Unlocking the FPS is the old frame rate issue where more fps is better. Don't think so. 20 is fine for instrument/cockpit sim flight. 24 will do for sight seeing. A matter of resource allocation: Frame rates, filtering, resolution, color depth, scenery and terrain detail. Each system is different and limited by configuration. Customer acceptance of COF shows that frame rates are not an issue to most users. Too bad CFS3 didn't match the graphics flexibility and capability of COF.
The informal polls consistently show majority satisfaction with COF. Simmer's as a group are generally looking to upgrade their systems. Just like I plan to do. If the reason is frame rates and COF then wrong reason. My guess is that 2006 will be much the same as COF with respect to frame rates. Why would MS mess with a hit seller? I think they learned a lesson CFS2 to CFS3 getting too far out with the graphics engine and system demands.