Goran I dont know why you keep defending xplane, it's not worth it with some of these people. We all know most serious simmers Rarely fly the default planes, except for some cases.I did an interesting thing today. Flew down west in xp10 to DIAMOND POINT. I have the same scenery in FSX/Orbx, paid $30 for the gorgeous little town.Of course the landing strip and facilities were bare, empty. But the surrounding houses, streets, terrain and coast were just as, if not more, enthralling, ESP with the amazing  clouds. Even better, the real weather made the landings horrendously scary, a wild easterly and low cloud cover.With the new scenery tools, such strips will be populated quickly, and in good fidelity if good artists do it. Ok not as perfect as orbx, but with terrain and skies/weather so good, how much time do u spend staring at robots drunkenly staggering around? I barely landed there in fsx,Here's a shot that a bud took today, those clouds- and when u enter them, hold onto your lunch!

Goran I dont know why you keep defending xplane, it's not worth it with some of these people. We all know most serious simmers Rarely fly the default planes, except for some cases.

I was captain of my high school debating team. Sometimes, I just can't help myself.

I have not tried the Vans so I just loaded it up. No VC was the first thing I noticed then I went external view. So Goran, I know what you mean about comparing apples to apples but can you really find an apple to compare this to? If it was being given away for free no one would download it.

Is it really fair to compare the worst default aircraft in X-Plane with the best payware available for FSX? Talk about stacking the deck in your favor.

If we want to talk about XP10's graphics, how about we use these recently posted screenshots as a starting point:https://picasaweb.google.com/101666907909842492197/XPlane10LandscapesOfTheWorld

So Goran, I know what you mean about comparing apples to apples but can you really find an apple to compare this to? If it was being given away for free no one would download it.

For those who have been involved with xplane a really long time, this makes a bit more sense and to me, in some fashion, it is homage to xplane's roots. Nobody flies those RVs....nobody, BUT....they are part of the history of x-plane's development and for those technically minded people that can appreciate what Austin had done, they are a bit of a reminder and snapshot of x-plane's legacy and also represent a basic example for flight modeling for folks to look at. I don't expect 99% of users to know or care so I am not surprised, nor even defending xplane's RVs...only explaining what I think the thought is. X-Plane still has that side to it of rapidly developing and testing flight models if knowledge and care is put into them and I think that's what these RVs are. Why take them out, they're part of xplane and what xplane can do.....I believe that's what Austin is thinking, but certainly not many more. Just us old timers.Enji...there was another post written recently on expectations just yesterday. Did you read it? If so, you'd know that we really don't care about your expectations as they're unreasonable. You expect (your words) default x-plane to match your FSX+addons? An 80.00 sim to match your (how many dollars worth of sim +addons?) Your default logic is moronic. You need a new logic add-on.

Is it really fair to compare the worst default aircraft in X-Plane with the best payware available for FSX? Talk about stacking the deck in your favor.

MM (sorry i don't know your real name!)You're right its not fair in the slightest to compare payware in one sim to default in the other but there is a factor that I think is sometimes all too often missed here on the forums, and yes I am aware I may be the exception but sometimes i'm not too sure - not everyone that "sims" is aware that there is this HUGE community outside of the box they buy, the link that they click.Sometimes the assumption is made that everyone that has bought Microsoft FS whatever, or X Plane this or that knows that there are massive resources for help/advice/addons (free and payware)/reviews etc.I started simming in 2005 with FS9 (other than having Flight Simulator in the 80's on a ZX81 - jeez we have come a LONG way!!) but it took me 4 YEARS to become aware that this whole "community" exists - Had no idea that AVSIM existed at all (or any other Flight Sim site for that matter) I did not buy ANY payware or even know that freeware existed, and generally struggled to make the damn thing run, leaving and returning to it when I had the patience on a regular basis and I only discovered this "community" completely by accident rather than design.Just a small thought on a chilled Sunday afternoon here, but it may just be that there are many more "regular Joe's" that buy a product and simply expect it to fulfill their needs/expectations right off the bat without spending further on add ons to improve a product that they just purchased than we sometimes assume.RegardsSteve

...not everyone that "sims" is aware that there is this HUGE community outside of the box they buy, the link that they click.

I think Laminar does a pretty good job making new customers aware of the add-on community. Not only do they promote it on the official X-Plane website, but the manual makes specific mention that freeware and payware aircraft and scenery is available on the internet, so if someone is unaware of it then they simply didn't bother to read the documentation that came with the software.

I think Laminar does a pretty good job making new customers aware of the add-on community. Not only do they promote it on the official X-Plane website, but the manual makes specific mention that freeware and payware aircraft and scenery is available on the internet, so if someone is unaware of it then they simply didn't bother to read the documentation that came with the software.

most people dont read the documentation ... if you think about it, did you read the documentation on your last car purchase, refrigator, windows, etc.

For those who have been involved with xplane a really long time, this makes a bit more sense and to me, in some fashion, it is homage to xplane's roots. Nobody flies those RVs....nobody, BUT....they are part of the history of x-plane's development and for those technically minded people that can appreciate what Austin had done, they are a bit of a reminder and snapshot of x-plane's legacy and also represent a basic example for flight modeling for folks to look at. I don't expect 99% of users to know or care so I am not surprised, nor even defending xplane's RVs...only explaining what I think the thought is. X-Plane still has that side to it of rapidly developing and testing flight models if knowledge and care is put into them and I think that's what these RVs are. Why take them out, they're part of xplane and what xplane can do.....I believe that's what Austin is thinking, but certainly not many more. Just us old timers.Enji...there was another post written recently on expectations just yesterday. Did you read it? If so, you'd know that we really don't care about your expectations as they're unreasonable. You expect (your words) default x-plane to match your FSX+addons? An 80.00 sim to match your (how many dollars worth of sim +addons?) Your default logic is moronic. You need a new logic add-on.

If anyone needed a post to sum up why X-plane in its current form will never compete with MSFS, this is it.

It will be a joy to prove you wrong :)

It will be a joy to prove you wrong :)

In future versions? Great. I'm sure they have the capability.With that attitude however, no way.

I might be unusual around here in that I fly FSX fully default and I'm quite happy that way - and I've been flight simming since Psion Flight Simulator on the ZX Spectrum!I did a *lot* of testing and tuning of my FSX scenery settings around KSEA in the default Cessna, and although my machine isn't capable of an "all sliders to the right" experience I get pretty good framerates (30fps+) AND really rather nicely detailed scenery.In X-Plane 10 unfortunately I have to make do with the default objects/roads/trees settings for KSEA, and the "plausible" Seattle just looks like green fields with a few trees and houses to me. There are no downtown buildings, no airport buildings at Boeing Field, no dockside cranes on harbour island, nothing I could call a landmark and the overall effect is not even remotely plausible to me one bit. The city looks unacceptably sparse, not even recognisable as an urban area. Cranking up the settings improves things a lot, but at the expense of all my hard-won FPS. But even on max settings, with the sim running like a sideshow, it still doesn't look as dense or urban as the default FSX KSEA.Out of curiosity I also imported the X-Plane 9 LOWI scenery into the X-Plane 10 demo and got some pretty good frame rates, so for me the bottleneck seems very much to be the "plausible world" autogen in the KSEA area. However, in X-Plane 9 I get 60fps in the default LOWI with all settings on max and although the nearby town seems to have rather a lot of Ikea stores it looks perfectly fine to me in terms of urban density. In X-Plane 10 I get more like 25fps with the setting dialed back to default, and Innsbruck again looks sparse and non-urban :-(After many hours of flying the demo, I had to conclude that for the limited budget of CPU/GPU power that I have available, I get better graphical detail and frame rates from either FSX (all settings one or two notches off max) or X-Plane 9 (all settings on max).Now I know that Laminar will continue to update and optimise X-Plane 10, and I know that the community will offer up some great airport buildings with the "lego brick approach" and I know that some great Payware will come through Aerosoft and their other partners - but if I order X-Plane 10 right now I will get *less* than what I have available to me right now installed and ready to go.As I've said in other posts, there's a lot to like in X-Plane 10. I'm sure flying in remote, non-urban areas I could probably get good enough FPS even now. But it would feel pretty limiting not to be able to jump into a jet and do a few city-to-city runs.

most people dont read the documentation ...

It's unfortunate, isn't it? But if Laminar puts the information in the documentation, and people don't bother to read the documentation, then who's fault is it that some customers may not be aware of the add-on options available to them?Hint: It's not Laminar's.

if you think about it, did you read the documentation on your last car purchase, refrigator, windows, etc.

I always read instruction manuals.

In future versions? Great. I'm sure they have the capability.With that attitude however, no way.

So an attitude forfeits all attempts to prove you wrong?Your posts gets funnier the more I read them.

So an attitude forfeits all attempts to prove you wrong?Your posts gets funnier the more I read them.

Which bits do you agree with?The bit where he says that they put crap in the game intentionally as a nod to the old days, or the bit where he calls a potential customer's ideas moronic?