frankla

might as well rebuild your system.

same here

frame generation on 4070i is doubling my frame rates.

bump

I only have acceleration installed. So if acceleration does not include SP2 and yet can not coexist with SP2 what is one to do? Uninstall Acceleration in order to get SP2?

Well, I saved the image at very low resolution. I have a feeling that when visibility is low as it was in this flight (10 miles), it doesn't cover the runway markings.

Runway markings stand out too much. I have attached a screenshot below. Is this normal? Anyway to reduce the effect?

Thank you Jim, I should try to explain this better. The sim starts normally. It only gets messed up when the sim is stopped (not paused) . This only happens after when simulation is stopped such as for instant replay or after an aircraft crash. Then after the graphics gliches start, the start-up screen also gets messed up. But this is not limited to start up screen. Another thing that happens is that all my 3D objects disappear. The only way to fix it is to restart FSX. I only have acceleration installed which includes SP2. No hard drive noises either.

After a long absence I am starting FSX again. I know my system is kind of old now, but my understanding is that FSX is not going to take advantage of current advances in GPU and CPU. Nevertheless, I was wondering if any upgrade to any components of my system will give me extra performance in FPS. i7 920 Bloomfield. OC'd to 3.8ghz, 12 MB of Triple Channel Memory 8 8 8 24 NVIDIA GTX275 Windows 7 64bit Thank you in advance Frank

what a mess. Another pic. The graphics is just a mess

bump

I keep getting flashing black skys and textures often after I press certain keys such as full flap ke (F8) or try to start instant replay (1st image). The problem will exist until I restart the sim and even the opening screen will show black everything (second picture). Following is the information about my rig and FSX. FSX Accelaration (SP2), UT GEX USA i7 920 OC to 3.8ghz NVidia GTX275, Driver 331.82 12 MB Triple Channel RAM Windows 7 64bit

Flying IS only safer than driving when commercial airline statistics (Per passenger seat/mile) are compared. However, general aviation flying is tremendously more dangerous than driving. Recognizing and understanding the dangers of flying and separating the attitude needed for flying from that of driving is vital for safe flying. "Flying out of Danger", a book which explains the risks and avoidance of dangers about flying should be a required read for anyone contemplating getting their pilot's license. It starts with dispelling the myth that flying is safer than driving. This perpetual misinformation is a disservice to all and is, in and in itself, a contributing factor in many tragic deaths because it causes student and new pilots to take wrong attitudes into flying. I will even go further to dare say that there are people with certain personalities that should never even try getting their pilot license. For example, if you are type that most often makes a left turn against upcoming traffic that cuts it too close for most other people in the same situation, you do not belong in an airplane. My two cents on this.

It had been a long time since I frequented the Screen Shot Forums. I was really surprised and disappointed that there are barely any Flight screen shots. Perhaps we should be allowed and encourage posting them here!!?

No..that is something they fixed in MS Flight

:LMAO: at "Janitor" at your signature. Sounds like my business..I am the president, the janitor and the receptionist.

While I am critical of Flight, I agree that "######" is meant to be demeaning and insulting. Lets all find a better way of saying it and agree to use it instead; Flight Enthusiast, Flight Fan.. but not ######

I agree with you wholeheartedly that they need to give to both segments. But 1) Why wouldn't MS communicate with us that they intend to cater to enthusiast too and take out the resentment? (JH went out of his way to dismiss enthusiasts in his interviews) 2) how can they do that with 2 scenery releases a year? If you don't care for an area, then you are stuck navigating an area for an entire year! I have never understood that argument. Why can't we have an easy mode and professional mode?

Tierborn, I don't mean to intrude but I wonder why you haven't over clocked your system? It looks like a perfect candidate for one.

I don't mean to hijack this thread but your description of views made me wonder how it would have been so cool to see the cars on the roads below. (I know, its not about flying, but have loved the idea of cars since the days when they were represented with just moving lights at night in FS2000-FS2002). Does anyone know if AI can be added as a DLC? Or is it something that is incompatible with the live aspect of Flight?

Luis how do you get private pilot award right in the middle of a flight? Was it because you had the minimum hours?

The fact is that if you don't like an up coming scenery DLC, you will be stuck with exploring the same region of Flight for a year!!!!~ I don't get excited by war birds. I am not gonna buy them regardless of how long they keep me "starved". I also love flying over cities, landmarks and populated areas that have recognizable features, so Alaska would not do it for me. I love GA and like planes such as 172, Archer and Cirrus. But being into GA is not the same as being a bush pilot. So from what I have seen so far I am not gonna buy Alaska even if there are no other sceneries to buy. Am I supposed to explore Hawaii for another year? Would any of you folks including loyal Flight optimists accept "playing" with Flight Hawaian advanture for another year? Perhaps I am clouded with my own needs. I also do not want to inflame or offend anyone. However I want to ask those of you who are so optimistic about Flight the following question: How they can keep the interest going this way? How could this road map work? P.S. The reason MS's communication has been a disaster is that they don't have a clear strategy and can not tell you about their intentions. They simply don't know. Based on what I read MS decided to change direction just few months before release!! My understanding is that the decision to not include enthusiasts as their target came very late in the development. How can one develop a product that has no initial vision and wavers and is so timid? I don't care how many MBA's are they running Flight, all I see is a plane that doesn't seem to be in control.

wow...the disagreements about Flight has become very civil here. Since the moderators did not over moderate the arguments, things have cooled a lot. I think it is like letting steam out. I hope I don't jinx it though.

I really do want Microsoft to make money. I maybe selfish cause I don't care who makes the money, 3pd or MS as long as I have what I want :diablo: . But I really don't understand Microsoft's decisions. Lets look at some of the decisions: 1)Would the young crowd whom they are trying to attract (entrants) want a WWII plane or a modern fighter or jetliner? I don't think most young people care about WWII. Most don't identify with history but with current world environment. (I am 48 and I don't identify with WWII planes much. :Just Kidding:) 2) Do people tend to like to fly over an area that they have some connection to or do they not care where they fly as long as it is new? I dare say most people do not fly in areas they don't have some sort of connection to. That is why I never flew in say Chili, or Morroco in FSX. This does not mean that a gamer would only want to fly in their home area, but that he has some mental connection to the area they want to fly over. How would releasing on small area of the world and promising two areas a year address that issue? 3) Why incorporate such realistic flight dynamics and realistic navigational aids if MS do not care about enthusiasts? If they intend to bring on the enthusiasts into the fold in the future (by offering DLC such as ATC, Long haul flight,etc,) why alienate them as Josh Howard did in his interviews? Microsoft is wavering and does not have a clear vision, they have put one foot in the water (offering navs, realistic flight models etc. for enthusiast) and have left the other foot on the dry land (not committing to ATC, real weather, global scenery, telling enthusiasts that Flight is not for them). They seem scared and sheepish to decide. If they don't have faith and confidence in their product why would you? 4)Prior to the Flight's release, I remember that there was agreement in the community that if Microsoft decided to have an on line store, it would not open the store without several products. After all how can you have a store with barely anything in it? To many people's surprise the store didn't have much in it. Worst yet, we were told we would get 2 sceneries a year and one plane a month. Am I the only one that thinks this is way too little and too slow for a casual gamer to keep his interest in Flight? If the Flight enthusiasts are moaning already about getting bored with Hawaii, do you think a newb will keep his interest for six months? I don't think so. 5)Microsoft , through interviews with Josh Howard, has indicated that it will adjust and produce future content according to how well their current DLC is doing. In fact many of you are ( rightly) concerned that if people will keep buying the cockpit less planes then MS would assume that people want cockpit less planes (Which is not necessarily a right deduction). Doesn't this tell us that Microsoft is winging it and did not do a good market research originally? Doesn't it mean that they don't have faith in the product? I love to be proven wrong, and I don't have an MBA so can't bet my life on what I think. But it just doesn't make sense.

I don't know why I found your comment funny :Just Kidding:. Perhaps I can imagine myself doing the same thing. I don't think I could ignore and then not wonder what it was being said. Have fun guys.