I will do that.....thanks for your quick response and advise GoranM

It's not about vigorous healthy debate. That is welcome on any forum.You know exactly what I'm talking about.... but I didn't expect anything different from you guys anyway.It's a top down issue over hear at AVSIMCraig

Not true .. if you guys wanted "vigorous" debate .. we would have talked about the content in Mike's review. Instead, the discussion has been about everything but his content (how many reviews have you done?, you cant have that opinion yet? He must be trolling).In a vigorous debate .. we would have talked about the elements of the XP10 that he liked and didnt like.... that would have been fruitful.Aside: now you guys are attacking the admins

Might be best to send Laminar your log.txt file. X Plane writes a new one every time the sim starts. It will outline why it stops at that particular point. You can find it in the root x plane folder.

You're welcome

I like Tierborns suggestion to have another look at Mikes statements. It seems I opened too many quote-Tags, so I need to split the post into two parts. Please leave a short answer to this, or I can not post the follow-up. thxAnswers and questions to Mike (1)

Night Lighting - XP10 has the best night lighting I've seen period.

absolutely! and even without the new HDE option, too!

Day Lighting - Overall world illumination is a bit too dark and dull.

Correct the gamma setting to your own liking as advised in the manual.

Clouds - Worse than the default FSX clouds but XP clouds are no steroids and morph before your eyes. The clouds look like smoke and are too nebulous. Probably nothing that REX for XP10 cannot fix.

Wich settings did you try in the rendering optiions that draw to this conclusion? Have you tried other settings than default in order to try to get the best out of this new cloud and wheather system?

Plausible World

I also was disappointed with Seattle. Then I moved to a more regional airport and town. oh Boy! there it all really fits. So Seattle might be a matter of having more 3D-Objects representing Mega-City style. So nothing that can't be improved. However, one thing is clear: This sim needs to be set to draw the maximum possible number of objects. Some stuff also will need improvement directly in the Open Street Map data. For example, you can see only a few parking lot's (giving more grey ground in the city). I never was in Seattle, but there HAVE to be a lot's more. But if it's not in the source data, it is not in the Sim.Stuff like this will require a community effort. Directly in OSM (so not only a job to be done by the flight sim community).I very much look forward to see some european cities, because OSM data seems to be alot better there than in the US. For sure, Aerosofts addition of more european style buildings will be really required.

Default KSEA - Nothing special and worthy of improvement by a 3rd party.

When was the last time something default wasn't worth to be improved by a 3rd party? The biggest problem with KSEA at the moment is performance. But Tom Kyler already admitted he will need to make improvements in that regard.

Global scenery textures

Excuse me…… You judge the "Global textures" by reviewing the demo area only. In this case, all critique that was directed against you is more than valid. Personally, I like them. They are an further improvement over version 9 textures, and many people admitted in the past that they were already pretty good for default textures on a global scale.

AI Aircraft

This will be a discussion for a long time, I guess. I think like this: For X-Plane, this is a MAJOR step forward. Also, it is a unique and challenging approach. It COULD be the real gem of the sim in the future with improvemts to come. But sure, we will have to use what's in there now and wait for the surprises that may come with the next incremental updates of X-Plane 10.

I like Tierborns suggestion to have another look at Mikes statements. It seems I opened too many quote-Tags, so I need to split the post into two parts. Please leave a short answer to this, or I can not post the follow-up. thxAnswers and questions to Mike (1)absolutely! and even without the new HDE option, too!Correct the gamma setting to your own liking as advised in the manual.Wich settings did you try in the rendering optiions that draw to this conclusion? Have you tried other settings than default in order to try to get the best out of this new cloud and wheather system?I also was disappointed with Seattle. Then I moved to a more regional airport and town. oh Boy! there it all really fits. So Seattle might be a matter of having more 3D-Objects representing Mega-City style. So nothing that can't be improved. However, one thing is clear: This sim needs to be set to draw the maximum possible number of objects. Some stuff also will need improvement directly in the Open Street Map data. For example, you can see only a few parking lot's (giving more grey ground in the city). I never was in Seattle, but there HAVE to be a lot's more. But if it's not in the source data, it is not in the Sim.Stuff like this will require a community effort. Directly in OSM (so not only a job to be done by the flight sim community).I very much look forward to see some european cities, because OSM data seems to be alot better there than in the US. For sure, Aerosofts addition of more european style buildings will be really required.When was the last time something default wasn't worth to be improved by a 3rd party? The biggest problem with KSEA at the moment is performance. But Tom Kyler already admitted he will need to make improvements in that regard.Excuse me…… You judge the "Global textures" by reviewing the demo area only. In this case, all critique that was directed against you is more than valid. Personally, I like them. They are an further improvement over version 9 textures, and many people admitted in the past that they were already pretty good for default textures on a global scale.This will be a discussion for a long time, I guess. I think like this: For X-Plane, this is a MAJOR step forward. Also, it is a unique and challenging approach. It COULD be the real gem of the sim in the future with improvemts to come. But sure, we will have to use what's in there now and wait for the surprises that may come with the next incremental updates of X-Plane 10.

Awesome response .. now the fruitful debate starts.1) I agree the night lighting alone is worth the ticket for admission.2) I mentioned that the lighting was to dark in comparison pics weeks ago. But, with gamma adjustments you can move the lightening to were it should be.3) It appears that Clouds are gonna be a fps hog. I am sure that optimized textures will make this better.4) I agree plausible works in the countryside .. but no in the cities. This will need to get better.5) KSEA looks great for default airport... again, at night the immersion factor goes up 10X6) Global textures - one thing that is for sure.. XP has the water textures over FSX7) AI aircraft is a downside for me as well ..... if XP10 catches on, its my hope that a 3rd party developer can improve the AI

Well said Woweezowee.This is why a review of a Demo is bad for everyone, you can't judge a piece of a product and compare it as a whole.To me Austin nailed this, it's better than expected.Like any other version of XP, the road ahead will be awesome.Now all I is need is those disks and that new DC-3 that Goran is doing and I'll be a happy camper!

thanks for your initial responses, guys.Answers and questions to Mike (2)

GUI

I already wrote about this in another thread. Starting herehttp://forum.avsim.n...ost__p__2172204with some more answers to this (non-)issue.

Scenery Limitations - Another non-starter is the lack of any detailed airports outside of Seattle.

Personally, I am going to start life with X-Plane 10 with something around 6000 detailed airports. Those are freeware efforts as well as conversion of MSFS sceneries as well as my own efforts. This sim grows. You need to give it time and attention to make of it what you like it to be. It brings all the flexibility you'd want for that. Granted that is not easy for Newbies to make a satisfying start right out of the box if airport building are one of their major wishes. But this situation will improve over time, especially with Aerosoft and hopfully some more scenery developers making their own conversion of their sceneries. And a part of it will stay to be a community effort, like it has always been with X-Plane, but those people will get better tools into their hands very soon.

Flight Dynamics

I could ask if you set your control sensivity to a better setting than stupid linear default setting. But at the end of the days it boils down to this: I did not try the new default planes, but from experience I know that there are very convincing planes available for X-Plane. And many are reported to be "spot on". Personally I am talking about "convincing", because I am not a real world pilot. For me, X-Plane makes a perfect approach technically in convincing me that the quality models I use actually "fly" like they should. The defaut Cessna was never one of them. There are improved versions downloadable at x-plane.org. Even better, get the Carenado C-172. In regards to Tom Kylers planes, who did the MU-2 (read a great review on Avsim applauding the flight dynamics beside visuals, too) and the Falco, I think his new Baron and C90 are great default planes by any standard.

Terrain Mesh

As a matter of fact the data for developing this has been imrpoved. From what I have seen in the demo, this is true.

Performance - Disappointing.

There are varying reports. I struggled to find a good setting with the demo, too. Experience with past X-Plane version tells me that there will be at least one major improvement/optimization made after the initual more serious bugs are ironed out.We'll see. I tend to be on the optimists side.

I think the entire FS community is eager for alternatives to Microsoft and their silly antics and failure to listen to the community

Wich is what Laminar did. So you say you like their approach in that regard and that you think that many msfs-users share this view with you. You WANT an alternative. Right?How much time are you willing to spend on something that you really want?X-plane is flexible. Settings. Plugins (some are absulutely essential for the experience). Scenery. And more.As it is that much flexible, it WILL consume some of your time to get used to it and to find just the right settings and additions to make you really happy.I think X-Planers have NEVER seen such a great base product of "their" sim. And that's what it is: A base that will be build upon for some years to come. Just like with the other sims. Even Fly! makes a comeback these days.So again I ask: How much time are you willing to spend on something that you really want? There are only few things in life that offer immediate satisfaction. Obviously X-Plane is not one of them.

3) It appears that Clouds are gonna be a fps hog. I am sure that optimized textures will make this better.

I am a bit worried about this, too, as well as about the global shadows. But Ben Supnik already posted a hint that he will review and improve:http://www.x-plane.c...-tricks-to-try/@ h2egc:It's the Saab that I am even more looking forward to. ;)

This is why a review of a Demo is bad for everyone, you can't judge a piece of a product and compare it as a whole.

Sure you can. That's the whole point of companies releasing demos, because they want you to judge their product and hopefully buy it. If the XP10 demo doesn't impress right from the start then Laminar is going to lose sales, which is why I think they need to be more clear on their website about the fact that this is really a beta and to do a better job of educating consumers about their way of doing things (frequent updates; considered beta until version x.2 or so; etc.).

They should have had a better plan for communication duties already some weeks ago way before the demo/beta release. They had and have not. I complained about this heavily on another occasion.But now, well. They made this mistake. Hopefully they'll learn from it. I'm over it.

@MM,Let's stop beating a dead horse!If you d/l the Demo, look at the manual it will tell you all you need to know.Also, on XPlane.com the main site, ALL the information about updates and such have always been listed.I know they changed the site for this release, but I'm sure it will be back to normal in a very short time.I do agree that they should not have changed the site the way they did, not enough info for new users.

Careful Craig. The sensitive ones will think you're getting hostile.

Yes I think Craig is hostile and you Goran have been on the edge. If you don't like the way we do things on avsim I'd suggest going elsewhere or I'll be glad to show you the door if that is what you both wish.

Here we go!It's always FSX vs XP, even with the moderators.I didn't see anything really offending here, so why the threats to boot someone.

Yes I think Craig is hostile and you Goran have been on the edge. If you don't like the way we do things on avsim I'd suggest going elsewhere or I'll be glad to show you the door if that is what you both wish.

It was tongue in cheek, Geof. Nothing more, nothing less.

I'll spell it out once again -personal attacks are not done here at avsim. Calling people babies, not grown men, and references to pms are personal attacks. Debating and discussing flight sims in a respectfal way are not.I hope this is comprehended .