AlanI'm sorry, but I would have to disagree with you there. Firstly, the author didn't trash FSX.All serious flight sim users have read PC Pilot or Computer Pilot at least a few times in their simming life. Those magazines promote FSX and it's add ons ad nauseam. I don't know of any x plane user voicing their disappointment over it. I see X Plane users disappointed there isn't more coverage of x plane, but other than that, there is no malice held towards the pro fsx reviewers. It is what it is and it's seriously, water off a ducks back.What X Plane users DON'T LIKE is being told that x plane is a joke, filled with false hype, and far from realistic. That's when the retaliations start coming out.

I didn't jump in to remark much about xplane at all. Why I did say something is because of that last thread that went on for ages about professional reviewers and who is qualified to write a report that is worth reading. Against everything you seemed to be implying in that other thread you posted a link to this one which was done by a guy who reviews everything and probably does not pay serious flight sims at all. Then you said you liked that he called it hyper-realistic when we all know the guy knows nothing about anything, most likely.

Some of you guys who can't stand hearing anything good about Xplane are becoming so predictable you are starting to sound like a broken record. The only thing we don't know is what point you will pounce on to try to discredit in any way you can.And it's always the same few names.

Exactly Jason. I deliberately kept my original post brief and to the point, wiggling my hook, line and sinker for a little nibble, then pow! Since when is there EVER and article on flightsimming in similar blogs/sites? We should all be glad it's being talked about in general, not just pounce and quibble. But as you say, it's pretty predictable now.

Hang on. First, I didn't post a link to this latest "review" at all. That was Simmo.If I see a site with reviews, that has ads on it, I consider it a "professional" site. Ads are paying the owners of the site. Obviously, it doesn't make the reviewers experts in their chosen field, but they're doing something right if they're getting paid.

Then you said you liked that he called it hyper-realistic when we all know the guy knows nothing about anything, most likely.

And yeah, I DO like how it started. So...? I'm not going to apologize for liking how it started. Nor do I think I should. I never said the guy was an ultimate professional in flight simming or reviewing. I'm sorry if you think my statements regarding this "review" have some kind of hidden undertone, but I can assure you, they don't. Instead of reading what isn't there, try reading what is there and take it with a grain of salt.

Jason and Simmo, I think, as I said in my last post, that these replies from the same people are not about xplane at all. One minute we are being told who is allowed to review xplane so that there will be no bias and the next the same people are telling us how much they like a review done by someone who probably donesnt know a thing but put in the kind words 'hyperrealistic' If these are the no biased guys that are allowed to make genuine reviews and are to be patted on the back then it's a bit sad imho. It just goes to whats been said before - anyone can review it id they review it nicely.

Hang on. First, I didn't post a link to this latest "review" at all. That was Simmo.If I see a site with reviews, that has ads on it, I consider it a "professional" site. Ads are paying the owners of the site. Obviously, it doesn't make the reviewers experts in their chosen field, but they're doing something right if they're getting paid.And yeah, I DO like how it started. So...? I'm not going to apologize for liking how it started. Nor do I think I should. I never said the guy was an ultimate professional in flight simming or reviewing. I'm sorry if you think my statements regarding this "review" have some kind of hidden undertone, but I can assure you, they don't. Instead of reading what isn't there, try reading what is there and take it with a grain of salt.

You are right, you didn't post it, my mistake. But you did seem to jump on it with enthusiasm that did not seem to be justified based on your views in other posts. How can I take one post literally and then read between the lines on others?

90% sounds better then 50% or 0%.

He said he gets 90% in X-Plane, which is a lot different then the real world! Let's see if he can achieve that for real! (If the FAA (or whatever regulatory authority is in his country) gives him authorization to implement it)

Jason and Simmo, I think, as I said in my last post, that these replies from the same people are not about xplane at all. One minute we are being told who is allowed to review xplane so that there will be no bias and the next the same people are telling us how much they like a review done by someone who probably donesnt know a thing but put in the kind words 'hyperrealistic' If these are the no biased guys that are allowed to make genuine reviews and are to be patted on the back then it's a bit sad imho. It just goes to whats been said before - anyone can review it id they review it nicely. You are right, you didn't post it, my mistake. But you did seem to jump on it with enthusiasm that did not seem to be justified based on your views in other posts. How can I take one post literally and then read between the lines on others?

My very first post in this thread was "Nice find, Simmo"Hardly enthusiastic.Where I DID get enthusiastic was after Ed decided to jump in, yet again, and do his best discredit the site and what was said about the technical side of things re X Plane. Along with talking about how he wrote autopilot code and it isn't that hard to do.But I will clarify something, in case you didn't notice it. My "enthusiastic" post was very tongue in cheek.

Just too bad they didn't use FSX, eh Ed?I like the opening line...

"Hyper-realistic flight simulator X-Plane 10"

Sure, but highlighting that quote as you did implied that you were giving credence to it. The only trouble is that this guy would not pass any of your tests about who is qualified to make such a a statement. Thats why I it looks like you are happy for anyone qualified or not to make statements in the positive but not happy for people to make statements in the negative

Even if that is the case, why does it upset you so much

Sure, but highlighting that quote as you did implied that you were giving credence to it. The only trouble is that this guy would not pass any of your tests about who is qualified to make such a a statement. Thats why I it looks like you are happy for anyone qualified or not to make statements in the positive but not happy for people to make statements in the negative

I edited my last post with "But I will clarify something, in case you didn't notice it. My "enthusiastic" post was very tongue in cheek."And I never said I wasn't happy for people to make negative comments about X Plane...as long as they thoroughly look at every aspect of it. I don't see people like Ed commenting on how well done the atmospheric rendering is. How realistic the clouds are. All they mention is the negativities of x plane, and then multiply them by about 10 with comments aimed at directly discrediting everything about it...without, from what I can tell, even TRYING the demo. These are all visual cues that even a 5 year old can see. I don't expect people to understand what goes on behind the flight model because it took me about a year to understand it. And that's a year of full time research.The vast majority of posts I have read from people giving their negative opinions are statements like"It takes too long to calibrate the joystick and by the time I'm done, the time limit runs out" FALSE. Calibrating the joystick does not take time away from the demo."The cities look like garbage so I won't get it". As if the cities are that much of a deal breaker. So if cities were immaculate and everything else was crap and terrain was flat, they WOULD get it?"I flew the default Cessna and the flight model is crap so I'm not getting it because the whole sim is crap if the Cessna is crap" Another deal breaker?I make payware for a living. I have had 2 of my add ons reviewed and a 3rd add on is about to be released. I was asked by the reviewers if I wanted anything mentioned in particular. I told them "No...just keep it HONEST. Feel free to criticize, but just keep it honest"Simmo's blog partner was one of the reviewers that reviewed my Duchess and he was one of those people. I've mentioned MANY times that I, along with many others, acknowledge X Planes shortcomings. With absolutely no problems. So I find it strange that you can come up with a conclusion that says "Thats why it looks like you are happy for anyone qualified or not to make statements in the positive but not happy for people to make statements in the negative"There have been quite a few posts in here from people who make negative points about x plane. But they are honest, and they refrain from using words like "crap", "garbage", "rubbish", etc...A point can be made without EMPHASIZING it with such colorful adjectives.

Where I DID get enthusiastic was after Ed decided to jump in, yet again, and do his best discredit the site and what was said about the technical side of things re X Plane. Along with talking about how he wrote autopilot code and it isn't that hard to do.But I will clarify something, in case you didn't notice it. My "enthusiastic" post was very tongue in cheek.

1. I said nothing about the site. Nothing. In that, I believe you owe me an apology.2. I said that a 90% success rate was not something to brag about. I stand by that, especially for something like this.3. Despite it's something done by Austin Meyer and he uses X-Plane to test with... it has nothing to do with X-Plane. Thus I've stated nothing about X-Plane itself.4. I did write autopilot code, lots of people have purchased the addon it's in. I never said it "isn't that hard to do." Thus yet again you owe me an apology.As for you never having written an autopilot... I'd say you're not qualified to discuss whether 90% is good or bad. ;)

Even if that is the case, why does it upset you so much

Why? OK, it doesn't upset me but these forums are here for discussion on the topic of xplane. It is not the 'xplane is cool' forum so I expect that different aspects of the simulator can be talked about constructively. We know that this rarely happens however. This is my first version of xplane that I have purchased and I have been using it since I got the demo. My disks appeared mid week and I got them installed. I also use FSX for my civilian sim. Civilian sims are where the least of my sim time is spent to be honest. Most recently it has been with dcs:a10, in the past il2, backshark and falcon. I have no philosophical problem with xplane that would lead me to bag it all the time for no reason, so we are clear. Anything I say is because it is what I think. I agree with some aspects of xplane but not all. We all do but some choose not to voice what they don't like. What irks me most about this forum is that there are clear biases to xplane - as you would expect. I wouldnt expect them to be such that all criticism is jumped on. It does annoy me people are told their opinion is not as worthy as someone who has spent more time in xplane but then reviews are cited as a great thing when they come out of the blue and they are done by people who review call of duty for a living and say HAWX has redefined combat simulators. All I want in these discussions is the same objective view that xplane guys ask of newcomers is afforded back to us. That, in reference to my original point, doesn't mean you should jump heavily on some guy who has a genuine question or concern and tell him he has no 'qualifications' while embracing some guy from pcgames review who you *know* doesnt have a clue.

Oh, and guys, for the record, I wasn't being entirely serious when I said that this gives X-Plane a leg-up in the flight modeling debate (notice the smiley in my original post). I just think it's extremely cool that the XP flight model is being used in a real-life application, and while PC Gamer may not be the record of choice for flight sim enthusiasts, it's still big time coverage for X-Plane, so that's a good thing.

1. I said nothing about the site. Nothing. In that, I believe you owe me an apology.2. I said that a 90% success rate was not something to brag about. I stand by that, especially for something like this.3. Despite it's something done by Austin Meyer and he uses X-Plane to test with... it has nothing to do with X-Plane. Thus I've stated nothing about X-Plane itself.4. I did write autopilot code, lots of people have purchased the addon it's in. I never said it "isn't that hard to do." Thus yet again you owe me an apology.As for you never having written an autopilot... I'd say you're not qualified to discuss whether 90% is good or bad. ;)

1. You've discredited absolutely EVERYTHING about X Plane and any positive review about x plane without knowing hardly anything about it. I'm so used to it, that whenever you're here, it's like you're about to find something negative to say again. Apologize for that and then I'll give you an apology.2. Who was bragging? He was talking about landing after a spiral descent on one engine using the autopilot.3. It actually has a LOT to do with X Plane. It uses X Planes code. The same code that is on the X-Plane discs that people are buying.4. No, you didn't say it's not hard to do, but you did say it's "nothing to brag about". To me, that's the exact same thing.

As for you never having written an autopilot... I'd say you're not qualified to discuss whether 90% is good or bad. ;)

Ed, you wrote a program for an autopilot in a game! You're not qualified either.