What do you think P3D is ?

Not every add-on is or will be compatible with Prepard3D, and it was never intended to be sold as a consumer product making its future uncertain.

Not every add-on is or will be compatible with Prepard3D, and it was never intended to be sold as a consumer product making its future uncertain.

It's no more uncertain than anything else. It's probably no more uncertain than an individual who made millions with his sim deciding he would rather live the good life, retire and fly real planes every day.

Not every add-on is or will be compatible with Prepard3D, and it was never intended to be sold as a consumer product making its future uncertain.

No more uncertain than the future of X-Plane with Austin in charge.....Christ...we get it......you want X-Plane to take over the mantle from Flight Sim

Why would people move onto other sims?Right now, the addons that are here for FSX make it by far the best looking, most immersive sim ever seen on a home PC.The FSX install DVD is just the base. It was released in 2006, of course sales have slowed down!Heck, if it wasnt for the addons, I would have gone long ago - but not to X-Plane. 5 years from now, X-Plane 'X' will still not have surpassed the user install base of FSX. I bet you a case of beer on that.

XPX has better looking clouds, lighting, buildings, etc... It has slopped runways. The flight dynamics feel better, especially when landing. It feels like you actually get into a ground effect ! It's not CPU bound so it runs smoother with better looking graphics. Unlike FSX, XPX is still in development ! So it can only get more fantastic !

Because MS may put pressure on LM and invoke the terms of the MS/LM agreement - possibly claiming LM has breached it?

In fact, the non commercial clause in fsx is there to protect the ESP revenues as much as the 'not for entertainment' clause in the ESP platform is to protect microsofts game revenue. If microsoft ever did that I would say LM could give them much more of a headache as they know sims that you pay by the hour are all over the world running on fsx. What are microsoft doing to stop that and protect LM's license?

XPX has better looking clouds, lighting, buildings, etc... It has slopped runways. The flight dynamics feel better, especially when landing. It feels like you actually get into a ground effect ! It's not CPU bound so it runs smoother with better looking graphics. Unlike FSX, XPX is still in development ! So it can only get more fantastic !

Hmm, now I have to buy X-Plane.

XPX has better looking clouds, lighting, buildings, etc... It has slopped runways. The flight dynamics feel better, especially when landing. It feels like you actually get into a ground effect ! It's not CPU bound so it runs smoother with better looking graphics. Unlike FSX, XPX is still in development ! So it can only get more fantastic !

I don't want to get in to an xplane argument here but xpx is still in infancy compared to the overall experience - including scenery. All of these things have problems with xplane as well. Clouds up high, framerates down. Add on external scenery and most need sloped runways turned off unless you want floating buildings. In fact, I wont even finish the post, its just going to be a debate in thew wrong thread.

The clouds in FSX look just fine thanks with FEX / REX....same with water. 'Slopped' runways...well lets just leave that one there.Lighting I will give you....XP10 seems to have that nailed.Better buildings? The 'plausible world' looks more cartoonish than stock FSX.The flight dynamics....I hear this a lot. Its subjective at best. Depends what FS addons you have. No desktop sim really feels like flying....that I can tell you.

No more uncertain than the future of X-Plane with Austin in charge.....

Unless you know something we don't, Austin isn't likely to have the legal rug suddenly pulled out from under him. :(

The clouds in FSX look just fine thanks with FEX / REX....same with water. 'Slopped' runways...well lets just leave that one there.Lighting I will give you....XP10 seems to have that nailed.Better buildings? The 'plausible world' looks more cartoonish than stock FSX.The flight dynamics....I hear this a lot. Its subjective at best. Depends what FS addons you have. No desktop sim really feels like flying....that I can tell you.

The clouds in FSX look great from the distance. ORBX scenery looks great from high up but the illusion falls apart when you get close up.

The clouds in FSX look just fine thanks with FEX / REX....

Until you fly through them and the illusion is shattered as you watch those wonderful 2D textures rotate around your aircraft. X-Plane 10's clouds are rendered in 3D.

The city is certainly recognisable as a city.

Unless you know something we don't, Austin isn't likely to have the legal rug suddenly pulled out from under him. :(

Neither are LM.....its conjecture on your part based on some strange idea that you know better than the lawyers at Lockheed Martin!There are plenty of posts from John Nicol (P3D lead) right here on Avsim encouraging new users to P3D. Do you really think LM would allow him to do that if there was the smallest threat of legal action from MS?I'll have what you are smoking!I know you guys are totally desperate for XP to step up and become number one but this is getting silly........

Edited January 5, 201214 yr by Glenn Harrall

I wonder how prepared will tackle clouds with a dx11 engine. Not to mention lighting, there are endless good possibilities. DCS:a10 has the same clouds as xpx, its not rocket science, I hope we can look forward to it in p3d. These clouds to take a toll on the gpu and framerate though. With rex flying with a lot of cloud about doesnt hit my frames and looks supurb. xplane looks supurb too but the method has a severe frame rate hit. xpx is much better when you are in the clouds but it still has to be weighed up.

The city is certainly recognisable as a city.

Did you notice the cartoon looking landmarks ? What about the photo looking real cars painted on the ground ?