Exactly how many times do you have to say it in the same thread?

>In response to: You'll have to turn so much eye candy down in>FSX that FS9 will look better and run smoother>>That may be true with your machine but it is nonetheless a>generalzation. It is not true for ALL machines.>But what is interesting, is that in many situations, FSX with auto-gen off, still looks far better than FS9 with full auto-gen and other options. Areas that I like auto-gen off, are the combination of city/mountain scapes. It'a much more like a photo with a bit of altitude. FS9 could never look as good, and I do get around 25 fps of smooth stutterless flight in these areas! L.Adamson

So what your saying is you have add ons to make FS9 look better. Let's compare apples to apples. You're assuming like many others that because YOU can't get it to run to your liking that it must be so for others. Ever think it might be your hardware configuration that made it crash? Or perhaps other programs running in the background? Pretty easy to blame it on FSX.

Adamson, Agreed.

I have no issue with the price. I'm more upset with the state of the program. So many problems other than performance issues such as, taxi and landing lights, erratic wind changes, poor airport beacon visibility, objects sinking into the ground, simconnect, a no-value- added change to the progressive taxi marker, strobe and navigation lights still visible in no-panel 2D mode, to name a few. What was done that took three years and 165 people?Yes, I agree fps is an issue. I hope other problems will be addressed and not just Vista/DX10.SDP.S. I sincerely hope everyone is enjoying the animals.

I agree for the most part, but as soon as you descend to landing altitude the world looks awfully flat without autogen. Love the extra FPS, but looks as though one is landing on a cardboard cutout without autogen..Gary

>I agree for the most part, but as soon as you descend to>landing altitude the world looks awfully flat without autogen.> Love the extra FPS, but looks as though one is landing on a>cardboard cutout without autogen..>I still have all my airport buildings, oil refineries, refinery tanks, towers, and an assortment of city buildings. While auto-gen certainly makes a difference in some situations, I've found that the photo-type city/subdivision textures can look quite good & convincing on the approach, and even from a side window view. If I'm looking towards the airport & runway, then the elasped time between the look of photo textures, and the look of flatness is rather short. By the same token, a lot of "cartoon like" auto-gen houses don't look to impressive if you stare at them too! It's still compromises, any way you "look" at it.But regardless, I just prefer the overall look of FSX's high res textures compared to FS9. Because of that, I'm willing to put up with other faults. And in reality, every full world flight sim has had many faults, whether those complaining about a particular sim, want to admit it or not.L.Adamson

My only complaint is, that in real life , the sun don'trise properly. It's one degree out!!!Hope this helps.Peter Sydney Australia

just like I said earlier, I have fs9 with all possible add-ons... I stopped firing it up it's just to boring in comparison with FSX,... JUST FLAT UGLY FLYING ON rails, I have a mid range machine and never had any of the described bugs, the landclass can already easiliy be fixed with the cloud9 product., never had strange crashes or stutters, maybe because I run xp64..who knows, maybe thats why. Otherwise, if you don't like it, just keep on enjoying FS9 for the next 20 years, it's good enough.greetings from the desertkpsp

Let's not forget:6. Lack of dusk lighting7. Unrealistic rain/snow effects8. terrible landclass outside the USTo name a few more...

"Sorry but I don't consider myself lame for making the most of it."Just long as your not lame enough to throw out FS9 at this point. That would be lame... Where did you read Aces is going to release a patch before the DX10 patch??? Last I heard the only patch planned was for Vista, furthermore Aces never committed to fixing anything in particular.

http://blogs.msdn.com/ptaylor/default.aspxhttp://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

>just like I said earlier, I have fs9 with all possible>add-ons... I stopped firing it up it's just to boring in>comparison with FSX,... JUST FLAT UGLY FLYING ON rails, I have>a mid range machine and never had any of the described bugs,>the landclass can already easiliy be fixed with the cloud9>product., never had strange crashes or stutters, maybe because>I run xp64..who knows, maybe thats why. Otherwise, if you>don't like it, just keep on enjoying FS9 for the next 20>years, it's good enough.>>greetings from the desert>>kpsp I like this post...anywho, greetings from lansing Jeff :)

>just like I said earlier, I have fs9 with all possible>add-ons... I stopped firing it up it's just to boring in>comparison with FSX,... JUST FLAT UGLY FLYING ON rails, I have>a mid range machine and never had any of the described bugs,>the landclass can already easiliy be fixed with the cloud9>product., never had strange crashes or stutters, maybe because>I run xp64..who knows, maybe thats why. Otherwise, if you>don't like it, just keep on enjoying FS9 for the next 20>years, it's good enough.>>greetings from the desert>>kpspA desert-dweller loves FSX .... why doesn't that surprise me? Most of FSX is desert, so I bet you're in hog's heaven :-lolJ/K :)

Or go to Amazon.com and get it for $50, and I picked up a copy at Circuit City a week after it came out for $59 (Nashua, NH).Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)N15802 KASH '73 Piper Cherokee Challenger 180