FSX has just about done me in----

[LAdamson 240]

I do not use autogen for general flying around mountain/city scapes. It's good for at least 10 fps. While a few more trees wouldn't bother me, when flying below mountain peaks; I've got to the point where I feel that auto-gen subdivisions actually destroy the photo-look, more than helping it. Global setting is at high, to keep all major city and airport buildings in tack.BTW, using the new Ultimate Terrain, adds a lot more trees to the city scapes with shade effects, that give a 3D appearence, even though they're technically "flat".L.Adamson

[Guest]

>BTW, using the new Ultimate Terrain, adds a lot more trees to>the city scapes with shade effects, that give a 3D appearence,>even though they're technically "flat".UT doesn't come with city textures... so how come it adds more trees? Or do you mean UT uses more default FSX textures which have trees on them?

[LAdamson 240]

>>BTW, using the new Ultimate Terrain, adds a lot more trees>to>>the city scapes with shade effects, that give a 3D>appearence,>>even though they're technically "flat".>>UT doesn't come with city textures... so how come it adds more>trees? Or do you mean UT uses more default FSX textures which>have trees on them?I'll assume, that since it represents many more subdivision areas, such as where I live, than default; then it's just displaying a whole lot more FSX "summer" trees. L.Adamson

[Mace 1,927]

>>And just where might MHTG be in Central America?? Don't>recognize the code, but I'd like to drop in there. By all>means, do DEN/SLC or GJT/SLC (shorter trip)! As you descend>coming over the Wasatch range it really is breath taking. Too,>just before you arrive in the SLC area you will see a glitch>in the landscape tiles that I reported to MS, but they didn't>fix with SP1. It is pretty unusual and I wondered if MS was>sending a message!!!>>Bruce>MHTG is in Honduras. Here: http://www.fscharts.com/ is the link with the approach chart..just enter MHTG in the "search" field. Check it out!I will look at the glitch near SLC, maybe it is something I can fix and upload.RhettAMD 3700+ (@2585 mhz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (Guru3D 93.71), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2gb Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8 (1T), WD 150 gig 10000rpm Raptor, WD 250gig 7200rpm SATA2, Seagate 120gb 5400 rpm external HD, CoolerMaster Praetorian

[LAdamson 240]

>>I will look at the glitch near SLC, maybe it is something I>can fix and upload.>The glitch must be the tall "spike" 50 miles or so from SLC, over the east/west running Uinta Mountain range. It was amplified farther, with FS Genesis; but I think that FSGenesis manually fixed the problem after it was noted. I just have not downloaded the update yet.L.Adamson

[LAdamson 240]

>Heinz-Werner - That's interesting. We both have similar>hobbies. I have been riding motorcycles for about 40 years.I have 40+ years on cycles too! Does this make us "old" guys? :-hah New tires for the Honda Valkyrie (98') tomorrow.L.Adamson

[brucets 94]

Larry -New rear tire for my 04 Sportster VERY soon-----almost 12k on it!!A Valkyrie??? That's an awesome machine and just about a collector item now!! Yeah, I guess you could say I am an old guy. I didn't start riding till I was 30 so you can do the math. If you started at 16 you would only be 56 or so!!!You spend so much time on these boards I dont see how you can be wearing tires out!!! Because of FS and moving back to DEN last November my riding is now down to about 5-6K a year I would guess. It used to be 14-15K a year!We should meet in Grand Junction sometime for dinner (I deleted Martini)!!! It's about 260mi for me and somewhere near 285mi for you based on downtown SLC.Scott

[Guest heinzwerner]

Scott, my Motor cycle area ended 25 years ago and I re-started last year with a small bike and nevertheless much fun on it. It makes me feel a much younger guy sometimes but i also meanwhile learned to put the safety aspect now on my focus as I was not interested in in younger years. So today crusin is the fun and no longer racin'. But against your experience this sounds a little like from a rookie ;-)At the moment I'm extending my bike driving license that is limited to smaller bikes yet. At the Attachement you can see my actual bike (Yamaha Virago XV125). The smaller Image shows my new one (Yamaha Virago XV535). This baby waits since 3 weeks in my garage hopefully lates till August. Then my License extension should be completed.Thanks for the Sideshow from your tour. I enjoyed it with my wife. Also very nice Images from New mexico and texas. For an european very inviting to your country.Back to the roots of this forum I would say. See you in the cockpit in 1..2 years - and maybe virtual connected with all features activated from FSX :-)Heinz-Werner

[LAdamson 240]

getting way off subject. :)Yes, 56, but started cycle riding with a Yamaha 80 at 14. Got a ticket for no drivers license at 15 & paid a healthy insurance premium for three years at 16 because of it. Have never made myself a good Martini, but consume a lot of Gin along with Tequila (but not together).Grand Junction --- all things are possible. Will have a plane flying in a month or two, too. It should make it in an hour & 15 mins. Don't run the cycle at 100 to 125 mph anymore, so it might take about 4 hrs. :-hah L.Adamson

[Guest captandy]

Well I have to say with all the addons I have for FS9 and how fluid the SIM is FSX does not compare.I have been doing this since the SUB LOGIC ATP days on an IBM PCjr and have had every iteration of MSFS since day 1.So in retrospect I can say that FSX requires way too much overhead as a fn of Hardware, compared to any previous rel.I know FS9 was pushing us hard in the begining but not to the extent FSX is.I for one would love to get into FSX and start building,but FS9 is so sweet in its current state that the incentive is just not there.And I know I am not alone ,so developers should reconsider their business models on upcoming releases.And my system specs are no slouch and I home built it as well so she is clean and mean.Andy

[Guest YukonPete]

My new BIG TIME DELL as you call it was my first major upgrade in almost 4 years. I used my old PC for 6 months flying FSX and I didn't complain and cry about it. So because your too cheap to upgrade does that mean that Aces should have released a fare less performing simulator? I guess so :) Sorry but if you have a system thats 2 years old when a new game is out then don't expect peak performance! With the speed computer hardware advances a new CPU or video card is out dated in a month or too. So Should I complain too Intel, AMD or Nvidia? Its not fair! You released a new CPU and I want my old CPU to run at the same performance as the new core! BooHoo.... Just continue using fs9 and your trouble free!

[LAdamson 240]

>Well I have to say with all the addons I have for FS9 and how>fluid the SIM is FSX does not compare.And for GA flight over my favorite mountain/city scapes with aircraft such as the RealAir SF260, I'm now about ten to one in favor of FSX, especially with the addition of Ultimate Terrain. Jeeze, make it a hundred to one! :-hah I've also been flight simming since it's invention for the home PC, and am well aware of what's what. With what I'm seeing and experiencing with FSX, I now consider FS9 as "crude and dated" when it comes to graphic potential.To even consider using FS9, I will now have to totally limit myself to outstanding third part scenery such as FlightSim Portland or Glacier Bay. If I had much desire to sim as an airline captain, then I'd most likely use FS9 for the complex aircraft/airport enviroment. But I really don't care much to fly airliners, except to admire the exteriors. I'm more interested in high performance GA. Whenever flying real life commercial, I always want to be lower to experience the scenery. Not actually "slow" but just at lower altitudes.I now expect these lower altitudes to contain scenery that's of higher definition scenery tiles. Tiles that have a crisp clear glossy look. FSX has them, and FS9 can only "wish". FS9 up close looks like swirls of colored mud. Always has, and always will; unless it's an area where third parties have created new and limited scenery areas by hand. Nearly 16 FSX pixels fit in the area of one FS9 pixel. The difference is easily noticeable to anyone who prefers getting below 35000'! L.Adamson

[michal 44]

Larry, I agree. The terrain in FSX looks so much better. Like you said unless you have something like FlightSim's Portland the FS9 looks like a crude sea of mud at lower altitudes.Michael J.http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/9320/apollo17vf7.jpg

[Guest captandy]

Sea of mud well when u put GE pro,FE,ASV6.5,RC and fly the new MD2006 and fly anyweher in the US the descent looks amazingly real to me where FSX looks more like an arcade.I fly commercial but also fly the AW KA and the DA Cheyenne at lower FL.I own most 3rd party airports and yes the Portland scenery is amazing but FS9 is more than enough for me.I recently reinstalled FSX when SP1 came out and yes the FPS went up but only with med sliders at best with all the AI offered ,and the blurries sent me over the edge so without further frustrations I removed it promptly off my HD. Larry I see u all over the forums and to me u seem to always be selling FSX as there is a profit in it for u.FS9 is not going anywhere fast and as stated by me b4 developers better listen ....Andy

[boshar 6]

>I now expect these lower altitudes to contain scenery that's>of higher definition scenery tiles. Tiles that have a crisp>clear glossy look. FSX has them, and FS9 can only "wish". And yet you seem content with FS-X blurries al over your terrain (its vissible in your own screenshots). I'd rather have consistent FS9 medium res scenery then put up FS-X high res scenery with constant blurring issues.Any way try tileproxy and SP1 if you still have time after posting in the forums. See how that works out. Tileproxy is the biggest goody FS-X has going for it.