6 years ago, FSX + Acceleration cost $US140 in Australia ($95 for FSX and $45 for Acceleration). In 6 years from now, X Plane 10 will probably cost $30.For eighty dollars, you get HDR lighting, OSM street data, 3D volumetric clouds, a flight model that x plane users say is very realistic, sloped runways, bird strikes, incredible rural scenery and updates for the life of the version run. Urban areas are lacking, but that's one element of the whole picture.When compared to what's available recently (Prepar3d), you got a lot more for a lot less $$'s. Prepar3d is $10 a month or $399 to buy outright. Prepar3d has x plane beat with airport buildings. It has 45 detailed airports and 23 detailed cities...worldwide. I sure as hell hope so for $400! X Plane 10 looks FAR better than Prepar3d. And in my opinion, the flight model is better than Prepar3d.

I think I should correct you on prepared. Prepared is priced for commercial use which is comparable to xplanes $750 price tag 'for commercial use', so the question could be turned around and ask why is xplane $350 more than prepar3d without all the extra stuff. Also, remember prepar3d has every city, airport, landmark etc that fsx does but it has enhanced all those other areas. Now, wrt the comparison to fsx pricing. At first I think it's a bit dodgey as fsx was more expensive when it came out so how can you compare $29 to $79 but I think it is fair to. PS, you cant compare the aussie price as it is not in USD, our regions dollar was a lot weaker and it would have cost more. Anyway, back to comparing $29 fsx to $79 xplane. I think it is fair to compare what a consumer can go out and buy right now. Like anything, you compare the value of the items at the time on the price. FSX at $29 has got to be very good value indeed to xplane at $79. xplanex may be $30 in 6 years but will it stand up to the competition at the time? I do have Prepar3d, its one of the many sims I have my foot in, including xplane, hoping that there will be a leap in sim technology in the near future.

Edited January 3, 201214 yr by JasonHarris

We need to clarify something. As far as I can see, the commercial license for Prepar3d is NOT FAA approved. X Plane, at $750, is, with certain hardware. But, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.I compared the price of FSX and Acceleration using US dollars. In $AUD, FSX was $AUD105 and Acceleration was $AUD49.95. Back then, $AUD1.00 was about $US0.94. So it was still pricey. And absolutely, a consumer CAN compare. But comparing a new release piece of software to software that is 6 years old that Brand X which is 6 years old is NOW $30 and the newer Brand Y which is less than a month old is eighty dollars is a little unorthodox. I ran a business for 12 years and sold it a few years ago. When i first started, I was told "NEVER, under any circumstances, compromise what you think you are worth!". Austin thinks X Plane 10 is worth $eighty dollars. That's his decision. Why fault him for it? If someone thinks it's too much, don't buy it. I've said that from day one. And even I'm criticized for THAT. Do I think a Bugatti Veyron should be priced at $2 million? Hell no! But I'm not about to go to a Bugatti dealer and start complaining to them that it's priced too high. It's priced at what they believe it is worth. Just like XP10, FSX, Prepar3d, Windows, Mac OS, whatever, and THAT deserves respect, if ONLY for the fact that a flight simulator ain't the easiest thing to create...let alone, update and optimize on a monthly basis.Will X Plane stand up to the competition? Who knows. FSX has so many add ons available for it now, that I don't think I would recognize it if it was a bare installation. So of course it will appear to be state of the art. I have no issues admitting that FSX has some amazing add ons for it that enhances it so much, you would be forgiven for thinking it was released only last year. But that's because of tremendous 3rd party support.I've seen people post things like "Even if they price it at $200, I'll still buy it!" when it comes to 3rd party FSX developers products. And that's for "incomplete" products also. Service packs pending.I do have Prepar3d also. I bought a 1 month license.

Im just wondering, with the lack of scenery, whats REALLY filling those 8 DVD's?

Elevation, land class, road and water data is what is on the DVDs. The information describing the world is there, the problem is the art assets are incomplete.

Damn, I didnt read that thoroughly.. You did say USD, it was higher than I ever paid so my brain must have read AUD. I didn't think you could pay $750 and plug in a device and your xplane installt was FAA approved. I thought it still had to be checked out. I have read in the forums that prepar3d is the same in that respect so what it the difference. $750 does not get an an faa certified sim out of the box. I still think it's a valid comparison. I could go to steam and get some old flight game for $2.99. Cheap as heck, it might have been $50 when it was first released and is now 5-8 years old. Would I compare it to fsx or xplane though. No, I dont think so, it just wouldnt have the legs 6 years on. The thing that makes fsx a better comparison is that it was first released 6 years ago but it stacks up well to xplane, as we all know it can still go blow by blow, even today. It's xplanes only competitor really with much bigger marketshare so why exactly can it not be compared fairly? I am not faulting Austin for his price, in fact I didnt bring it up, you did and then compared the value to other sims. I just turned it around and said in like, is xplanex worth 3x fsx's current price or is it worth nearly double prepar3d's price for the commercial version? Covering your last point, fsx does have a lot of addons that make it better. Lucky for fsx as I know people are crying out for xplane to have the same. With the $50 difference between the two sims you can get some pretty good payware for fsx and still come under the $ tag of xplane. I would also agree that fsx is largely where it is because of tremendous 3rd party support but thats what makes it what it is today and that is added in to the equation, it cannot be ignored. xplane seems to be in a real catch 22, not much third party support and a developer that delivers a very bare bones experience in terms of scenery and expects the third parties (that dont exist) to fill in the blanks. You have to have more than the technology, you have to commercialise it properly.

Edited January 3, 201214 yr by JasonHarris

I didn't bring up the price comparison. MVGibbage did. X Plane has been checked out by the FAA. The src code for the flight model has remained the same for years. Many others will disagree with me, but it is so accurate (As long as the flight model is done properly) that aircraft manufacturers are using x plane to test their new aircraft. It's been mentioned before. Icon aircraft, carter copter, Garrow aircraft are just 3 off the top of my head that are using X Plane for initial flight tests to see if their aircraft fly as expected.It always comes down to how many elements of the flight model the developer adds. As far as X Planes future add ons and what people are crying out for, trust me, there are huge things being done that haven't even been announced yet.

So am I wrong? Can you just buy the $750 version of xplane and do nothing more than add one of the listed/compatible controllers and your sim is faa certified. No one comes to test or check anything? Real pilots can come and log hours on it as a properly certified setup? How is it different from FAA certified FSX set ups?

I'm not really the person to ask. When it comes to regulatory specifics, you're better off emailing Austin or contacting the FAA and get all the details from them.Apart from this... http://www.x-plane.com/pro/landing/ ...I couldn't elaborate.

OK, I didnt think that they certified the software but they do approve the setup/configuration as a whole. This is no differn't than prepar3d or fsx in this regard. I am not sure why you posted xplane was approved and the others are not if you are not familiar with how it works.In fact, the answer is here http://www.x-plane.com/pro/certified/ xplane will not require any less work to get a certified setup than prepar3d would and by paying $750 you unlock features which are required for certification. Those features seem to be available in prepar3d anyway.

Edited January 3, 201214 yr by JasonHarris

I never said FSX or Prepar3d WASN'T FAA approved in some cases. I even said to correct me if I'm wrong about Prepar3d. I said X plane IS approved with an unlock. It was more of a response to those that say the X Plane core flight model is completely unrealistic.I've seen FSX used as an instrument trainer at Bankstown Airport. (However, I did sway the CFI to take a serious look at X Plane)

From my understanding, xplane is not approved. The FAA do not approve software. Once unlocked it has the features required to allow it to become part of an approved setup but xplane in itself can never be faa approved.

Edited January 3, 201214 yr by JasonHarris

"Certification requires not only that the user have the certified X-Plane software, but also certified hardware (cockpit and flight controls) "Obviously, X Plane that you buy for $79.95 is NOT FAA certified. But it contains elements INSIDE the program that is unlocked by a USB key that enables the FAA certified portion. Along with having the certified Hardware.

In X-plane v10, TODATE, except perhaps, say a half a dozen landmarks around the world, THERE IS NOT ONE BUILDING IN THE ENTIRE WORLD THAT LOOKS LIKE THE REAL WORLD BUILDING !Not one. NOT ONE ! If there is or was, IT WAS NOT INTENTIONAL - perhaps a fluke of the random autogen.That was the case over a decade ago.THAT IS STILL THE CASE TODAY - AFTER 10 VERSIONS OF X-PLANE.In X-plane v10, there is still not ONE BUNDLED AIRCRAFT THAT FLIES LIKE OR COMES CLOSE TO THE REAL THING IN PERFORMANCE.One would think that after 10 versions of X-plane, bundled aircrafts would perhaps be endorsed by the individual manufacturers - or at least be accurate enough to qualify as the best that can be achieved on a desktop sim, considering Laminar's hype about it being the most comprehensive sim with the best flight model. In scenery, Seattle is the showcase - did they look at themselves in the mirror before they put out that crap! In bundled aircraft, what is the equivalent showcase real world aircraft ?Laminar reserves the right to change anything, ANYTIME, with no obligation or explanation owed to anyone. To say that 3rd party development has suffered is an understatement. When you look at the path X-plane has taken over the years, it has slowed, halted and/or broken 3rd party developed aircraft, scenery, plugins, tools and utilities by changing the basic program, changing formats or fixing some bugs and introducing new ones; the path is littered with bruised, hurt individuals and groups with casualties all along the way. 3rd party developers, both freeware and payware, just walk away in DISGUST ! They don't have any recourse but to give up. And the users suffer the loss.3rd party development is primarily responsible for the success of the MS FS franchise. That message has not sunk in at Laminar to any significant depth.TOOLS, UTLITIES AND DOCUMENTATION - Subjects better left for later - for now.The issue today is : WHEN IS LAMINAR GOING TO ISSUE A ROADMAP WITH A TIMELINE FOR X-plane v10 ?If you feel strongly enough, demand an answer from Laminar by emailing [email protected].

Edited January 3, 201214 yr by m_av

XPX's "plausable world" is really just unfinished. For that price, I would expect a complete sim and not something that almost requires mods and add-on's to even be close to the 6 year old FSX Gold you can buy for $29.95.

Thing is, that price for X-Plane includes continued development over the next several years which will address things like city detail. Their scenery artist has said that the data for high rise structures does exist in X-Plane currently but that they have yet to create the 3D models to take advantage of it, so for the time being they're using generic houses and office buildings to fill in the gaps. However the skyscrapers are coming, and when they do, many of the complaints surrounding plausible cities will have been addressed.And I have some news for you, FSX with default scenery is pretty butt ugly, so while you might get detailed cities and airports for the price, they're not much to look at (the graphics are very outdated), so you'll still want to shell out the cash for 3rd party scenery packs if you want a nice looking sim. Out of the box, I think X-Plane 10 has the superior graphics, and its depiction of rural US is outstanding.

Im just wondering, with the lack of scenery, whats REALLY filling those 8 DVD's?

High resolution terrain mesh.

If you feel strongly enough, demand an answer from Laminar by emailing [email protected].

I would say, rather, that you should email them with a polite request. Austin doesn't strike me as the kind of guy who will respond favorably to whiny customers with a false sense of entitlement.

And I have some news for you, FSX with default scenery is pretty butt ugly, so while you might get detailed cities and airports for the price, they're not much to look at (the graphics are very outdated), so you'll still want to shell out the cash for 3rd party scenery packs if you want a nice looking sim. Out of the box, I think X-Plane 10 has the superior graphics, and its depiction of rural US is outstanding.

This is stock FSX cirrca 2007. It would have the addition of FS Genesis, for additional topography, but that's it. Stock clouds and cityscape. I just think it's not bad, considering it's age. This is the Salt Lake City area, just southeast of the airport. I'd be interested in seeing some XP10 screen shots of the area. Someone has already done a nice airport rendition for XP9. which I hope I can use in XP10.