Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

data65

I got your Windows Live right here Microsoft! Go Austin!

Recommended Posts

Regarding the Avsim article on the future of MSFS. All I can say is, I've had it! I will continue to fly FSX as long as MS supports it and allows future activations. That's fine with me, and if they ever pull the plug on that then I'll revert to FS9. However, having said that, no way no how am I gonna buy an XBox to fly any future incarnation of FS, nor will I be forced to pay for every extra plane or scenery area! In my opinion Microsoft has gone way too far here! I suppose that thier thinking is that they could make more money that way, but in reality, again in my opinion, the money made from this move will not be for Microsoft, but rather for Austin Meyer the creator of x-plane. If I were him I would hire whoever he needed to and pounce...pounce hard!!! It will take years for Microsoft to pull any Flightsim out of the ashes of ACES Studios and in that time Austin could pick up 100% of the Flightsim market. Think of that. One guy has the chance to corner a market that he barely had a fingerhold in a month ago, and he could do it virtually overnight! If he doesn't act now he will be missing out on the chance of a lifetime! Austin if you are reading this, I can't speak for the whole community, but i can say this. From what I've seen, all you need is detailed cities,airports and a few more little extras and you have MS beat for good! Don't blow this oportunity to beat the big boys and make a buttload of money in the process! I guess this is a call for support of X-plane and Austin Meyer! I don't even own it yet...but I will if it is developed to modern eyecandy standards. Honestly I am outraged at Microsoft's behavior in this matter Do I seem miffed? I am!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Regarding the Avsim article on the future of MSFS. All I can say is, I've had it! I will continue to fly FSX as long as MS supports it and allows future activations. That's fine with me, and if they ever pull the plug on that then I'll revert to FS9. However, having said that, no way no how am I gonna buy an XBox to fly any future incarnation of FS, nor will I be forced to pay for every extra plane or scenery area! In my opinion Microsoft has gone way too far here! I suppose that thier thinking is that they could make more money that way, but in reality, again in my opinion, the money made from this move will not be for Microsoft, but rather for Austin Meyer the creator of x-plane. If I were him I would hire whoever he needed to and pounce...pounce hard!!! It will take years for Microsoft to pull any Flightsim out of the ashes of ACES Studios and in that time Austin could pick up 100% of the Flightsim market. Think of that. One guy has the chance to corner a market that he barely had a fingerhold in a month ago, and he could do it virtually overnight! If he doesn't act now he will be missing out on the chance of a lifetime!Austin if you are reading this, I can't speak for the whole community, but i can say this. From what I've seen, all you need is detailed cities,airports and a few more little extras and you have MS beat for good! Don't blow this oportunity to beat the big boys and make a buttload of money in the process!I guess this is a call for support of X-plane and Austin Meyer! I don't even own it yet...but I will if it is developed to modern eyecandy standards. Honestly I am outraged at Microsoft's behavior in this matter Do I seem miffed? I am!!!!
Austin will miss the opportunity if he (and the fans that post all of XPlane's superlatives) does not heed the advice given here to build his flight model into something that better simulates flight. As long as I see posts discussing how superior "Blade Element Theory" is to all contenders, I will steer clear of his product. I certainly won't buy his sim just for the sake of having a new flightsim every few years no matter how miffed I am at Microsoft.

Share this post


Link to post

If I were him I would have been on the phone the next day to all those ACES developers working out some sort of development deal. Have heard both good and bad about X-Plane, like all flight sims, but isn't is true that that each major upgrade is incorporated into the previous sim. That is too say you don't have to scrap everything you worked on with the previous version? (my knowledge on X-Plane is very limited).Then again, is this not a perfect opportunity for an open source like Flightgear to "take flight" sort-of speak? There's probably a good six years left between FS9 and FSX before it grows long in the tooth and by then we could have quite a substantial FS platform that would not have to be scrapped every 2-3 years. You could build a flightsim world that could last 20-30 years. We certainly have the talent pool out there to create a whole new world!

Share this post


Link to post
In my opinion Microsoft has gone way too far here!
Can't agree with you more. MS has gone too far and killed the goose with the golden eggs in the believe that their strategy for Xbox will work. What is really appalling is that they make this move in the midst of a crisis, hoping everybody will believe that they have to do this because of the crisis. :( No they don

Share this post


Link to post

I have to agree. We use X-Plane at Aims Community College where i am attending flight school. It's an okay sim for use as an instructor-station/simulator with the proper equipment, but it is by far no comparison for recreation to the enjoyment I have had with FS2004 and FSX. If the ACES team ever teamed up with Austin, I believe a new and promising future would be revived for FS.Wait -- didn't the government try to break up Microsoft and their attempts at monopoly-type business? Oh, okay! This must be their way of sneaking back into that area of their particular "expertise"I hope they realise the moment they quit supporting activations for FSX, P2P hacks are going to go through the roof -- mainly because no one wants togive up FSX for the joke of programming that the rumers state they are doing.Bleah.Austin, ACES -- if you read this -- I am with the author. Team up and make the world FS community one of the happiest communities in the computer gaming industry.

Share this post


Link to post

It's good to see some up and downs and no flaming. Thank you all very much for expressing some very constructive comments. I hope nobody got the idea that this was a commercial for X-plane. I owned x-plane 7 and I didn't keep it long. It had, and still has, a long way to go, but that was my point. If Austin can bridge this large chasm between MSFS and X-plane, he can write his own ticket. Thanks again all for a flame free discussion. Let's keep it going. If we can stay united as a community then that is half of the battle.

Share this post


Link to post

At the moment, I get irritated flying X-plane after about five minutes. I just don't like the flight modeling too much! But it does have interesting scenery with it's global disks. I'm especially interested in mountain topography. So. if Austin could bag his "blade element theory", and go with MSFS's "look up tables",I could get hooked! :( L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
At the moment, I get irritated flying X-plane after about five minutes. I just don't like the flight modeling too much!
What I don't understand is why you repeat that over and over and over in every single thread where X-Plane is, sometimes even barely, mentioned.I can understand that, when someone claims alleged superiority of its flight model, you feel the need to reply. But in this thread no one ever mentioned its FMIt's like every time one would mention MSFS, I'd go like "It's so stuttering" and "I can't stand its texture blurring" and "95% of aircrafts have not smooth gauges".I don't do that here, nor on the X-Plane forums!Marco

Share this post


Link to post
What I don't understand is why you repeat that over and over and over in every single thread where X-Plane is, sometimes even barely, mentioned.I can understand that, when someone claims alleged superiority of its flight model, you feel the need to reply. But in this thread no one ever mentioned its FMIt's like every time one would mention MSFS, I'd go like "It's so stuttering" and "I can't stand its texture blurring" and "95% of aircrafts have not smooth gauges".I don't do that here, nor on the X-Plane forums!Marco
You are correct. I should have stated it differently.The orgininal poster said: From what I've seen, all you need is detailed cities,airports and a few more little extras and you have MS beat for good! I should have said:I disagree. Besides detailed cities,airports and a few more little extras .................he'll need to revamp the flight modeling!L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post

The superior Blade Element Theory... It might be superior indeed - in theory. Modern real aircraft (and cars for example) are designed and tested by super computers. The accuracy of the FS model, the environment simulation and the processing power of an average home PC just don't cut the cake (yet?).Please correct me if i am wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
What I don't understand is why you repeat that over and over and over in every single thread where X-Plane is, sometimes even barely, mentioned.
IMHO He doesn't like Austin and wants to bash X-Plane every chance he gets. :(

Share this post


Link to post
IMHO He doesn't like Austin and wants to bash X-Plane every chance he gets. :(
Thats a bit harsh. I do think there is some validity to Larry's claim but boy sometimes it just sounds like a broken record. Is there anybody left who doesn't know how Larry feels about the X-Plane flight model...

Share this post


Link to post
Thats a bit harsh. I do think there is some validity to Larry's claim but boy sometimes it just sounds like a broken record. Is there anybody left who doesn't know how Larry feels about the X-Plane flight model...
Tongue in cheek.

Share this post


Link to post

Well guys-Larry and I have been around since the beginning of flight simming and the "broken record" we have heard since the beginning is the superiority of xplane's flight models over fs's.I made some posts on xplane org of problems I had with the flight model and was told by one-a) fs fm's are a toy-game in compare and :( that xplane's flight models are superior-there just hasn't been a good one manifested yet because it takes too much work to make one.(paraphrasing).I have never had a problem with one person preferring a flight sim over another-I actually prefer many things in the present xplane over fsx.But if you have noticed, Larry , I, and others have a problem with misinformation. Stuff like fsx is more "gamelike" compared to fs9, "serious simmers don't like fsx", "fsx is for animal chasers" ,and the "flight models of xplane are superior to fsx's" all meet that criteria.So I wouldn't shoot the messenger but the message. I don't personally care if a fm is derived from pi meson laser nuclear reactive googly permutations.I do care if it reacts and flies like a real plane. Some "myths" need to be pointed out-especially when repeated like a mantra.

Share this post


Link to post
"fsx is for animal chasers" ,
Nope you need X-plane for that :(. Especialy in the early 8.6 times. Chase the birds, hit them and crash. Now 9.3 apperently adds moose on the runway. After my experience with birdstrikes there is no way I going to hit those deer.I think part of the problem is that Avsim forum users are FS centric (and there is nothing wrong with that!). We could benefit if the current X-Plane and Flightgear forums get a more prominent place so the FS part of us doesn't get offended when we discus the good points of one sim versus the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Nope you need X-plane for that :(. Especialy in the early 8.6 times. Chase the birds, hit them and crash. Now 9.3 apperently adds moose on the runway. After my experience with birdstrikes there is no way I going to hit those deer.I think part of the problem is that Avsim forum users are FS centric (and there is nothing wrong with that!). We could benefit if the current X-Plane and Flightgear forums get a more prominent place so the FS part of us doesn't get offended when we discus the good points of one sim versus the other.
I think Deer-added-at least what I have seen....Here is a shot on my iphone ( a little hard to see) of me taking off two days ago from kjxn-7-8 deer just off the runway.Here is a shot of xplane taking off the same airport that I tried that night and guess what-deer off the runway-put a big smile on my face!As for birds-bring them on-a problem with practically every one of my flights. I saw a 310 almost crash this summer due to hitting them on flare-sending bodies flying everywhere including near me waiting to takeoff. The US air in the Hudson kinda showed that too-what were the stats? 54,000 bird strikes reported in the last 5 years?But I agree-especially in these times-support for all flight sims is a good route. I have a feeling the forums may get more active.Real deer (on iphone-too bad I didn't have a real camera-they were quite close...)Xplane:

Share this post


Link to post
Well guys-Larry and I have been around since the beginning of flight simming and the "broken record" we have heard since the beginning is the superiority of xplane's flight models over fs's.I made some posts on xplane org of problems I had with the flight model and was told by one-a) fs fm's are a toy-game in compare and :( that xplane's flight models are superior-there just hasn't been a good one manifested yet because it takes too much work to make one.(paraphrasing).I have never had a problem with one person preferring a flight sim over another-I actually prefer many things in the present xplane over fsx.But if you have noticed, Larry , I, and others have a problem with misinformation. Stuff like fsx is more "gamelike" compared to fs9, "serious simmers don't like fsx", "fsx is for animal chasers" ,and the "flight models of xplane are superior to fsx's" all meet that criteria.So I wouldn't shoot the messenger but the message. I don't personally care if a fm is derived from pi meson laser nuclear reactive googly permutations.I do care if it reacts and flies like a real plane. Some "myths" need to be pointed out-especially when repeated like a mantra.
Truer words could not be spoken! :( And that's exactly it. I heard about the supposeable superiority of X-Plane's flight dynamics for years; yet I could never find it after repeatedly using the demo's, and I coined the phrase of "blade element theory superiority" as a "myth", years ago. Like Geoff A., we both dumped FS98 in favor of Pro-Pilot, because it came up with a better flight model for that time period. I'd have no problem at all jumping to X-Plane if I could just really enjoy the flight aspect. With Pro-Pilot one evening, I was doing simple turns around a point over the "synthetic" San Francisco area.................and thought WOW, that seemed almost real! The sim just had a good sense of dampening as I rolled the wings. X-Plane still reminds me of a vacuum, and I can't really explain it. Quite frankly, FS98 was about the same. You pulled the yoke back, and the nose went up; but no sensation of moving through air. So, as it stands; I don't get many sensations of "feel" with X-Plane. The X-Plane flight model isn't as good as some 3rd party models for MSFS in regards to what a plane should do, when you move the controls a specific way. The only time X-Plane is better than MSFS is reaction to tail surfaces on the ground roll. However, earlier versions of MSFS & Microsft's Combat 1 & 2 had superior ground roll effects, to that of X-Plane.Actually, there is one more thing that X-Plane can do somewhat better. And that is stopping at level after a fast roll. X-Plane seems to have no "inertia", and MSFS has a bit too much in doing a 360 degree roll. In a real airplane, your moving the flight surfaces against the air stream. It's rather easy to just stop the roll on a dime............so to speak. With MSFS you have to time it, and slow the rate of roll ahead of time. With X-Plane, you simply release the stick, and the roll will stop right there!Inertia is a tricky subject though. I use to play with it in Cessna's when I was beta testing. In a typical high wing Cessna, you can quickly roll the yoke to the left and release. The plane banks to the left, then quickly rolls back towards neutral and beyond to the right for a split second, and then level. That.........is "inertia". With my low wing RV, I'll roll to the left with the stick, release, and it just sit's there in a bank for a bit of time. It doesn't have as positive stability as the Cessna does, and reacts more like an aerobatic aircraft. Actually it is semi aerobatic and is rated as such. The lesson here, is that all airplanes certainly don't act the same. When you apply flaps in a high wing Cessna, the nose pitches up (ballooning ) and you push slightly forward on the yoke to compensate. With my RV, the nose pitches down, but you don't do any compensating. The X-Plane Cessnas and RV's both balloon up & require forward yoke/stick to prevent climbing. The X-Plane Cessna stays banked like my RV in a roll and release. These examples are just a few of what I'm talking about in regards to flight dynamics.L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post

Help Larry! I'm rapidly going over and becoming a convert.After working several days (still only 85% there) I have a nearly fully working rendition of my aircraft. Never been able to do that with fs....a real stormscope, a nexrad xm like setup, a fully working autopilot that works like my century IV-on and on. I got a pretty good looking panel in fs-but it didn't have this functionality-I am delighted. That is what I use a sim for-and I've never had this close to my real plane except when Reality Xp helped me with my Debonair for fs2002/04.Then there are little things you start to notice. Today I went to the outside view and noticed the rudder was blowing back and forth in the wind-better step on the rudder pedals. I took off in rain and lightening (all showing up on my stormscope, and 496)-started climbing in very realistic looking rain. At couple thousand feet higher- what the hay-it started turning to snow! My airspeed started dropping (I haven't added deice yet)-I looked out and-I was picking up ice.. The feel of loss of lift, performance etc. was extremely real-scary actually! (My instruments are not fully calibrated yet-so don't mind the readings).Luckily my family in the backseat was blissfully unaware as I began stalling and looking for a place to land-is that ice on the window next to my son?! :-lol ( I am a sucker for the 2d views in a 3d cockpit-wish they hadn't gotten rid of them in fsx.If I can just tone down the twitchy's in the fm between the cool effects, better scenery, better water, and ultra smooth flight and instruments among others I may just be the next convert. The fm (or making a plane fly right by it) is the only thing standing in my way right now! Like fine wine or beer the beauty starts coming out after many hours! I have to say I am very presently surprised with the new version (beta).

Share this post


Link to post
Help Larry! I'm rapidly going over and becoming a convert.
You'll make a fine ambassador! :( L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
You'll make a fine ambassador! :( L.Adamson
Not sure either of us would... :( . If I can't get the pesky fm under control at some point all bets are off.

Share this post


Link to post
If I can't get the pesky fm under control at some point all bets are off.
Well....... good luck.Just today, on our experimental aviation forum; a potential builder (non-pilot) asked about flight simulation. One reply was---- forget Microsoft as they laid everyone in the flight sim department off and closed the studio. Get X-Plane because it uses real world physics, and will accurately simulate the way your airplane is supposed to fly....All I know, is that my RV doesn't fly like the X-Plane version does.L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Actually, there is one more thing that X-Plane can do somewhat better. And that is stopping at level after a fast roll. X-Plane seems to have no "inertia", and MSFS has a bit too much in doing a 360 degree roll. In a real airplane, your moving the flight surfaces against the air stream. It's rather easy to just stop the roll on a dime............so to speak. With MSFS you have to time it, and slow the rate of roll ahead of time.
Just remember this is one thing you can easily correct in MSFS by adjusting the MOI values in the weight_and_balance section of the aircraft.cfg. From GA to heavy jets it's fairly easy to get the inertia "just right". Any changes to axis response by adjusting the MOI values can be changed by minor adjustments to the sensitivity values in the flight_tuning section. That's one of the greatest features I enjoy about the MSFS flight model, it's very easy to get the feel to match up to real life regardless of aircraft type. Regards,John

Share this post


Link to post
Just remember this is one thing you can easily correct in MSFS by adjusting the MOI values in the weight_and_balance section of the aircraft.cfg. From GA to heavy jets it's fairly easy to get the inertia "just right". Any changes to axis response by adjusting the MOI values can be changed by minor adjustments to the sensitivity values in the flight_tuning section. That's one of the greatest features I enjoy about the MSFS flight model, it's very easy to get the feel to match up to real life regardless of aircraft type. Regards,John
It is interesting the differences between the two sims. In my case, my goal is always to duplicate my aircraft panel so I can use a sim for valuable practice.I was able to do a fairly good rendition in fs-with an add on program of course-fspanel studio. However, as a "layman" I was not able to create some important custom instruments I needed-such as a stormscope, Century IV autopilot, and a basic dual manifold/rpm gauge among others. So the panel was more "eye candy" than fuction-though it served my needs.With xplane with no add on-I have been able to do duplicate all the important instruments and I may be going for near 100% functionality-both looks and reality of usage. The ease of customizing instruments is very easy and do able. I am now not at the mercy of simming with a semi real cockpit or waiting for a 3rd party developer to do it (which in my case has never happened-there still is no B55 Baron for fs-freeware or payware!).As for tuning the flight model- xplane's works differently. I have not got into it yet-but it appears one can place "invisible" structures on the aircraft to tune the xplane flight models-and there are an overwhelming number of parameters to tune in the basic plane maker.So far I find ground handling, general straight and level more believable in xplane. What needs to be dampened or tuned is an over reaction and lack of momentum to aileron, pitch, and rudder inputs. The icing I experienced last night in xplane was not only more believable in visuals (ice on windows etc.) but the performance dropoff and reactions was very good and actually scary as I started to approach a stall/wing drop with a big ice accumulation. It duplicated pretty well what I have experienced and beyond with ice-certainly more complex than fs's frozen pitot tube and basic simulation of the aerodynamic effects.Add smooth instruments and there is huge potential here.So the question might be-is the xplane fm able to be tuned to perfection? Are the fewer xplane users/developers vs. the massive fs users/developers the reason we have not seen many/any good handling aircraft or is there a flaw in the fm that will always create a barrier? Are the greater complexities of the variables so complex in xplane that one must be a nasa scientist to get something good?If greater numbers start migrating to xplane we may have an answer soon. In the meantime I am going to be looking-cause there are some new realities in this sim that are tugging me like a magnet.

Share this post


Link to post
Today I went to the outside view and noticed the rudder was blowing back and forth in the wind-better step on the rudder pedals.
I think I can explain that. I presume you're using the payware Baron for X-Plane. Some authors add artificial stability to their aircrafts in Plane-Maker to make the flight model more stable. The payware Baron uses this trick, so the blowing rudder was actually due to the artificial stability in action. :)Infact, if you go in the failure screen and fail the "ART STAB", the rudder should stop moving (and the flight dynamics should actually change a bit as well).Marco

Share this post


Link to post
I think I can explain that. I presume you're using the payware Baron for X-Plane. Some authors add artificial stability to their aircrafts in Plane-Maker to make the flight model more stable. The payware Baron uses this trick, so the blowing rudder was actually due to the artificial stability in action. :)Infact, if you go in the failure screen and fail the "ART STAB", the rudder should stop moving (and the flight dynamics should actually change a bit as well).Marco
I am using the payware Baron-but it is anything but stable!Too bad about the rudder-I thought it was one of those nice little touches you find with time.Right now-about the only way I can handle the Baron is on autopilot. It is way too touchy like an aerobatic plane, has none of the real heaviness on controls. The controls also don't reduce input at slow speeds but still react as if you were in cruise-so therefore I have gotten the plane near/on the runway but it isn't pretty. One second of looking at a radio and it is in a 60 degree bank.I'll be looking into this next after I finish my panel-but the default Fs Baron is lightyears closer to a real Baron than xplane's. Like fsimp-maybe a translation program to convert fs fm's to xplanes! :-lol

Share this post


Link to post