XP 10 Landscapes

[Janov 2,383]

I think everyone needs to realize that the ongoing debate between X-Plane and MSFS is really not only driven by objective "quality" - but more and more by rock solid economical interests.Think hard: What is a person who is making money selling add-ons for one platform really going to say about the "other" platform? "Wow, that looks great, I encourage everyone to go and buy that other product - I will just burn all the copies of my add-on in my fireplace, that´ll also keep me warm in the winter!" Not likely.Same for the users. They are "chained" to one product by all the money they have spent on it´s add-ons. They don´t want their favourite developers to "also develop" or "entirely switch" to the "other" product. They want them to focus all their energy on keeping making add-ons for the one flight-simulator they are using.Also the question has cropped up why there is little news about X-Plane on the avsim front page. Just let your eyes drift a bit to the edges of the screen when viewing that front page. What do you see? Commercials. For what? Think hard again. This goes both ways, off course. Don´t expect ANY frontline news about the impending release of "FLIGHT" on the .org front page. As a matter of fact, avsim has reported about XP10, already.So I encourage everyone to read between the lines when someone slams MSFS or X-Plane. Very often they are affiliated with one product or the other, and really don´t want the other one to prosper, better or not. And all the talk of "I have both installed" or "I have tried...., didn´t like it" don´t really mean that someone is absolutely neutral about those flight-simulation products.I am absolutely not surprised that pretty much EVERY thread turns into "X is better than Y" thread.Jan

[rojantrojan 17]

Also the question has cropped up why there is little news about X-Plane on the avsim front page. Just let your eyes drift a bit to the edges of the screen when viewing that front page. What do you see? Commercials. For what? Think hard again. This goes both ways, off course. Don´t expect ANY frontline news about the impending release of "FLIGHT" on the .org front page. As a matter of fact, avsim has reported about XP10, already.Jan

I agree at least Avsim has shown some news I was suprised to see absolutely nothing about X-plane 10 on the .org front page. Strange.

[Janov 2,383]

I agree at least Avsim has shown some news I was suprised to see absolutely nothing about X-plane 10 on the .org front page. Strange.

And even stranger - XP10 is basically not discussed on the .org forums, either. No screenshots posted, no videos... Almost like everyone is trying to be really cool about it. Unless I failed to find the correct subforum - which is entirely possible .Jan

[JSkorna 138]

Jim, I thinkI see your not a big ###### of XP 9 or 10. Jim maybe you should hangout in the flight forum since you think XP looks so horrifically fake... Or better yet maybe you can program your own Flight Simulator ! Let us know when you have something remotely plausible !

Maybe you can ignore my posts. I have my opinions about both. I tried XP9 and didn't like certain things and removed it. I have always kept an open mind about XP10 until I see it run on my system. Until then I have my opinions from the screen shots.

[airlinejets 709]

Maybe you can ignore my posts. I have my opinions about both. I tried XP9 and didn't like certain things and removed it. I have always kept an open mind about XP10 until I see it run on my system. Until then I have my opinions from the screen shots.

Peeing on a competitor's parade is not very cool or ethical. Janov is right about the agenda some commercial members have when they troll these particular forums. I would think they would have better things to do or at least business to take care of. On the other hand, discrediting competitors is a way of doing business maybe?

[FloB 34]

Yes, I usually fly with quite high settings. Though, you can't compare it all to XP9 because there are quite some new ones. Like the shadow settings (in those shots they were at MAX). Or the atmospheric rendering (of course on ... I will never again fly without it - it makes THE difference!). Screen res was at 1920, textures at extreme res, and max trees. And for AA ... well, this will be a bit harder to compare. With the atmospheric rendering, which uses deferred rendering (its common with many modern games), you can't use the normal AA modes, but only some post processing modes. In all the shots I used the FXAA version, which makes kind of a "smoothing of edges" (you can google for it). Its effect is quite good and it is not too ressource hungry. Otherwise you could only use (well at least that in at the moment). 4x SSAA (super sampling anti aliasing), but which would mean that XP10 would need to render the scene in double the resolution (4 times the pixel count) ... which might kill performance a lot (so I usually don't touch that).But with all these settings you get a quite good performance outside cities (with their gazillions of 3D objects and roads). With my GeForce 570 GTX + Core i7-2600K I come around 40-50 FPS (without big stuttering). Though in big cities this can drop to 20, but there, usually reducing the shadow distance helps ...Disclaimer: all these numbers are not official, and should only be taken as a "hint" what to expect (you can see them in the top left of the screenshots under FREQ). They can easily change at any point of the further development process as there are always things that change (or will be optimized etc.).

Hi alpilotx,from the statements made by xp-developers I assume that it should benefit markable from Intel´s Hyper-Threading. Especially with ground-traffic and AI traffic enabled. Could you run a short test regarding this or is your xp10 version limited/ without traffic? Just a rough estimation would be enough... Would probably be intersting for people who consider upgrading theirs pc´s for xp10 (not me, I´m done with it;).Thanks

[PebbleBeach 124]

Xplane images appear to dark if the comparison is the same time of day.......

Yes,and much more real looking.

Peeing on a competitor's parade is not very cool or ethical. Janov is right about the agenda some commercial members have when they troll these particular forums. I would think they would have better things to do or at least business to take care of. On the other hand, discrediting competitors is a way of doing business maybe?

Amen to that!

[Tierborn 203]

Yes,and much more real looking.Amen to that!

Not if those images are from the same time of day .....

[Guest chris k]

post removed

[Guest chris k]

post removed.

[JSkorna 138]

Hi Chris,You'll also notice that in that fine shot you posted, there are NO roads in the XP shot. Nice try and thanks for playing!Yes, we are aware of the limitations of placing textures on the sides of mesh.

[Guest chris k]

post removed.

[strider1 586]

post removed.

Where is the post ??

[JSkorna 138]

In his head. He knew I was right and had nothing intelligent to add.

[PebbleBeach 124]

That first picture comparison........ The FSX picture. What in the world is that small white block towards the bottom right section of the image? Is that one of the high detailed airports Maddog has been telling us about that shipped with stock FSX?