Bruce Nicholson KMFR

Brian, That is a nicely crafted statement and probably represents a fair number of FSX users. Time certainly will tell once we see what happens with future developments and technology. P3D is going to evolve and FSX won't. Certainly there will be users that stay with FSX, just as there are users currently on FS9. People will decide when to move on, and it's usually a large development that makes them move and invest the money. FS9 was holding its own with FSX until PMDG released the NGX and said no to FS9. An event like that will happen with P3D too and that will be the turning point. Cheers, Bruce

I for one am very grateful of earlier adopters that are out spending money on P3D2 and video cards, running through configurations and reporting what works and doesn't work. For those of us on the sidelines observing, you are the pioneers that will allow the rest of us to make informative decisions when the time comes to adopt P3D2.

The mid 90's?!?! Hey someone scammed me when I bought FS 1.0 in Oct 1981. Here I thought I was using a legitimate versions of the franchise for all those years before the 90's. Probably too late to get my money back... I bet that guy in the store that sold it to me is long gone by now.

^ +1 on not selecting the nVidia Chipset drivers Driver Sweeper also advises removing the drivers in safe mode after a reboot. It's probably not necessary after the uninstall and reboot, but it's best practice in case the O/S has a hold on the driver.

I thought I was reading Chicken Little there for a moment... The sky is falling!!!!! The sky is falling!!!

Well, no cockpit, so no screenshot... :Party:

I don't follow the logic... With your analogy, are you suggesting we forget about the fully grown fruit bearing tree we have today and go back to when that tree was just a seed? Then what? Wait for another fully grown tree to evolve, which is exactly where we were before we had to go back to the seed?

I read awhile back that P3D also improved the default landclass, as in no more worldwide deserts. Can anyone confirm? Not having to add 3rd party landclass to improve FSX would pay for several months of a subscription to P3D.

Why wouldn't Mark take the bet? He's playing with other people's money.... oh wait, the other bet hasn't been paid yet! Hang in there Mark, I'm sure it's coming next year... there must be a reason it's late... maybe a payroll deduction of $1 per weekly paycheck? :(

MS spends all that time improving the graphics and clouds, yet it still rains from above the clouds, coming from the clear blue sky?? Looks like that didn't get fixed from previous versions. :(

Bill, very nice reply as one needs to see things though another's eyes to understand. Additionally, it's quite easy now that the announcement has been made to play "Monday morning quarterback" and say it was so obvious, how did everyone miss it? Where was that post before the announcement, when people at were saying the same thing and getting hammered for being idiots and trolls?

I don't follow the logic??? If Flight doesn't have AI planes, ATC, navaids, fully operable control switches, weather, etc., how will monitoring our usage develop the apps we need? MS is simply going to see that we don't play with the fluffy stuff and fly VFR. How is that going to help develop all the things we want?The only way MS is going to know is by people telling them and voting with their wallets, not by using the silly thing!

Woohoo! :( The Sands repaint is up and available on in the library...Thanks Señor Picasso! :(

Wow Ed!Another superb HD video. I love that passenger view with the nose wheel shadow descending toward the concrete. That's the first I've seen in a FS video and so realistic.Looking forward to your next video project.Bruce

I think the question you are posing is... what changes from season to season are noticeable.? The answer depends whether you are a detail person or not. The changes will represent new airlines that started in the past year, airlines that are defunct and should no longer be present in the sim, and equipment changes where old aircraft were retired and new aircraft delivered to airlines. Of course there are schedule changes, but those are not noticeable to the average simmer unless a real world schedule is checked. As long as there are aircraft in the skies and at airports, most users perceive a "realistic" feel to the sim.Is it worth getting? Again, that depends on your level of realism. Most users will probably be happy just keeping what they have since nothing seems out of place. However, when a big airline goes out of business or merges with another, or you know XYZ no longer flies the MD-11, then you are going to notice how dated the traffic is and want an update.So it's up to you to decide...

That Al Bundy billboard is great! :( Nice video...

Wow Ed!The lighting in this one is superb :(

Interesting point Scott...Many people rejected FSX because they felt it wasn't a big improvement over what they already had and found it difficult to use. We've seen similar opinions about the new forum and library software as compared to the prior version. Of course you are referring to FS9'ers as unable to adapt and change, but still, it shows people will not shift from something they like unless you make it worthwhile.

The front page loads fine for me in IE8, but it still is crippled in Chrome. I can read the library, forums, other links with Chrome, but the main page is having a problem.

You answered your own question. ActiveSky assigns a random visibility when the METAR visibility is 10 SM as well as many other features FSMetar does not have. Check the ActiveSky webpage for all of the details.

I think you are confusing configuration files with sliders. Configuration files contain the settings that apply to the sim. The sliders are a convenience for the user to easily scale multiple configuration settings with one control. Recall how the number of trees and autogen objects in FSX were found in a config file? People were able to tweak the config file so they could enjoy all the other things that came with higher slider settings without having the number of trees and/or autogen objects slow their system. That is an example of how the configuration file should be the limiting factor and not the slider.As you say, let the designers set the maximum for trees at 100,000 so the sim can grow into the future, but set the configuration file so the best hardware at the time of release can run at max sliders. Users are happy when the sim will run at full sliders and when power users discover how to adjust config settings, everyone thinks it is a bonus and the sim appears to be even better.

Yes, of course!It's well known that third-party designers of scenery, weather, aircraft, etc., have to temper the "realism" in their products to manage frame rates. The whole point of sliders in fltsim isn't to say one day there will be hardware that will let you max out the sim; it's to allow everyone on the day of release to enjoy the sim to the best of their current hardware's capabilities. People with top of the line systems are going to be disappointed if they cannot enjoy everything the default sim has to offer.The entire progression of designing the default flight sim beyond the capabilities of current hardware reached a ludicrous point with the release of FSX. If the franchise had released another version within a few years, as had been done with prior versions, users would have had the choice of a new sim before the old sim could be maxed out. There is something very wrong with that philosophy, and makes no sense with an open system that can be modified with add-ons. If Microsoft had released a sim that was closed and the user had to experience everything out of the box, then I can see why Microsoft would need to design for future hardware, but that isn't the case.Third-party designers can easily add more to their products to bring a system to its knees. Many posts in this thread are pleading for the ability of third-party designers to have the freedom to do what they want with the new sim. So let the designers manage what the hardware is capable of and have the default sim work really well at its release.Should there be a case where a user decides to stay with the prior version, don't worry about sliders being maxed. The default FS9 has long since been running with max settings with the latest hardware and yet users manage to pile on complex third-party add-ons to keep their systems churning.

I enjoyed reading Angelique's review, however I had to smile when I read "This small US state has stolen my heart and I really mean that." and later in the overview, "For a small state like Oregon and then only half of it, it’s pretty expensive."Small state? Something just seemed very odd about that statement. Maybe when compared to California or Alaska, or when considering the extent of the scenery coverage. Personally, I wouldn't call Oregon small by any means. It's the 8th largest state of the lower 48 states. For our European friends, and this would include Angelique, Oregon is slightly larger than the United Kingdom. To put that into perspective, it would be equivalent to saying "For a small European country like the UK and then only half of it, it's pretty expensive." I think most readers would say, What??? :(

This has been discussed many times over the years. Try searching on the words "spawn" and "swarm". You'll find postings. For example: http://forums1.avsim.net/index.php?showtop...96&hl=spawn has some good information on what causes the swarm, how to remove it, and settings to avoid getting them.

Have you tried the Alpha India Group, the center of AI activity? http://www.alpha-india.net/Ask in the forum section and I'm sure you'll get more information than you expected, maybe even from Daan (dusteagle).