...only with night lighting textures and seasonal textures. AND blend seamlessly from one texture to the next! :( Ron

I know what it isYou heard of DVD rentals paid for over the internet where they deliver to your door?This will be IN FLIGHT MOVIES delieverd to your door

"My main concern would be bandwidth use. The service provider would have to ensure there was enough bandwidth available so the scenery could be used in even the most extreme circumstances of many, many users doing it at the same time."My main concern too.Jim

I don't fully understand the whole bit torrent thing, but wouldn't that be a semi-resolution to this bandwidth problem?http://www.bittorrent.com/

I don't fully understand the whole bit torrent thing, but wouldn't that be a semi-resolution to this bandwidth problem?http://www.bittorrent.com/

That's an interesting observation!Something else to keep in mind: Just because something may be "revolutionary" doesn't necessarily mean it will be, or work, "for the masses". Cost to the consumer is always a factor to consider. Excessive bandwidth use COULD be somewhat controlled if the cost of the service was out of reach of EVERY FSX user. There is nothing to prevent a "revolutionary" advance in the Flight Simulator experience to be cost-prohibitive to some of the user-base. This has been demonstrated over and over again by releases of new Flight Simulator series that "won't run well" on some end-user's older computer systems. If the end-user doesn't want to upgrade (or can't afford to), then they can't get the benefits of the new release. It works the same way with some addon developers additions to FS. FS may run "OK" out of the box for some users, but if they try to add a complicated addon to it and their computer isn't "up to par", then it's a no-go for them.Marketing, sales, and profit margin are very often based on "units sold at a certain price". If enough "units" are sold at a "certain price" to overcome the costs of development and ongoing service, AND produce a profit for the provider, then that is that. There is no need for the provider to "serve" the entire population. They only have to get a large enough PERCENTAGE of the population to pay for the product or service to "make a profit". BMW produces cars that are out of the price range of a majority of the population. But they know they only have to sell enough of those cars to people who CAN afford them to still make a profit. Same thing with aircraft manufactures. Not every "pilot" can afford to by a Cessna Citation. But Cessna only has to sell a certain number of Citations to make that part of the company a viable enterprise.The amount of bandwidth required for a service WOULD be influenced by the number of people who agreed to pay a price for the service. It the price was high enough, and that limited the number of users (but still resulted in enough users paying for it for the company to make a profit), then that would be a consideration.FalconAF

Any effort about scenery generation is to be congratulated but I still think the best results (at least for my use) would be something what ORBX sells. I can get a razor-sharp scenery for the whole continent with no sudden transitions at reasonable price and download size. It comes with phenomenal autogen and night lighting, the latter being the absolute must for my type of flying. But I can see that photo-based scenery can work for some who like a lot of daytime VFR flying in a relatively limited area.

I agree, never fly anywhere without it anymoreJAR

hi,I think I have the solution: It is the possibility to add a big breasted nice looking female copilot in any aircraft (even addon aircraft). Honestly I can't think of anything else...Just my two cents!

Perhaps a big breasted nice looking air hostess as well?

I hope it's not some photo scenery product. With FSX and Autogen, pure photo based scenery is SO obsolete, as it only looks good from a certain height, and the graphics get really ugly (and the immersion dies a painful death) when flying low. Aerosoft went the right way with hand placing Autogen on the satellite images, but that would be impossible for a USA sized package (and itdoesn't really work well with metro areas). I really can't listen to them proclaiming how great their prodicts are - they are obsolete to anyone who wants a real environment to fly in and not just a texture on the ground. Los Angeles looks millions of times better with UTX + GEX than with photoscenery. So if it's a tileproxy - I say 10 years to late. Scenery enhanced in an intelligent, vector based way is the future, products like UTX, GEX, FTX and Austria X show this very clearly.

I hope it's not some photo scenery product. With FSX and Autogen, pure photo based scenery is SO obsolete, as it only looks good from a certain height, and the graphics get really ugly (and the immersion dies a painful death) when flying low. Aerosoft went the right way with hand placing Autogen on the satellite images, but that would be impossible for a USA sized package (and itdoesn't really work well with metro areas). I really can't listen to them proclaiming how great their prodicts are - they are obsolete to anyone who wants a real environment to fly in and not just a texture on the ground. Los Angeles looks millions of times better with UTX + GEX than with photoscenery. So if it's a tileproxy - I say 10 years to late. Scenery enhanced in an intelligent, vector based way is the future, products like UTX, GEX, FTX and Austria X show this very clearly.

I couldn't disagree more. I think autogen looks cartoony (why I leave the buildings off in my settings), and rivers, bodies of water, and natural features that fsx generics can't be able to do are missing but present in photoscenery. I have utx, gex, and ftx, and I much prefer photoscenery. I've done a lot of rw compares to both (some on my blog site), and I think the photoscenery wins hands down. Another example of different strokes for different folks. :(

I think autogen looks cartoony

That's what I always thought .. until I experienced ORBX /FTX scenery, it is a different world IMHO, it completely revised my standards what scenery should look like.

That's what I always thought .. until I experienced ORBX /FTX scenery, it is a different world IMHO, it completely revised my standards what scenery should look like.

I have the Orbx.ftx scenery-and it is very good for that type of terrain and a new high for generics. Go to the mountain West of the US or the deserts of Nevada and generic can't ever come close to duplicating all the variations, colors, and subtle graduations of real.

I agree with Geoffa. For me, it's relative to the scenery area I'm flying in. Products like UTX, GEX, and FTX can be more "autogen" oriented in places where a simply "flat" residential or commercial area may not look "realistic" due to no autogen. But even some of the photoreal sceneries still do a good job with their added autogen. I live in Las Vegas, and the MEgaScenery Las Vegas comes with autogen. With the addition of a few other things I added to my scenery library for the Las Vegas area, it looks darn good and very, very close to what I see flying out here. MegaScenery's Socal is the same way for me.It is also very dependant on wht yu can "do" with your computer. If you have a powerfull enough computer (I do), then you can crank up the LOD Radius manually to something as high as 8.0 (FSX slider maximum is only 4.5). At 8.0 LOD, a very good photoreal scenery product just simply looks amazing. FS Dreamscapes VFR+ Utah at LOD 8.0 is simply incredible. It's the only scenery I use now for flying in Utah.FalconAF

Los Angeles looks millions of times better with UTX + GEX than with photoscenery.

I love my UTX+GEX combo, but is not an accurate representation of LA compared to Megascenery. I live in the LA area, and if you want to know what it's like to fly around LA, you're not going to find anything better than the Souther California package from Megascenery. Not only do you get a huge diversified area displayed in photo accuracy, but it also has autogen trees and buildings if you want it. So if you like seeing ridiculously over sized trees and buildings, you can display them on top of Megascenery. I don't spend much time flying below 2000 feet so I turn off autogen to get better FPS anyway.

So what is this "big surprise" then to be announce today?

Its FS Viagra. You can get up within minutes but if the mission lasts longer than 4 hours you better see a doctor.

Its FS Viagra. You can get up within minutes but if the mission lasts longer than 4 hours you better see a doctor.

I was just wondering if anyone knew what the big surprise was?

I was just wondering if anyone knew what the big surprise was?

http://www.megasceneryearth.com/ :(