Hi everyone,TileProxy is perhaps just the beginning of the future of flightsimming.With that in mind I really would like to hear what the Aces team is thinking about this developement.And what they beleave what would be the Fs future ( and possibilities ).

I doubt anyone from Microsoft would disclose company polices or any feature roadmaps here. A personal opinion maybe, but not more.Oh by the way I just remembered I had a saved flight over the Microsoft Millenium Buildings in Redmond. That was for testing one of the provided phototerrain samples from the Flight Simulator SDK. But I had never checked this out with full Google phototerrain coverage. Beautiful! Didn't know they had so many lakes and trees around. ;)"Visiting Redmond - Looking for Bill's house" is now on my account on flickr for a limited time: http://www.flickr.com/photos/cbuchner1Nice scenery around there. The 3D buildings are called the "Millenium Buildings" and that's where ACES are situated. You will notice that bright patch around where the buildings are. That's scenery created with the SDK sample. The world around it, that's Tileproxy.

In that first picture from your link, ACES is in the building on the far left (otherwise known as Millenium F, or just Mill-F in the MS internal Mail system :-> ). Nice shots.

Christian,Even though I have not fired up my copy of FSX yet, this certainly makes me want to get a new PC ordered. While FS Navigator is an all-time favorite of mine, your work pales in comparison to the overall long-term impact for consumer based flight simulation. I would not know how those at Aces could do anything but stand up and take notice. They are probably having meetings already. What a major league shot in the arm for the long-term sales of their program. Congratulations on exposing the tip of this marvelous iceberg. And many thanks too !!!The entertainment implications for large screen projection and HDTV systems, surround sound, and world-wide photo-real, alone, with this adaptation are just staggering. Bob (Las Cruces, NM)

Hi there,indeed, ACES will realize that many FS users are happy with the "flat earth" model. Thus, they will remove seasons, night lights, and autogen from the next version of the sim and strike a deal for a $29.95 monthly subscription fee with an image server company. Then everyone can fly at 70fps and circle their houses until the broadband connection coughs or the 1TB harddisk crashes, whichever comes first. :-outta (warning: satire)Cheers, Holger

I think we all know that seasons, night lights and autogen hinting would have to be provided by such a subscription model. But thanks for the pointer ;)

Actually-many are.... (no satire intended).http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

Well don't count me in there!

As with all things with the sim-what we want can be very diverse, as well as to opinions of what constitutes a greater reality.Take a look at Stoopy's excellent screen shots in the avsim screen shot forum:http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho...id=257511&page=We have the Nazca Lines in Peru, waves and ocean that looks real in San Diego, mountains with the desert subtle colors of the real ones in Death Valley, and salt flats in the desert. As I pilot I live for seeing sights like that from the air-and with tileproxy they are there in their complete glory vs. a sim with a lot of generic stuff trying give the appearance of reality but never quite doing it. We also have completely real roads of all types, completely accurate landclass, correct buildings, manmade checkpoints and real world aberations such as Stoopy's shot show, and real tree/vegetation placement. Sure, the whole world isn't done this way, and it is "flat" from about 600 agl down, but there is more ultimate reality here imho than what fsx offers in its present form. When it is figured out how autogen can automatically be placed on top of this perhaps everyone will be happy.By using Tileproxy I give up landclass which is never quite accurate, 4 seasons which don't really look very believable to my eyes, water that at least to me looks caroonish and never catches the sublties, and a bunch of buildings and trees spread over generic textures which sometimes contribute to a feeling of reality, but a completely and very often arbitrary reality that doesn't match the real world at all. I don't really have to give up night flying because if I want to fly at night I'll just use the fsx generic which isn't too bad. With TileProxy I get geography that matches complete reality (where it is available), roads (all) that match reality and look real (not like a jaggy grey line drawn over a generic terrain tile), and a depiction (though flat looking at extremely low altitude) of actual houses, buildings , and real vegetation where they actually are.Will I still buy scenery small scenery areas by dedicated developers that concentrate on a particular area which may or may not be personally interesting to me? Sure. Will I crank up autogen here and there and take low level flights thru a generically rendered earth for the atmospheres? Sure.Will I enjoy myself immensly flying on a daily basis to an area of the world I select for my interest which represents the world in 100% accuracy- you bet-and I'll be spending most of my time there. No problem if it isn't your cup of tea-but there seems to be quite a significant market here (flying over Mt. St. Helens right now).http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

Yes, I believe this is the way of the future. In fact, I think some time in the near future Flight Sim is going to turn into something like Microsoft

Welcome to the Matrix.

>indeed, ACES will realize that many FS users are happy with>the "flat earth" model. Thus, they will remove seasons, night>lights, and autogen from the next version of the sim and>strike a deal for a $29.95 monthly subscription fee with an>image server company. Then everyone can fly at 70fps and>circle their houses until the broadband connection coughs or>the 1TB harddisk crashes, whichever comes first. :) I understand your point of view.However, TileProxy doesn't render obsolete the good work the Aces team has done in making FS X as real as it gets. I consider that the job they have done is superb. But from now on, when I go fly, I'll have two options : continue on an adventure I started in Febuary, which is an around the world flight in a Cub or Cessna (using TileProxy) or crank up Flight 1's ATR 72-500 (when it will be available for FSX) for a flight at FL 180 (using FSX's engine).Let's just hope that at one point in the future, both will blend in.Cheers,Louie.

Hi Louie,actually, I wasn't trying to convey my point of view, I was trying to make a joke in response to the original poster's question. I certainly didn't want to start yet another round of testimonials for or against TileProxy.As it happens, though, I do agree with your thoughts about the use of TileProxy. I've enjoyed the few flights I did with TileProxy immensely but had to shelve it for now because my rig is dedicated for design work. If I had a second PC just for flying I would set it up for FSX/TileProxy use.Cheers, Holger

The pictures whose link you provided are gorgeous. But all of the shots, except one, are of mountainous areas witout vegetation (deserts). The San Diego screen shot is taken far and away from the city. In other words, you have chosen scenes that are devoid of life and civilization.I remember the landing on my first flight in a small airplane (Piper Warrior). The trees, cars and houses under the base and final leg of the traffic pattern were both beautiful and freightening. Those trees and objects are as much part of flying to me as the view of the mountains you seek. Taking into view that FSX was made to be a living, moving and breathing simulator (per request of so many people who asked for moving cars, denser forrest, animals and a less stale environment), I think I am not alone to say I prefer autogen to photoscenery. Can you imagin those elephents and the birds on a flat photoscenery devoid of any other objects? Would't the cars on the roads look ridiculous if there were no other objects in the surronding areas?So I guess it all boils down to how high you want to fly and on what you want to fly over.

I was based at a 2000 ft. airstrip with 50 ft. trees on either end for 5 years so I know what you mean! :-). I don't disagree-I like autogen low down-it is just judging reality to reality I find this more real experience overall since nothing in fs is 100% yet. Hopefully Christian will figure out a way autogen can overlap it and then everyone can get everything they want.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg