As the title states

Great improvement but still have a long way to go. I think Prepare 3D has a brighter future.Aaron G.

I think Prepare 3D has a brighter future.Aaron G.

not in it's current price, it doesn't have a brighter future among the private section.if prices would change , then yes, it could be a good choice.

not in it's current price, it doesn't have a brighter future among the private section.if prices would change , then yes, it could be a good choice.

And Lockheed is considering a pricing scheme for us flight sim geeks.

[sarcasm][command make topic= true`/`NGXpilot=false>{make comment< . ~ unable<//[Error report~1]>System unable to comment/~NGX file not found./[%^~`]

For me its not quite 'there' yet. Its scenery looks amazing but the graphic models of aircraft arent really to my liking. However I must admit I have not yet flown X-Plane 10 yet - just been looking at the pictures If X-Plane 10 was to grow into a stable base sim with lots of great developer support though I could certainly see myself making the move in the future.

I don't mind the visual models being weaker if the program logic was capable of accommodating PMDG 737 / A2A type of aircraft system modelling.There has been some promising attempts at advanced aircarft in Xplane - like this WIP for XPlane 9:

The Xplane developers seem to take Flight Simulation seriously and are probably keen to win over FSX users. So let's hope X-plane 10 offers something competitive!The problem with the FSX/Prepar3D engine is that these systems are only 32-bit which means maximum of 4GB memory is supported, and they don't utilise multiple core processors, so when you take a heavy aircraft like the PMDG 737 near a heavy airport like one of Gary Summons Xtreme series and it becomes a slideshow.I think a lot will depend on what MS Flight turns out to be like - and we'll know about that pretty soon.

I don't mind the visual models being weaker if the program logic was capable of accommodating PMDG 737 / A2A type of aircraft system modelling.There has been some promising attempts at advanced aircarft in Xplane - like this WIP for XPlane 9:

The Xplane developer seems to take Flight Simulation serious and is probably keen to win over FSX users. So let's hope X-plane 10 offers something competitive!The problem with the FSX/Prepar3D engine is that is only 32-bit and doesn't utilise multiple core processors, so you take a heavy aircraft like the PMDG 737 near a heavy airport like one of Gary Summons Xtreme series and it beocmes a slideshow.I think a lot will depend on what MS Flight turns out to be like.

I do believe that somewhere on the Lockheed roadmap they will gradually transition code to 64-bit. As for multi-core support it will take advantage of all 4 cores soon, but they are trying to get as much of the graphical work to be done by the GPU freeing up the CPU for the physics.

I think a lot will depend on what MS Flight turns out to be like.

I agree, if MSF would be a direct successor to FSX, then I believe the MSF would still be the dominantwithin the FS SIM community usage, however if MSF would not be anything like the MS-FSx genre , then I believe the X-Plane 10 would slowlygrow, eventually superseding the MS-FSx user count and being the dominant onePrepar3D, would have a very small cut of the FS users community as it is just to pricey for the "little" added value one gains over the competitors (i.e. X-Plane, MSF).so you might get a bit more realism over X-plane/MSF with Prepar3D, would one pay nearly 10 times more for that? I belive not, or the amount that would pay the extra burdenwould be low numbers.so if you ask me, the main competition would be between X-Plane 10 and MSF.Prepar3D would not really be part of this combat, unless they cut the price downto the level of their competitors.

Another big question with MSF is will it support VATSIM / IVAO?I believe this will largely contribute to the make or break MS for the online flight sim enthusiasts. I, for one, wouldn't touch it if Windows Live was the only online capability it had.

that is one of many other questions what MSF would support and wouldn't support.are there going to be addons API's capabilities (that is far vital question rather it would be a success or failure).if there will be very good API's released for MSF (e.g. SimConnect, etc), then it's only a matter of time until addons would becreated for MSF. IVAO/VATSIM client would only be a matter of time until it would be released as a MSF client.remember, FSX when was released , it toke some time until the SquackBox was released for it's support.I believe the same would be for MSF.if MSF however would be sealed code, it would disappear as quickly as it appeared in the Marked.and it's future would be well determined before it was born.

Hi Gents,It appears that at least one developer is supporting X Plane 10.Aerosoft are looking to adapt FSX sceneries for X Plane as well as some of the Aircraft,such as the Airbus.Some GA developers already support x Plane.

Apparently, PMDG has at least considered XPL10, as in Lelystad they are told to have a version of I think NGX and 747 running in XPL.Whether they consider the porting viable, not viable, or wait for sales information, I do not know.

not impressed with the demo, perhaps will look at the final release but its years behind FSX, FSX completely kills it with its mature addons. I dont hold any real hope for MS Flight either. I downloaded the Xplane 10 demo and removed it very quickly

I dont hold any real hope for MS Flight either. I downloaded the Xplane 10 demo and removed it very quickly

1) I do.2) Same as you.