No, it's not me that get 50+ FPS, at least not yet, but this guy - Mathijs Kok from Aerosoft does!

There's an interesting discussion over at Aerosoft how he manages to do that, and I must say it's a bresh of fresh air:

http://www.forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?showtopic=30796

With an old ATI Radeon 4650 card..

It's complicated, but what about a smooth game with 50 + FPS?!

http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm

Apparently he doesn't mind a few "jaggies" and some setbacks in IQ, he's more interested in flying. At least that's how I interpret his approach.

But it's ironic that he does this as an Aerosoft spokesman ( - or is it his company?) - they make the most hard hitting add ons when we consider FPS!

Try Venice, Italy - an your CPU is in for a ride I guarantee...

I think he has an "audience" with the people who actually do not understand tweaks and settings like NickN advocates, there's a lot of them around,  if you look at various forums.

PS:

A pilot's view on flying and FSX:

"Ah! you have to love the contentiousness that develops every time someone dares to criticise someone elses tweaks in FSX. I've told you the truth, Mathijs has stated it plainly: FSX has the capability to deliver what most simmers need. But it's the simmers demands - their WANTS - that screw it up most times.

The fact that FSX can't deliver what most simmers WANT is a different issue...

Let me put this into context: I flew a Warrior recently (a real one, not a desktop recreation) to perform a photographic mission for comparison purposes for simmers. It got screwed up:
1: While preparing for the flight from Fairoaks I had to do a walkround in long wet grass. FSX fails to deliver the experience of wet socks, it cannot recreate the fuel drain contortions (I used a rubber mat, but still got my knees wet) and it failed conspicuously to represent the sheer bloody aggravation of getting my maps into a too-small map pocket.
2: It was a sunny winters day and the crazing on the windscreen meant that at certain sun angles there was no view out the front, and at others the poor quality of the glazing meant that every straight line had a kink in it (anti-aliasing as a FALSE flight sim experience? Whatever next?)...
3: After take-off, the GPS gave us a perfect route to the area required, missing all the airways and other traffic, Unfortunately at 1500 AGL the haze was so bad that we could barely see the ground at any slant angle (a criticism levelled at FSX oh so often) and ATC routed us away from some traffic coming into Farnborough, so we strayed conspicuously from the red line. I can see the complaints from FS veterans now.
I then overflew Goodwood without even knowing that was where I was, climbed out over the coast and then turned back to Shoreham and Fairoaks. At no point could I make out clearly a tree, a house or even a golf course on the ground... industrial estates were visible and major roads, but they all look alike - Funnily enough, JUST like FSX...

So don't give us any crap about `realism`. Most non-pilots simply haven't a clue.

In fact, I would now go further, based on our advice:

BEFORE you go out and spend 800 Euros on a new rig, spend a hundred quid on an air experience flight and learn what FSX is really trying to recreate. It will be a terrible, shocking surprise. Or a revelation, depending on whether you take the advice to heart...

Snave, on 11 December 2009"

Something to think about, eh?!

Well I have environments, land mesh enhancements hd aircraft and hd clouds and run most settings full right except traffic, half way for those, 32 bit system so no dx10 but she flys smooth as glass.

Looks impressive!

But you didn't max. everything...

Look at 0.56 - no traffic in air, land & sea!

Why Paul & I cannot acheive 50+ FPS in FSX :






Isn't the FSX FPS counter, really inaccurate ?  I know it was way  off in FS2002 & FS9. One of the things that made chasing the FPS snipe so maddening.

I think the "50+ FPS" statement is a clever marketing gimmick performed by Mathijs Kok!

Probably directed at the young players - the boys who are totally obsessed with how many FPS you can get in games like "Crysis", and whatever else they like to throw Mom & Dad's money after!

WE, the grown ups, the babyboomers, the cynics, the tired and wornout, we don't really care about FPS, we care about smoothness in our sim and smoothness in our lives outside the sim!

I started this thread to get a discussion going about flying in a sim, or be obsessed with visuals...

There will be aviators, and there will be "landscape artists"!

Who are you??

lunitic_8 wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2010 at 3:47pm:


...the greater the claimed FPS.... ....

..the smaller the Wiener, Luni... ...!

Paul....Guess the size.... .... .....!