From the review:"Most X-Planers are real life pilots that prefer a simulator of aircraft dynamics rather than a flight scenery simulator as FSX is often referred to as being oriented towards. X-Plane has received certification from the FAA for logging hours under specified circumstances. X-Plane has a more realistic flight model than others of its genre. Updates are regularly made freely available. I am using version 9.55rc3 for this review."I don't know exactly why, but it seems that so many of those who write reviews for X-Plane, just have to toss in a bit of MSFS versus the notion of realistic flight dynamics. Quite frankly, I get irrated rather quickly..........whenever I see X-Plane, real pilots, and realistic flight dynamics in the same sentence. Especially when MSFS as a scenery viewer is thrown into the heap!For starters, generalizing that X-Plane has superior flight dynamics, is just that, a generalization. Why do I say that? It's easy, because many X-Planes are pitiful when it comes to flight dynamic realism. And while we can find some rather nice X-Planes, the same can be said for MSFS. Yes..........you heard it right here........MSFS is capable of very well done flight dynamics for a desktop simulation. MSFS is not just a scenery simulator. And quite frankly, as a pilot myself.........I'll be glad when X-Plane becomes even more of a scenery simulator. Afterall, it's scenery that we see, when we look down! As an X-Plane owner, I'm all for the projected version 10, with new scenery enhancements.So, there you have it. A rant from a pilot, X-Plane owner as well as FS9/ & FSX. Just happens I like both scenery and flight dynamics from a sim. It gives purpose. But I don't agree that most X-Planers are pilots. From reading the forums, it's quite evident that many are not. And we can't say as a blanket statement, that X-Plane has a more realistic flight model........just because it's X-Plane. L.Adamson

.... I get irrated rather quickly..........L.Adamson

The above selected quote is about all I learnt from your endless complaintsal

The above selected quote is about all I learnt from your endless complaints

At least they're justified. I'm not complaining about X-Plane. I have versions 8 & 9, as well as several paywares & numerous freebies. My complaint is about the nonsense regarding MSFS. Like I've said for the last six months...........X-Plane needs to stand on it's own. And that means not making un-founded attempts in claiming it's natural superority over what's available for MSFS. The only one that's positive it's superior.......is Austin. It's Austin's marketing strategy, and it seems to work, as he's made millions off of it. If Austin perfected a superior sim over MSFS 15 years ago, then so be it. But MSFS along with 3rd party additions have certainly changed over those many years.And that's my point. There just happens to be quite a few models for FS9/FSX that are very good in the flight dynamics department. And just as with X-Plane, many real life pilots as well as non pilots use a form of MSFX. So we don't need this "marketing strategy" of X-Planes superiority in all these reviews. Two reviews in the last week, have basically said the same thing. If I came on too strong, in the first post, then accept my apology. I was in a hurry, as my wife was telling me I only had a minute before taking her to the doctor. And yes, I was a bit ticked. But that's my personality. Other than that, I'm rather neutral in picking one sim over the other. I have both, and support both. Just understand that "real" pilots like MSFS too.L.Adamson

L.Adamson

Then I can agree that X-Plane does have some "unknownable" characteristics.Personally I prefer FSX, which has more emersion, which is what I think we need. And I have been a real world pilot too. X-Plane can "feel" more like movement, whereas FSX somtimes feels like a sliding ruler stiff movement.But just like in my home studio music creation part of hobbying, which too can be regarded as a simulator: there is nothing like the real thing.

Then I can agree that X-Plane does have some "unknownable" characteristics.Personally I prefer FSX, which has more emersion, which is what I think we need. And I have been a real world pilot too. X-Plane can "feel" more like movement, whereas FSX somtimes feels like a sliding ruler stiff movement.But just like in my home studio music creation part of hobbying, which too can be regarded as a simulator: there is nothing like the real thing.

In any case, it is inappropriate for a review, that is suppose to be unbiased to take an unrelated swipe at a competing product. What does flight models have to do with a environment add on of clouds? It would be ok though, to compare against REX for FSX/FS2004, as they are similar products.

In any case, it is inappropriate for a review, that is suppose to be unbiased to take an unrelated swipe at a competing product. What does flight models have to do with a environment add on of clouds? It would be ok though, to compare against REX for FSX/FS2004, as they are similar products.

I think the reviewer was just trying to give readers who never used X-Plane a short idea of what it is. It was not really part of the review on REX itself.And, with all the nasty negativity towards reviewers lately, especially against some well meaning contributors that wrote extensive reviews, it is a wonder why they still write for an onworthy bunch A lot of negativity lately, I would not bother with writing.

I think the reviewer was just trying to give readers who never used X-Plane a short idea of what it is. It was not really part of the review on REX itself.

Most likely, but it also gives the casual simmer the impression that X-Plane is the sim of choice for real pilots, while MSFS is for those who prefer "eye candy" (scenery).In reality, the percentage of real pilots using desktop flight simulation is rather low. I know this because I ask. At our EAA (Experimental Aircraft Association)meetings, pilot/aircraft forums, and just around the airport. Most of my pilot/aircraft owner friends that I often fly with............don't use desktop simulations.Also in reality, many pilots do in fact use MSFS. And many non-pilots who are interested in aviation use one or the other, or both. As to flight dynamics, it's very controversial. A blanket or generalized statement just can't be used. Although X-Plane is promoted and marketed as having superior flight dynamics, it just isn't the reality of the situation. More than not, it very much depends on the experience of the programmer/designer.....and their willingness to tackle situations that either sim does not handle well.As for the FAA, it's a much older version of X-Plane that's used. And it's in conjunction with an expensive motion based simulator. Both sims are used by various flight schools.And...for eye candy in a sim........ I've got a few X-Plane 3D cockpits that I really like. Perhaps even better than those for FSX. In fact, the default X-Plane 172's 3D cockpit is much better looking than the FSX 172's... IMO. Just a while back, X-Plane 3D cockpits were quite simplistic compared to what was available for MSFS. But that has changed!L.Adamson