FSX's Green Toxic Glowing Fields . . .

[esrum1]

I've got a "Top 5 Things Gone Wrong" list for FSX. On that list would be the disgusting night textures that FSX tries to pass of as "acceptable".

Last week I flew into Denver (real life) for business. I got in late, and peering out the window on final, I could barely see a thing on the black ground.

Simulating that exact flight, looking out the window and you'll see yourself flying over what appears to be green toxic glowing corn fields. To the best of my knowledge, no official product has been released as a solution to this problem, but has anyone noticed this and been able to remedy it?

For conversations sake, the other 4 items on my "Top 5" list:

(No particular order)

1. Sub-par at best ATC.
2. Impossible-to-decipher rules and instructions for adding jetway and ground support to add-on aircraft.
3. Lack of Traffic Tool-like programing.
4. Lacking weather generation. (Thanks to AFX for getting this done right however.)

[joejam2]

"3. Lack of Traffic Tool-like programing."

FSX comes with a program called Traffic Toolbox.

I also get "blotchy" night textures.

[bkeske]

>1. Sub-par at best ATC.
>2. Impossible-to-decipher rules and instructions for adding
>jetway and ground support to add-on aircraft.
>3. Lack of Traffic Tool-like programing.
>4. Lacking weather generation. (Thanks to AFX for getting
>this done right however.)
>

First off, look for texture replacements by Adam Mills. They are an improvement, and free to boot.

There are 3rd part folks coming out with texture replacements that will transform FSX.

1) The ATC is as good as we have had in the past, and I doubt there will ever be improvements here as FS tries to cater to the 'newbie' and casual user first. If you want better ATC, there are 3rd party programs available.
2) I believe there is a third party program available to do something similar to that. But as I pretty much only fly general aviation aircraft, I really don't need it. But...if there is a need, you can expect someone will 'fill the void'.
3) I'm not a 'traffic aficionado', but I have a couple airport scenery's that uses the old Traffic Tool program to place traffic. I do use a program to create general aviation traffic for FSX though.
4)I prefer to use ASX.

Bottom line....FS is about a $30-50 program. For that money I'm happy, considering one or two third party aircraft or scenery programs cost as much, if not more. In other words, **it is a platform**, and as always, it allows the exceptional work to be done by others so we can have exactly what we/you want. Believe it or not, there are probably thousands upon thousands of folks who use FS right out of the box with no desire to become 'addicted' to the program as we do here.

If FS had exactly what you wanted, and 'everyone else' wanted, it would be a very expensive package indeed. And you would probably refuse to pay that much for some stuff you don't care for anyway.

Accept it (FS) for what it is, and praise the wonderful third party guys who give us each the opportunity to mold it into what we desire. After 12-13 years using FS, I kinda prefer it that way.

Of course, your other option is to go out and get your pilot's license and get all the reality you can afford.

[BOtten]

I'd agree. I'm using Ultimate Terrain X for my terrain textures, and some photoreal texture addon scenery in certain areas. I also use X Graphics and Active Sky X to enhance my flight world. I'd check into some of those, although the stock textures aren't ALL that bad if you can crank up the sliders to reveal more details. Even today, most systems can't go 'full slider'.

As far as ATC...well, that's always been one of FS's least capable systems. Sometimes ATC will make silly directives that make zero sense. I've been routed completely opposite directions and ATC never came back to redirect me. ATC is also probably one of the toughest implementations to get right, so although it isn't perfect, at least it works a bit. Adding extra traffic just adds to the woes, but I think traffic needs to be there. I just purchased and now use Ultimate Traffic X and find it works nicely.

FS is open architecture, meaning the code is out there for addon developers to work with and give us extra scenery, weather, aircraft, sounds, panels...almost an endless list of addons to enhance it. No, FS isn't perfect 'out of the box' but if you dress it up with some well selected addons ( take your pick too because most of the categories will have more than one offering ) you'll get more enjoyment.

[JSkorna]

Hi,

Green glowing any textures means that your system is not able to keep up with FSX.

Jim

http://www.hifisim.com/banners/hifi-...-sigbanner.jpg
http://www.hifisim.com/

[esrum1]

Indeed, a big thanks to ALL third party developers.

I've got quite a bit invested into this fetish of a hobby, and each third party add-on that I do own (which includes almost any title relevant to a more realistic simulator) adds a new dimension to the software.

Jim, I am referring to the "green hued" textures that appear at night. Not a literal "bright-green" texture. Next time you take a live night flight, whether commercial or private, take a look out the window. You won't see a dang thing, even 10 feet above the ground . . . then compare that to

There's a fix in the FlightSim.com, titled "Redbrownfix" or something to that effect (my apologies to the author, I can't remember his name) that I've been able to get to work in FSX with fairly good results.

It's still not perfect, and that might be asking for too much . . .

Joe