;)Ian.

Bah, I don't worry about it. :) It is depressing to see so many unhappy FS'ers, though it seems Aces are working on something for next year. It is strange how some are enjoying it and some are riled up so much about it, reminds me of the initial fly release.Ian.

"However, this is all dismissed by "airport scenery viewers", and "airliner button pushers". How ridiculous........Nothing is being dismissed. Most of the people who are vocal about the shortcomings of FSX have also commented on the improvments and potential of this new version.To group and dismiss people in this way sounds a little 'elitist' to me, as many of your recent posts have.It seems as long as YOU are happy with what FSX does for you, then nobody else should be complaining either.No matter which way you cut it, out of the box performance with sliders halfway giving 15FPS on new hardware is not acceptable.There is no hardware on the horizon (2 years) which will make any difference to this title as has been discussed 1000's of times.This is not like previous releases where the Mhz race was truly on. We are at a monumental crossroads in PC hardware development and unfortunatley, hardware turned left while FSX turned right. To say that 'it's the same with every new version of Flight Sim' is simply incorrect this time around. Let's not even start on the bugs (probably the most bugs I have seen and heard about in a new version of FS) and the poor coastline and water data in everywhere but the USA. Have you SEEN Canada in FSX?? It might well as be FS98 in this regard!The bottom line is that this release has split the community and may well continue to do so for some time. This means development and sales of addon products will slow and the great base we had in FS9 will be no longer. I for one am not prepared to have a sim that is only suitable for a certain type of flying, namely bush and GA in non built up areas. I expect to be able to load FS and decide to pretty much do anything I want, not fly along and suddenly change direction because a city or large town is on the horizon and will kill my performance.If what we are told is correct, us serious users here at AVSIM, make up a fraction of the FSX user base. Well, of that fraction, I am but one person, but one person that likes addons and contributes to that market with my $$. Regardless of you liking or not liking to hear the 'complainers' the concerns are valid and will reflect the future of the user base here at AVSIM and FSX. At the end of the day, a split community is as much your loss as it is mine.The funny thing is, I remember taking part in a survey (maybe AVSIM?) that took place a few years back, probably around the time of the start of development of FSX. One of the questions asked 'What is most important to you in the Sim?' One of the answers was FPS and fluidity which of course, was the most popular answer if I remember correctly. Wonder what happened...............

> I for one am not>prepared to have a sim that is only suitable for a certain>type of flying, namely bush and GA in non built up areas. I>expect to be able to load FS and decide to pretty much do>anything I want, not fly along and suddenly change direction>because a city or large town is on the horizon and will kill>my performance.>As I've mentioned over and over for weeks.....What's my favorite scenario to fly in FSX?It's heading out over the mountain ranges and city scapes of the Mt. West at biz jet speed. This is where FSX has a photo look that makes FS9 resemble a dismal low resolution blurry mesh!And it certainly isn't bush flying!Frame rates in this type of flight remain close or at my 25 fps target rate. Smooth fluid and stutterless! And as I've said before, the city scapes look excellent without cartoon auto-gen subdivisions, covering their photo clarity tiles. All the major 3D buildings, gas refineries, and moving cars are still there.If it was just bush flight & trees, I would not be impressed for long. It's the climbout or approach to cities, especially combined with some mountain foothills, that is so impressive about FSX!L.Adamson

I do not believe the problems are different than any other release. There were bugs and things people disliked even in FS9, since FS95 maxing the new sim has always caused pain and suffering, at least for me.Unless someone works for the R&D department for Intel or AMD I wouldn't speculate what type of processors we will see in a year or 2 unless you mean multicore by the left right split in which case it seems, according to Adam, that Aces are working on this for a February release (that according to Tom).Anyway, the community always seems to split during a new release, this one seems a bit more divisive though, commpared to other ones; maybe more people online and the the amount of 3rd party software has fueled the fire.As far as the defense stance for those who like FSX, well, that's been brought on by so many degrading and attacking posts. Not the good constructive discussions like I believe this thread to be (it's holding steady), but the condescending all out flame battles that have gone on. Oddly, I understand both sides, if I were and airline flyer I'd be miffed a bit, but you have to understand it from GA flyers point of view. We are in nirvana.Edit:I agree with the above, flying through cities is doable in FSX at a price, thankfully the city textures are really good so flying out of Denver into the mountains is an awesome experience, flying through those same mountains with full autogen through snow showers is even better to me. Ian.

"according to Adam, that Aces are working on this for a February release (that according to Tom)."You are making connections that don't exist. I was referring to DX-10 compatibility. My post was not related to anything that had anything to do with processors. :)

"Unless someone works for the R&D department for Intel or AMD I wouldn't speculate what type of processors we will see in a year or 2 unless you mean multicore by the left right split in which case it seems, according to Adam, that Aces are working on this for a February release (that according to Tom)."You don't need to speculate, the roadmaps are at Intel and AMD for all to see.

> Payware companies will be able to see their way through this>rough time, but the key to doing so is to develop products>that are easily (read cheaply/freely) convertible between FS9>and FSX.There is no such thing as a product that is "easy" to take from FS9 to FSX, I'm afraid. The new technology behind the visual models alone is a tremendous leap, and it is taking a lot of work behind the scenes to get products up to FSX-standards. Not to mention the changes in gauge programming, flight dynamics, etc. Developing for both FS9 and FSX takes us (developers) down two very different development paths, with very little overlap.Regards,Owen

Sorry about that, I got the 2 posts mixed up. :) I knew something was in February.Ian.

You are right... There IS Valentine's day. :-lol

Do you mean as far as multicore or new technology? If multicore then I did agree with you.Ian.

Hah, between you and my wife, how can I forget. :)Ian.