>>The very worst thing Laminar can do right now is push this out of the door in its present state, Microsoft will look at it then match or exceed every feature before releasing Flight!.<<And duplicate it using DirectX? LOL

HelloThe world in XP-10 does not look all that realistic, the citys are just flat out weird with all that green.I suppose if you want to play dodge the pylons in the middle of the freeways it might be fun for a while.It looks what it is, a good attempt from a small company and no doubt it will sell a few copies.As you seem to know so much about DX11 vs OGL, why would Microsoft struggle to match XP10?DX11 seems quite capable from what I have seen so far.

DX11 seems quite capable from what I have seen so far.

What simulator created by Microsoft runs on DX11? Oh thats right.

The world in XP-10 does not look all that realisticc, the citys are just flat out weird with all that green.

Perhaps not real, but it does look plausible. If you watch Austin's recent X-Plane presentation, he repeatedly said that the goal for X-Plane was not to create a real world but a plausible one, and from what I can see, they've succeeded -- keeping in mind that most of the videos floating around at the moment are with low rendering options. Crank up the settings and those green patches you're complaining about will be filled in with buildings.

I suppose if you want to play dodge the pylons in the middle of the freeways it might be fun for a while.

Or if you want to fly in an urban area and see a plausible cityscape below you.

It looks what it is, a good attempt from a small company and no doubt it will sell a few copies.

O.K., now you're just trolling.

HelloThe world in XP-10 does not look all that realistic, the citys are just flat out weird with all that green.I suppose if you want to play dodge the pylons in the middle of the freeways it might be fun for a while.It looks what it is, a good attempt from a small company and no doubt it will sell a few copies.As you seem to know so much about DX11 vs OGL, why would Microsoft struggle to match XP10?DX11 seems quite capable from what I have seen so far.

What are you smoking or drinking ?

The same thing you are.Now, back on the subject at hand: will Santa Monica airport look like Santa Monica does in real life or will it just be an empty field with some runways and taxiways laid down?

What are you smoking or drinking ?

HelloYou Xplane guys are very defensive, why is that.I am giving my opinions as to where I feel Xplane10 is going in the wrong direction.I do not want a "plausable world" I want a realistic one, which is what I have now in FSX.I mostly fly in the UK, I have full photo scenery at high resolution, just about every major airport in full detailHundreds of VFR fields created as they are in reality, Airports full of Ai, good third party ATC, a better weather system than anything in XPlane.Xplane has almost none of this.20 Ai, 1 major airport not fully modeled, it needs to get better than this.The problem you guys have with Xplanes direction , is it is Austins way or no way.You are never going to have the machine to run dozens of Ai being controlled by full ATC with the direction Austin is taking XP10.Now tell me why I would switch platforms.

Here's an early beta of Santa Monica Airport in X Plane 10. Looks REAL impressive if you ask me.I just wish someone would make my local airport in FSX look at least slightly real. For now, it's just a runway with NO taxiways and no buildings and a bunch of colors on the ground.I guess my point is, there will be airports in both simulators that don't look like the real thing. I'm sure you can understand, Jim, the kind of manpower it would take to create every single airport with the detail you're asking. It's completely unreasonable to expect it to happen.

The same thing you are.Now, back on the subject at hand: will Santa Monica airport look like Santa Monica does in real life or will it just be an empty field with some runways and taxiways laid down?

Hello JimNo but it needs nothing else, why bother with terminals and parking when there are only 20 Ai aircraft in the XP10 universe.The chances of one of them landing at Santa Monica is slim at best.

Here's an early beta of Santa Monica Airport in X Plane 10.Looks REAL impressive if you ask me.I just wish someone would make my local airport in FSX look at least slightly real. For now, it's just a runway with NO taxiways and no buildings and a bunch of colors on the ground.I guess my point is, there will be airports in both simulators that don't look like the real thing. I'm sure you can understand, Jim, the kind of manpower it would take to create every single airport with the detail you're asking. It's completely unreasonable to expect it to happen.

Every airport wasn't his intent .. more than one detailed was!

Hello JimNo but it needs nothing else, why bother with terminals and parking when there are only 20 Ai aircraft in the XP10 universe.The chances of one of them landing at Santa Monica is slim at best.

You need to read up on X-Plane. Those 20 aircraft will inhabit your immediate vicinity (when an airplane gets a certain distance away, it's removed from the game world, and a new one is spawned to enter your airspace), so when you arrive at an airport, you're certain to have some traffic to contend with.

HelloYou Xplane guys are very defensive, why is that.I am giving my opinions as to where I feel Xplane10 is going in the wrong direction.I do not want a "plausable world" I want a realistic one, which is what I have now in FSX.I mostly fly in the UK, I have full photo scenery at high resolution, just about every major airport in full detailHundreds of VFR fields created as they are in reality, Airports full of Ai, good third party ATC, a better weather system than anything in XPlane.Xplane has almost none of this.20 Ai, 1 major airport not fully modeled, it needs to get better than this.The problem you guys have with Xplanes direction , is it is Austins way or no way.You are never going to have the machine to run dozens of Ai being controlled by full ATC with the direction Austin is taking XP10.Now tell me why I would switch platforms.

MD, your following post explains why some of us may appear defensive. Coz a number of forum members are clearly onthe offensive.There's some great uk photo scenery for sale right now for xplane, 125 for entire uk.But then again, Orbx have just announced they're doing UK sceneries, so you'll be happy! End of next yr though. Another nail in the ms flight coffin Your last question? It's not really worth the effort to answer. Like all products, you'll weigh up the costs/benefits and make your own decision.

HelloYou Xplane guys are very defensive, why is that.I am giving my opinions as to where I feel Xplane10 is going in the wrong direction.I do not want a "plausable world" I want a realistic one, which is what I have now in FSX.I mostly fly in the UK, I have full photo scenery at high resolution, just about every major airport in full detailHundreds of VFR fields created as they are in reality, Airports full of Ai, good third party ATC, a better weather system than anything in XPlane.Xplane has almost none of this.20 Ai, 1 major airport not fully modeled, it needs to get better than this.The problem you guys have with Xplanes direction , is it is Austins way or no way.You are never going to have the machine to run dozens of Ai being controlled by full ATC with the direction Austin is taking XP10.Now tell me why I would switch platforms.

MD, let's make a hypothetical. Let's say I go to the Flight or FSX forums and start criticizing them. But not the obvious things. Let's say I criticize the lack of autogen. Or the lack of shadows from the cars (not that there are any cars in either FSX or Flight), saying the color looks a smidgen off. Let's be honest, I would be ripped apart. Yet the "competition" feels like they can come in here and start tearing apart something which has, let's be honest, never been done before. Don't add autogen that looks like this, its "oh, x plane doesn't have realistic autogen.". Add the autogen with this much detail, it's "That's TOO much detail. My dual core CPU and 256MB video card won't run it so I won't be getting it."A blind man can see that X Plane can't win the die hard MSFS user. I've read posts where "Austin shouldn't be doing this..." and "Austin didn't market this very well...". Amazing how many back seat flight sim developers and promoters there are. Austin has been doing this, successfully since 1992. MSFS has been doing it 10 years longer. Yet both FSX and X Plane are BOTH up to version 10. The more powerful company with 283 developers has a 10 year head start on the single developer and they are BOTH up to V10. Not to mention that Microsoft canned ACES one time already. X Plane has been getting better with each version. If you look around the forums in the community, what looks like the majority of people actually prefer FS9 over FSX. How can a flight sim go backwards in its development??It's fine to have opinions, but if you search through these forums, we have X Plane users in an X Plane forum giving their opinions on which core flight model is better, more efficient, whatever you want to call it. Then we have FSX enthusiasts coming in to this X Plane forum telling us that we are wrong in our opinions, often times nearly being abused for having these opinions. But you are allowed to have a negative opinion on X Plane without copping a bit of flack for it? Double standards, bro. You have a "realistic" world in FSX because of your payware. Not because it was all default scenery. People need to stop expecting 1mm terrain data for the entire planet with scenery that is IDENTICAL to the real world. It just ain't gonna happen. You're talking about data that is incomprehensible. Airports full of AI. Some people like AI. Some people don't. I stopped using AI about a month after I got FS9...8 years ago. I'm a Vatsimmer. FS9 and FSX AI is crap. Airlines? What airlines? The fictional ones that microsoft threw in there? Or the ones that came with Ultimate Traffic (A 3rd party add on). Many people would love X Plane to have AI...and now it finally will. It was definitely a long time coming.ATC...you stated good THIRD party ATC. Why 3rd party ATC? You don't like the default ATC? The weather system is debatable. X Planes weather was directly compared to FSX's weather in an edition of PC Pilot and was found to be much more realistic than FSX. Your last statement..."It's Austins way or no way" is just nonsense.Austin has been listening to the X Plane community for years. He adds things that are suggested to him. He always listens to feedback and implements where it's necessary. I know of a small handful of developers for x plane that have spent a great deal of time to get certain aspects of x plane correct. Me included.When was the last time Microsoft or ACES took any feedback from the general FSX community? I think it's safe to say you would be lucky to even get a reply telling you to leave them alone. At least that would be more respectful than totally ignoring you.

You need to read up on X-Plane.  Those 20 aircraft will inhabit your immediate vicinity (when an airplane gets a certain distance away, it's removed from the game world, and a new one is spawned to enter your airspace), so when you arrive at an airport, you're certain to have some traffic to contend with.

HelloSo how does ATC interact with enroute Ai traffic ?Recently I flew (virtualy) from EGGW (Luton) to EDDG (munster Germany), there were over 30 Ai aircraft at Luton, in the london area alone there were over 50 Ai airborn and loads of Ai flying the airways across Europe as I flew.How will XP10 simulate this environment ?

You need to read up on X-Plane. Those 20 aircraft will inhabit your immediate vicinity (when an airplane gets a certain distance away, it's removed from the game world, and a new one is spawned to enter your airspace), so when you arrive at an airport, you're certain to have some traffic to contend with.

That's my biggest complaint about the XP AI system, they are there because you are there, not because they're suppose to be there.

HelloYou Xplane guys are very defensive, why is that.I am giving my opinions as to where I feel Xplane10 is going in the wrong direction.I do not want a "plausable world" I want a realistic one, which is what I have now in FSX.I mostly fly in the UK, I have full photo scenery at high resolution, just about every major airport in full detailHundreds of VFR fields created as they are in reality, Airports full of Ai, good third party ATC, a better weather system than anything in XPlane.Xplane has almost none of this.20 Ai, 1 major airport not fully modeled, it needs to get better than this.The problem you guys have with Xplanes direction , is it is Austins way or no way.You are never going to have the machine to run dozens of Ai being controlled by full ATC with the direction Austin is taking XP10.Now tell me why I would switch platforms.

Your right, I will tell Austin to call it all off and start from scratch since you don't approve ;) Like you assesment counts since your less then one percent.I think your just trolling.What are you commercial vendor of ?