You know ... its posts like this that make me wonder why Phil Taylor takes time out to respond to a guy with 7 whole posts under his belt and a huge chip on his shoulder.It's one thing to be critical of a particular element of this game if your goal is to pass along feedback to the developers so that the game can be improved in upcoming versions.It's quite another to just insult people by calling them liers, and making unfounded "accusations" ... as you call them ... about the game designers motivations.I don't know Phil Taylor. Never met or spoken or interacted with the man. But, I've read his website, watched him interact with the community primarily on this site, but also others. And I've never come away with the feeling that he was some marketing schmuck trying to separate me from my wallet. He seems like he's generally interested in doing a good job with the product he's tasked with developing. We've all benefitted from that work.I hope the forum moderator just locks this thread down. Finding something you don't like about FSX and having discussion about it is completely appropriate on this forum. Demeaning the ACES team isn't.Kevin D. Greene(Fair Disclosure: I've worked with other members of the ACES team developing missions for FSX: Acceleration.)

>You know ... its posts like this that make me wonder why Phil>Taylor takes time out to respond to a guy with 7 whole posts>under his belt and a huge chip on his shoulder.>>It's one thing to be critical of a particular element of this>game if your goal is to pass along feedback to the developers>so that the game can be improved in upcoming versions.>>It's quite another to just insult people by calling them>liers, and making unfounded "accusations" ... as you call them>... about the game designers motivations.>>I don't know Phil Taylor. Never met or spoken or interacted>with the man. But, I've read his website, watched him interact>with the community primarily on this site, but also others.>And I've never come away with the feeling that he was some>marketing schmuck trying to separate me from my wallet. He>seems like he's generally interested in doing a good job with>the product he's tasked with developing. We've all benefitted>from that work.>>I hope the forum moderator just locks this thread down.>Finding something you don't like about FSX and having>discussion about it is completely appropriate on this forum.>Demeaning the ACES team isn't.>>Kevin D. Greene>(Fair Disclosure: I've worked with other members of the ACES>team developing missions for FSX: Acceleration.)I think you should look at his 8th post, seems like a more rational (i.e. p.c. for this board) post to me. Simply looks like an observation given our limited knowledge of what really went on between microsoft and aces with regard to pre-marketing this "game," as you put it.

I think where the guy lost me was when he launched into a personal attack, calling ACES liars, saying they're irresponsible, unforthcoming ... impuning their skills as programmers, making unfounded accusations about their motivations.To wit:"Do I think ACES and Microsoft Marketing have been irresponsible, inconsiderate and less-than forthcoming about their development plans, engine capabilities and product functionality?"... But I hate feeling like I'm being lied to."... ACES can't figure out how to program for it. "... I stand by my accusationSo, no, I really didn't read the guy's eighth post. Don't want to read his ninth one either. And I hope his posting priv's are under review.That's inappropriate commentary, and shouldn't be encouraged.

Ryan,I don't understand.. Are you saying, it would be a complete rebuild to achieve the VC shadow effects for the 747?Hmmm,,,,,,

The DX10 version of FSX will be a disappointment to many. Whatever the merits of DX10/SP2 (and I'll sure there are many) it is clear that it does not live up to the claims made a year ago for a step change in performance and graphics quality. Those who have invested a lot of money in Vista and DX10 graphics cards on the basis of false claims are entitled to feel aggrieved. However, ACES have been attempting to hose down these unrealistic expectations for many months and what has been delivered should not be a surprise to anyone who reads this forum. I'm sure ACES have got the message loud and clear, and we can only hope that MS itself absorbs the lesson. I'm not sure anything more can be achieved, unless those dissatisfied with the outcome have some positive suggestions about what should be done about it... Cheers,Noel.

Mission Guy,Let me be clear: I am in no way, shape or form accusing Mr. Taylor of any wrongdoing or any disshonesty. Nor am I willing to allow this conversation to degrade into personal attacks of any kind.I think if you read my posts more carefully you would see I am not being rude or beligerent, but do feel that after a 1,500 dollar investment I am owed an explanation as to how such a trumpetted technological achievement that is arguably the main selling point for the company's newest, and most expensive operating system could be so, well, unimpressive. I understand the development process is difficult, and I do not think any less of Aces or Phil Taylor. Indeed, I hold their product and their talents in the highest regard. If I had any say in this whatsoever, I would have told them to take all the time they needed to deliver on the capabilities of the API. So my question is this: Whose decision was it to move on from trying to create an impressive Direct X 10 FSX to creating a new iteration of the series completely that by past development cycle estimates won't be released for another two years? It is my intention to make it known to the powers that be that the creation of a product whose new features actually warrant a new release should be more important than adhering to strict development cycles to stay in line with corporate profit projections.Things I would consider as such:-ATC that has accomodations for emergency operations, nationalized accents and/or procedures, and more realistic congestion management.-Better ground/object/building/vehicle collision detection. Float planes do not bounce-More gradual/realistic implementation of wind forces and wind shear.-Better Seasonal Daytime/Nightime lighting, in clear conditions and cloudy conditions, with appropriate shadows or lack thereof.-Better and more gradual visualization of haze layers, including the capacity to see upcoming areas of lower visibility-More detailed/varied volumetric clouds, as well as removal of the billboard turning effect that still occurs.-Better modeling for the different types of precipitation, including their affect on plane performance, runway surface, their movement relative to wind speed and direction, and their ability to reduce visibility through the windscreen.-Plane models that realistically take into consideration plane damage from abuse/misuse/accidents, so that safe operation even under adverse conditions would be much more rewarding.-The ability to render overcast skies in a more realistic way.If that isn't constructive criticism, I don't know what is.-Josh

Edit: My apologies, I of course meant "Please DO NOT turn"..

>Edit: My apologies, I of course meant "Please DO NOT turn"..Well, you're off to quite a start here, aren't you?I'm going to take a shot in the dark and suggest that you didn't read the Terms of Use when you signed up, and ask that you do that now.I think, given the fact that over the course of 2007, you've started a few threads, that you've been around here for a while, and you kind of have an idea of what is allowed and what isn't. This thread is an example of the type of disruptive behavior that makes my job more difficult. You certainly have every right to feel underwhelmed or disappointed with any software you like, and if it relates to Flight Simulator, you can come here and discuss it. But insults directed at anyone, demands for answers on why Microsoft swindled you out of whatever exaggerated amount you put up there, these are the things that differentiate between good and bad threads.You claim that you aren't directing your anger here at anyone on ACES or Phil Taylor specifically, but you keep directing your posts at him, and are accusing the company he is here to represent. When you say that Microsoft is being dishonest, that travels down by proxy.And if you are directing this only at some imaginary smoking man in a dark room at the top of the food chain in Redmond, then this isn't the proper venue for you complaint. If you want to talk about why you aren't impressed with cockpit shadows, then fine. Go ahead. If you want to make demands for explanations that nobody owes you, then this might not be the right place for you. I believe you are here to pick a fight in this thread, and nothing else, and I'm not going to let it continue.And since we're clearing things up, Vista is not the most expensive Microsoft operation system.

Not a Senator, Phil Taylor, Et Al,I honestly and openly apologize if the words I have chosen have come across as inflammatory or derogatory toward any one person who frequents these forums or is considerate enough to represent the company that publishes the software we all use and enjoy. I also apologize if I have violated the terms of use for this forum or website.However, I do believe that it is possible to question the motives and business practices of a corporation without targeting an individual within it, as I have tried to do so here. I have been honest about my complaints, and tried to clearly differentiate my dissatisfaction with the state of affairs from any perceived dissatisfaction of Phil and his team, clearly to no avail. As a purchaser of a product that has been marketed directly to me on false pretenses, I am absolutely entitled to ask for an explanation of those shortcomings. And Mr. Taylor is absolutely entitled to refuse me those answers. Not once did I demand explanation or attack him personally, though you and others seem to think that challenging his contentions is paramount to it.I read these posts because I enjoy flight simulator. I posted here because I had a question I wanted answered, and hoped people were willing to discuss it without the kind of knee-jerk reactions that come when someone suggests that a company may not have the best interest of its customers at heart.If you decide to close this post or remove me because you think I am not trying to engage in meaningful conversation meant to improve flight simulator, you certainly have that right, though you could not be further from the truth. To be honest, I am disappointed in your sensitivity to, and intolerance of a legitimately founded opinion.-Josh

>So, no, I really didn't read the guy's eighth post. Don't want>to read his ninth one either. And I hope his posting priv's>are under review.>>That's inappropriate commentary, and shouldn't be encouraged.Ohh for gosh sake, let the man say his peace without attacking him because you don't agree with him. We all love the franchise and the product but Josh makes excellent, articulate points and maintains a tone of respect about it. I was one that bought a new pc last december for fsx and the dx10 patch that was supposed to be done by february. The dx10 patch was delayed until november which at the time really chapped my hide but I figured they needed the time to add the new features and I relented. Now to find out they spent an extra year almost on this dx10 patch and didn't really add anything to it other than shadows and a bit of a frame rate increase. Josh makes an excellent point in that why does it take a year extra to finish the dx10 patch only to get a single new feature which has been done in dx9 for over a year now. Phil says they didn't have enough time to add anything more, but the patch was already delayed for almost a year as it is. Just how long does it take to create a single dx10 patch anyway? If it takes this long to add 3 or 4 new features via a single dx10 patch then one does have to wonder what the holdup is? Test drive unlimited does beautiful console shadows in dx9 with high end HDR (not just bloom like fsx) and models the entire island of oahu while doing it. Phil is the man and we all respect and like him, but like it or not he IS the faceman for THE major corporation that invented the technology. If they can't deliver on a few simple godrays and full HDR lighting and shadows in a single patch in over a year's time then something is amiss with this technology or the way that they approached it.________________________________________________________________________________________________Intel D975XBX2 'Bad Axe 2' | Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 @ 3.20Ghz | 2 GB Super Talent DDR2 800 | Big Typhoon VX | eVGA 8800GTS @ 565/900 | Seagate 2x320GB SATA RAID-0 | OCZ GameXStream 700W | Creative X-Fi | Silverstone TJ-09BW | Matrox Triplehead Setup

>If you decide to close this post or remove me because you>think I am not trying to engage in meaningful conversation>meant to improve flight simulator, you certainly have that>right, though you could not be further from the truth. >>To be honest, I am disappointed in your sensitivity to, and>intolerance of a legitimately founded opinion.>>-Josh Josh I couldn't agree with you more. Some people around here tend to gang on others like a pack of raptors if they deviate from the PC party line. Nothing you wrote was disrespectful and imo was very nicely worded so as not to sound confrontational. Your thread was backed with facts and was articulately written. I agree with you 100%. I still love fsx and aviation and it doesn't make me a hater for being annoyed that I feel let down as well.________________________________________________________________________________________________Intel D975XBX2 'Bad Axe 2' | Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 @ 3.20Ghz | 2 GB Super Talent DDR2 800 | Big Typhoon VX | eVGA 8800GTS @ 565/900 | Seagate 2x320GB SATA RAID-0 | OCZ GameXStream 700W | Creative X-Fi | Silverstone TJ-09BW | Matrox Triplehead Setup

See, here's the thing you're not getting in regards to separating what you say from Phil and ACES: You aren't just stating your opinion of a product, you're accusing the company Phil works for of committing fraud. You can be disappointed as you want in my sensitivity but words like "false pretense" and "bait and switch" describe illegal business practices. Do you see the difference is?

>If>they can't deliver on a few simple godrays and full HDR>lighting and shadows in a single patch in over a year's time>then something is amiss with this technology or the way that>they approached it.Dave, unless if I'm missing the sarcasm, I think you need a vacation. This place may be getting to you. :(You know full well that ACES hasn't spent the last year just working on DX10 features.

Well according to Phil they have. He said that there are different divisions in Aces that were working on Acceleration and that none of their other projects were taking time away from the dx10 patch. I realize that SP1 was in there as well which coupled with the vista graphics patch really did fix all of my problems. Overall I am quite happy with fsx and I think a lot of my frustration with the lameduck dx10 patch is because I was hoping that Aces would deliver what 3rd party vendors have so far been unwilling to do - some badly needed enhancements. Maybe now that they have stopped modifying the core code of the sim some devs might actually start to create some quality complex aircraft and airport/scenery upgrades for this thing!________________________________________________________________________________________________Intel D975XBX2 'Bad Axe 2' | Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 @ 3.20Ghz | 2 GB Super Talent DDR2 800 | Big Typhoon VX | eVGA 8800GTS @ 565/900 | Seagate 2x320GB SATA RAID-0 | OCZ GameXStream 700W | Creative X-Fi | Silverstone TJ-09BW | Matrox Triplehead Setup

Perhaps I wasnt clear.There is one graphics team. So SP1 took away from SP2(DX10). Count the time since SP1 and you get the focused time we had on DX10.Acceleration planes and scenery are not made by devs, they are made by content people. The sim devs ( carriers, helos ) and the multiplayer devs (MP racing) are also distinct. That is why Acceleration did not impinge on either SP1 or SP2.The tradeoff we made on the graphics team was SP1 and fixes for everybody, versus more DX10 work. I repeat I think we made the right call.