Where I stand with XP10

[ryanbatc 12,832]

I've been PMing user Goran over the last two days.. he's clarified a few things for me (thanks!)Still I've got some concerns, or, things that will stop me from buying the XP10 game:1) Graphics. I can't for the life of me get a crisp, nicely AA XP10 scene without video artifacts (see the render thread started by Geof). If I use my nvidia profile I don't get artifacts but then I have tons of shimmering. Argh.2) Performance. It's not too shabby, but using the HDR AA really drops frames down to around 15 at KSEA with that King Air's VC. I'm used to FSX (yes you XPers can lol now) so 15 is alright, but I can get more in FSX with Orbx and it looks excellent. Without HDR and if I put up with the video artifacts I can pull about 30 at KBFI, about 22 at KSEA with no clouds.3)Land detail/landclass. Low level flying is great, cars on the highway, really well done. Bravo. Up higher all I see is a bunch of tiled neighborhoods. Doesn't look realistic per google earth. (Not talking about textures only landclass and vector terrain)4)Eye candy on/in addon planes. I realize some of the planes that just came out are amazing for you guys (XPers) but to us FSX guys they are still dated (sorry the truth). Check out some of the newer Carenado stuff for FSX - their textures are incredible. Also PMDG, Sibwings, A2A, Flight1's Mustang and T182, and Aerosoft's Katana 4x are superb textures in their cockpits and externally. I'd love to see those details in XP10.5) Airports... from what I've read even XP10 won't come with "default" buildings on smaller airports. Users will have to add them theirselves. Big bummer for me.Things that make me want to buy XP10:1) Night lighting.. yummy! The light poles along the major highways are good (they actually look like Orbx scenery so there's not much difference from FSX if you happen to own those packs). But the runway environment looks better than FSX, realistic runway lights from a distance.2)Weather and IMC - great for approaches to minimums. I flew IMC up at 3000ft today in the XP10 and I love how when looking at my wings the vis trails off like it does in real life. Sometimes you can't even see your wing tip! This is probably the main reason I'd purchase XP10.So there we are... you'll notice I didn't write anything about flight dynamics. I don't have a ton of real world hours in multiple planes (PPL ASEL Piper Warrior III) but I've flown FSX planes I've flown in real life and they're very close for the feeling of flight. I just don't see why some XP guys constantly bash FSX - it really does a nice job most of the time (addons are the key here). While XP may win the purists over with it's extra realistic flight dynamics (so they say), FSX has excellent graphics and decent flight dynamics. This is the exact reason why I feel I could use BOTH sims. Fly XP10 for IMC practice approaches, and fly FSX for everything else. I also fly on vatsim and I know XP has Xsquawkbox so I'll maybe check that out too.

[Mountain Man 142]

Concerning flight dynamics, X-Plane passes the "if it's hard to control then it's realistic" test.I guess I'm just used to the (unrealistic?) stability of FSX's default aircraft. FSX default 172 is easy to fly hands off, but I find myself having to constantly make minor adjustments when flying X-Plane. Not having ever flown a real plane myself, I really couldn't say which is more authentic.

[GoranM 3,762]

Concerning flight dynamics, X-Plane passes the "if it's hard to control then it's realistic" test.I guess I'm just used to the (unrealistic?) stability of FSX's default aircraft. FSX default 172 is easy to fly hands off, but I find myself having to constantly make minor adjustments when flying X-Plane. Not having ever flown a real plane myself, I really couldn't say which is more authentic.

Just to satisfy your curiosity, take an introductory flying lesson at your local flying club. Might cost about $50 or $60. (If you can afford it). Ask questions.I can safely say that flying straight and level in a single engine GA is a lot of work. Hold level->Adjust pitch to hold the aircraft straight and level->trim the aircraft->wind change->Adjust pitch to hold the aircraft straight and level->trim the aircraft->etc, etc....

[LAdamson 240]

I can safely say that flying straight and level in a single engine GA is a lot of work. Hold level->Adjust pitch to hold the aircraft straight and level->trim the aircraft->wind change->Adjust pitch to hold the aircraft straight and level->trim the aircraft->etc, etc....

The real stuff is still a lot easier.......than sims. With a sim, you're looking at a smaller horizon, and a tendency to want to wander up or down more. And the trims are more touchy. But..........If I'm going a hundred miles or so, the altitude A/P gets engaged.L.Adamson

Concerning flight dynamics, X-Plane passes the "if it's hard to control then it's realistic" test.I guess I'm just used to the (unrealistic?) stability of FSX's default aircraft. FSX default 172 is easy to fly hands off, but I find myself having to constantly make minor adjustments when flying X-Plane. Not having ever flown a real plane myself, I really couldn't say which is more authentic.

It's (FSX 172) actually more realistic than you might think. The 172's do fly rather easy. With X-Plane 9, I've got my settings set where I want. With 10. everything is a bit too touchy again........and needs to be toned down with setting adjustments. Default, isn't what I'd call that real.

[h2egc 31]

As far as being to touchy, go to the "Joystick & Equipment, Null Zone "page and adjust until your happy.Sliders full right should make the plane feel like an FSX plane, then start moving them to the left.

[Alan_A 1,650]

As far as being to touchy, go to the "Joystick & Equipment, Null Zone "page and adjust until your happy.Sliders full right should make the plane feel like an FSX plane, then start moving them to the left.

I've found so far that moving the stability sliders to the right (away from what's "realistic") seems to help. For me at least, null zones need to stay at minimum and response curves need to stay linear or I lose all the fine control available in my joystick.I'm now trying to work with the number of flight models per frame setting (under settings>options and warnings) - upping it from 1 to 3 seems to help - and then I'll try adjusting stability downward against that setting. Still having some problems with the mass-less puppet-on-a-string feel, but it's getting better.Anybody else finding ways to tamp down the touchiness?

[Geofa 108]

I've found so far that moving the stability sliders to the right (away from what's "realistic") seems to help. For me at least, null zones need to stay at minimum and response curves need to stay linear or I lose all the fine control available in my joystick.I'm now trying to work with the number of flight models per frame setting (under settings>options and warnings) - upping it from 1 to 3 seems to help - and then I'll try adjusting stability downward against that setting. Still having some problems with the mass-less puppet-on-a-string feel, but it's getting better.Anybody else finding ways to tamp down the touchiness?

You might want to see my comments in this thread...http://forum.avsim.net/topic/354867-to-all-the-xp-10-haters/page__fromsearch__1

[Alan_A 1,650]

You might want to see my comments in this thread...http://forum.avsim.n...__fromsearch__1

Thanks, Geoff - extremely helpful, as always.Did you find you had to do a lot of work to get your controller sensitivities right? Or did the default settings work for you?

[Geofa 108]

No-I didn't have to do a single thing-just accepted the defaults!

[Alan_A 1,650]

No-I didn't have to do a single thing-just accepted the defaults!

I'm sorry - I'm sure you've mentioned it before, but can you remind me what yoke you use?I'm thinking that either the Thrustmaster Warthog needs special handling (which it might, because of the way the magnetic Hall Effect sensors work) or I'm doing something wrong. Open to either possibility...

[virtualstuff 757]

Just to satisfy your curiosity, take an introductory flying lesson at your local flying club. Might cost about $50 or $60. (If you can afford it). Ask questions.I can safely say that flying straight and level in a single engine GA is a lot of work. Hold level->Adjust pitch to hold the aircraft straight and level->trim the aircraft->wind change->Adjust pitch to hold the aircraft straight and level->trim the aircraft->etc, etc....

Actually in real life that's easy don't make it bigger as it is loland yes the flight model default is off compared to real life ;-)@Ryan first impressions so far...Default models isn't at the same level as FSX default stuff was back then go figure ;-)Modeling and graphics are nice but not at the professional level and techniques used in 2011.Never seen so many washed out colors not realistic as all...Hardware detection approach I don't like it at all.But then again I never been a fan of default stuff but then again that's maybe me.Like the sloped runways and night lightning is nice but weird effects used, (never seen street lights as stars lol)but still better as FSX default lol (someone likes the round brush lol)Curious what possible is in the development framework of XP, but myself not interested to develop at this point in time for several reasons.But still interested in the technology and possibilities.

[Geofa 108]

I'm sorry - I'm sure you've mentioned it before, but can you remind me what yoke you use?I'm thinking that either the Thrustmaster Warthog needs special handling (which it might, because of the way the magnetic Hall Effect sensors work) or I'm doing something wrong. Open to either possibility...

I am using the saitek proflight yoke...

[Alan_A 1,650]

I am using the saitek proflight yoke...

Ah, that makes sense. The Saitek is a very nice controller - I've used it and also the CH Yoke, among several others - but it has a little more "slop" in it than the Warthog does. Same is true of nearly all controllers that use potentiometers as opposed to Hall Effect sensors. The motion tests in the original Sim HQ review of the Warthog show the difference - not against the Saitek yoke but against joysticks based on similar technology. So the Warthog apparently needs some damping in X-Plane.Makes me realize that there's a huge amount of individual variation in controllers, and that too many reviews and user reactions miss this point.

[Mountain Man 142]

As far as being to touchy, go to the "Joystick & Equipment, Null Zone "page and adjust until your happy.

I found one setting that helped out, the lower one with the box where you can define the center point of the joystick. Turns out my joystick has a bit of slop when it returns to center, so I would take my hand off thinking it's in the middle when it was actually reading slightly off-center and causing the plane to roll or pitch. I was driving myself nuts trying to achieve stable flight by tweaking the trims. Now that I've gotten a decent null zone, I no longer feel like I'm fighting with the plane. FSX (or the Windows drivers) must have a generous null zone by default.

[Murmur 3,941]

Modeling and graphics are nice but not at the professional level and techniques used in 2011.Never seen so many washed out colors not realistic as all...

would you define this not realistic at all and not at the professional level used in 2011? lol http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aTpfNnwim4AMarco