Poor Aces? Poor Hobby? Poor Phil? Poor me?

[teropa 4]

Well, not that I agree with his behaviour in anyway, but I think this was otherwise an excellent thread to make a point about behaviour and banning. I do think his posting was an attempt at sarcasm about the mentioned subject.Tero

[tf51d 284]

> Bottom line is that MS flubbed FSX. ACES was run over by>MS marketing in tying FSX, Dx10, et al to Vista (another not>ready for prime-time product, lol), when dx10 for FSX didnt't>actually exist at that time in Aug, 2006. Phill inhereted a>FSX that was esentially new code on top of old code going back>to FS98. The original team leader who is no longer around to>get flamed for the choices he made and the resulting>consequences, is probably telling Phill, "I told you so", in>reference to reaching out to the FS community. I dont think>that the communication between MS and us was a corporate thing>as much as it was an ACES initiative to improve relations>between 3rd party developers and the community at large. In>the beginning, Phill and various team members approached us>with a "glass is half full" attitude towards FSX, but in the>end it was the nearly two years of constant bashing and>flaming by various end users and some 3rd party developers>with the attitude of the "glass is half empty" attitude and>maybe overall fatigue with dealing with the constant>negativity that made Phill pull the plug on that initiative>for now. Does FSX deserve the ire it generates? Yes, it does>because we bought it with the promise that it woud be fixed>and the fixes were inadequate in the eyes of a large number of>end users. Could FSX be fixed? Sure. but nothing short of a>major rewrite would do that and MS accounting would not>approve the money for all of the man-hours involved in that>just for essentially gaming software. If we all were>individual companies, paying licensing fees to use FSX instead>of just individuals, that rewrite would be done without>question, but it is what it is.> As an early adopter, FSX has been nothing short of>frustrating through RTM to SP1 and 2, with all of the money>spent on hardware and the countless hours of tweaking to get>more FPS. But get a 3PD add on like FlyTampa's St. Maarten>complete for example and get prepared for at least a 10fps +>hit on FSX, which has essentially no overhead, unless you turn>the graphics way down. I hope the next generation of CPU's>and RAM coming this fall will allow FSX to be run like FS9 is>now, but I'm not holding my breath. So just move those sliders>to the left and try to enjoy FSX or go back to FS9 because all>of the complaining and flaming will not change anything. If>there is to be any fix, it will probably be up to a 3PD or a>talented individual(s) to come up with one, not ACES or MS.I think you mean to say on "Your System". The problem with posts like this is the generalization. If you want the scenery detail that FSX can produce, it's going to come at a cost, there is no way around that. FS9 gets better frame rates, because at max settings it has a fraction of the detail FSX can produce. Using your example FlyTampa TNCM, you say there's a 10+frame rate hit. Against what are you basing that on? I have that scenery and I just checked with scenery and autogen at extremely dense (I normally run autogen at Dense), in the Cessna I can get Frames in the 40's, and a LDS767 in the 20's. That is with 100% airline traffic. I can get much better at my normal dense setting, which still has for more scenery than FS9. Most performance related complaints come from those that don't match their settings with the system they have. They shoot for the moon, but that's human nature. That's the one mistake I think Aces did make. They made all this detail, which no system when it first was released could handle available within the GUI! The GUI should have been tuned to the top ended system of the day. Then have the additional scenery unlocked via the config file when Hardware caught up. BTW What are your system specs?

[Odaat 0]

... now, where was I?Geofa and I have exchanged emails, and I appreciate him setting this whole affair right. I think we are both ready to move on now.I appreciate the folks who chimed in with support, and I especially want to thank Bob Bernstein and Grapesh for relaying messages back and forth to get this sorted out.Edit: Of course you realize now that I have no creditibility because I have a post count of 1. :-)

[lost16 0]

For my specs they were great when FSX first rolled out. Dell xps 420 E6700 2.66Ghz (1066 FSB) 4GB 533Mhz DDR2 Samsung 500MB HD 7950 GT 512MB (now 8800GT 512MB 650Mhz) Sound Blaster X-fi Fatality Extremegamer Vista 64 I can run default St. Maarten locked at 31fps on the runway. in a cessna caravan, with AI locked at 100%(UT) cars 25%, boats and ships 50%. Autogen is at Very Dense. Unlimited frame lock causes major fps surges for me, so I lock it at 31 which is half of my monitors refresh rate. Also using Nhancer with 8xS combined AA, 16x AF, and Vsync forced on. On FlyTampa's, I get 12fps on the runway, goes up to about 18-25 over water with any portion of scenery in view with no Aircraft AI cars 12%, boats and ships 35%. Autogen is at dense Short of replacing CPU with q6700 (can't upgrade memory since MB only takes 533 or 667 and can't overclock), I'm just waiting to see what comes out. Most of FSX's problems ( in my experience) are in how it's engine renders textures. Flying over any heavily forested areas, mountains, etc. and getting major FPS surges, no mater what autogen settings for me is an example fo this, or textures that sharpen up right under the aircraft on dense or very dense autogen is another example. Just my experience (yours will vary, lol) Will

[Geofa 108]

I am very glad it worked out-welcome back. Better get posting! :-)http://www.mediafire.com/imgbnc.php/1b5baf...b9f427f694g.jpgMy blog:http://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/

[bob.bernstein 0]

Glad you've returned, Paul!B

[jwenham 1]

I had a issue with the Fly Tampa Scenery as well where if I looked at the runway my FPS would shoot into the single digits but was better everywhere else. I found that by turning my AA way down 2X it was fine as far as FPS goes. The other thing that worked allowing me to keep my AA higher was to turn the GLOBAL TEXTURE RES down from MAX to HIGH and then all was fine.

[N562Z 4]

Step back, take a deep breath and take a look around the real world, not the virtual one. Enjoy your life, your children, your families.....Take that walk you've been promising yourself and smell fresh air that is not stagnant and overheated from our over-worked CPUs. Smell the coffee, the flowers, and spend a night or two a week away from the addiction we all know and love that is FlightSImulator. Forgive and forget..and try to create a realistic perspective. It's fun to conquer challenges, but no fun if it consumes you to the point of insanity, incredulity, insensitivity or inflexibility. At least not to me.http://www.my-buddy-icon.com/Icons/objects/red_3d_plane.gifAlex ChristoffN562ZBaltimore, MD

[BobP 56]

About 120 replies (at the posting of this) and around 4000 reads! Plus at least two other threads concerning Phil Taylor. Don't you people ever fly? LOL.For instance, I just discovered (after months of flying) that you can grab the selected aircraft in the free flight mode picture and spin it around. I'll be darned.Bob..

[tf51d 284]

Locking Frame rates, doesn't work the same as it did in FS9. Doing so will reduce performance significantly, presumably to give resources to other areas such as loading scenery. You can test this yourself, if you have fraps, load it up and watch the frame counter, which is generally an average of what you are getting. Run the sim with unlimited frames, record it's average, then lock it at or above that number, then see what Fraps reports. If you would like send me a PM, and I can help you with your settings to get the right balance for your system.

[slashed2 53]

That gave me a chuckle, thank you, this thread was getting way to serious.

[Guest gmark]

Ya know Bob, I discovered the same thing a few weeks ago. For me personally, I felt like a bit of an arse. Now why didn't I know that before? Ah, the fun of discovery in this hobby.Cheers!GMarkatKLUK

[Guest player1]

>About 120 replies (at the posting of this) and around 4000>reads! Plus at least two other threads concerning Phil Taylor.>Don't you people ever fly? LOL.>>For instance, I just discovered (after months of flying) that>you can grab the selected aircraft in the free flight mode>picture and spin it around. I'll be darned.>>Bob..Actualy this has been Tom's plan all along...Have someone produce a sim and make like you have this great site to chat with others about in support of the sim, when actualy its the other way around...the sim is to support the site...its true!The grandfather of FS Bruce Artwick & Tom met behind closed doors some 25 years ago...I can't tell you what all was said...All I know now as our investigative team uncovered recently is that it seems that Tom convinced this programing guru to abandon his dream of creating a new energy source to take advantage of the new and exciting home computer market. What would emerge was a program creating a huge amount of excitement that would lure you in until you where hooked, .............ok someone else run with this. I have a plane to catch. Really!Do a nice job!

[Tom Allensworth 1,532]

Yeah, and I also own 350,000 shares of my friend Bill's company. And, come July 1st, he'll only be spending 20% of his time at MS. Guess who is going to increase his time there??? :)

[Odaat 0]

>Edit: Of course you realize now that I have no creditibility>because I have a post count of 1. :-) and my spelling is still atrocious at times...