Worth upgrading from maxed out FSX?

[Mountain Man 142]

My opinion is that no matter how you dress up FSX, it's still fairly flawed at the core, which is the part that really matters as far as I'm concerned. XP10, I feel, has a much better core, and the pretty bits will come eventually.

[woweezowee 10]

I don't think anybody "in the know" doubts the improvements to the core… most people talk specific issues about the current state of affairs.

[N1G 88]

woweezowee

That's just a basic tip for newcomers to X-Plane or people hesitant to experience the issues with early versions in general. That tip is based on what X-Plane oldtimers know from experience. Also we can expect to have some more serious performance tuning, less crashs and possibly some new features when .2 arrives.Especially the beta and RC-cycle can be very frustrating for people. If you know X-Plane, like me, that might not be such a big issue for you - like it isn't for me. That's fine. But anyone switching from a perfectly running FSX with tons of add-ons is good adviced to have a look at X-Plane 10 as soon as it is a more stable platform and some of the anticipated improvements are implemented.As far as "what developers think":http://forums.x-pilo...dpost__p__31749It's just what hardcore users think, too: Too many issues now.Patience is the key. 10.2 sounds reasonable as an advice to newcomers.don't confuse rationality with negativity.

woweezowee,Thanks for explanation. I had no idea that the .2 release was something which had a defined history.ThanksBob

[LAdamson 240]

My opinion is that no matter how you dress up FSX, it's still fairly flawed at the core, which is the part that really matters as far as I'm concerned. XP10, I feel, has a much better core, and the pretty bits will come eventually.

FSX is very adaptable, flight model wise, so what core do you speak of.

[m_av 0]

I have to ask....you wouldn't happen to still be writing to Sony regarding your Betamax?

Sony Betamax was a COMPLETE, BUGFREE PRODUCT THAT JUST WORKED, AS INTENDED, OUT OF THE BOX. No if's, and's or but's. It worked the day you plugged it in. Not a month, two months or six months from now ! It came with a warranty, too ! Also, are you suggesting that Laminar is anywhere close to Sony. ARE YOU SERIOUS ?I write about Laminar, Austin and X-plane, the product because I know A BIT about all of them thru personal experience and after a decade of the attitude, behaviour and actions of Laminar and it's head, I have a right to have the opinion I have. I share that opinion, FWIW. You don't have to read it, agree with it, pay attention to it or respond to it. NO CHARGE !The problem with X-plane v10 IS NOT CAUSED BY ME, YOU OR THE CUSTOMERS WHO BOUGHT IT.It is very clearly Laminar's creation ( and it is a pattern that repeats with EVERY VERSION ) and the least Laminar and Austin could do is to own up to the problem, inadequacy, etc. and address the problems and issues at hand.WHEN WILL LAMINAR DO THAT ? Edited January 20, 2012 by m_av

[LAdamson 240]

Night flying is amazing...a real treat and a challenge as the sky at night is much darker than FSX...with no seeing the horizon in most areas.

With my heavy and bulky CRT monitor, the FSX sky is very dark. No horizon on moonless nights, can be seen. Using FSX on a LCD flat screen, which I just tried, I can see the terrain.As for challenges, flying in pitch black, certainly isn't a neccesesity anymore. With terrain data bases, GPS, and synthetic vision..........planes don't need to be running into mountains, just because the pilot can't see what's ahead. I tend to keep track of the whys and the wherefores of real life flight into terrain accidents. Over the years, there has been plenty.....................even when the plan was to fly IFR.

[Muskoka 104]

Ok, I'll chime in.....m_av's post has some valid points....You can't ignore the fact there's a lot of frustrated users out there.GlenEdit: I guess the question that begs to be asked is:"Why doesn't Austin wait and get it right, before putting it on the market for purchase".As far as I'm concerned, if your just running the demo, you have no business complaining about anything, what have you lost. For those of us that have purchased it, I we were expecting a little more at this point?

Edited January 20, 2012 by Muskoka

[GoranM 3,762]

Sony Betamax was a COMPLETE, BUGFREE PRODUCT THAT JUST WORKED, AS INTENDED, OUT OF THE BOX. No if's, and's or but's. It worked the day you plugged it in. Not a month, two months or six months from now ! It came with a warranty, too ! Also, are you suggesting that Laminar is anywhere close to Sony. ARE YOU SERIOUS ?I write about Laminar, Austin and X-plane, the product because I know A BIT about all of them thru personal experience and after a decade of the attitude, behaviour and actions of Laminar and it's head, I have a right to have the opinion I have. I share that opinion, FWIW. You don't have to read it, agree with it, pay attention to it or respond to it. NO CHARGE !The problem with X-plane v10 IS NOT CAUSED BY ME, YOU OR THE CUSTOMERS WHO BOUGHT IT.It is very clearly Laminar's creation ( and it is a pattern that repeats with EVERY VERSION ) and the least Laminar and Austin could do is to own up to the problem, inadequacy, etc. and address the problems and issues at hand.WHEN WILL LAMINAR DO THAT ?

Says the guy who won't even disclose who he is, what his connections are to Laminar or what he has made for x plane.

[Geofa 108]

The vids I've seen of XPX so far: The urban areas look disappointing - the residential areas are laid out in an unrealistic manner and go right to the downtown buildings with no row houses, parks, etc. However the sky and water look fantastic. I was just flying in FSX with my fave aircraft the Constellation and thinking the urban areas looked nicer than the vids I've seen of XPX. Of course my FSX is maxed out. I'm wondering is it worth the purchase. I'd like the opinion of FSX fans that have tried XPX, I am downloading the demo right now. Also, do you think developers will jump on the XPX bandwagon since MS Flight is a just a game? This is what I'm thinking and this is why I'm considering purchasing the new X plane.Edit: Ok I just saw the downtown Seattle vid (XP10) on youtube and it looks pretty good with decent FPS. Now if only California Classics Connie can be used in XP10.

Yes I think it is worth the purchase-if you are a flight sim nut why not?However, a lot depends on what you want to simulate and what you expect at this minute, and whether you are patient for the future, which may or may not happen.I have to confess-I love the sim, have been using it since it came out, and don't feel a great urge to go back to fsx. On the other hand I am getting itchy about the scenery looking very much the same in urban areas no matter where you simulate in the world, missing my reality xp gps from version 9, and wishing there were more things available to improve it.On the other hand-a few weeks ago i fired up the sim in Juneau Alaska-flew around-then did the same in fsx...fsx looked very dated even with all my add ins and xplane showed its stuff. In terms of stats-there is more of the world that is probably superior in xplane (the rural areas) that is modelled better than fsx now. Unfortunately, most will be simulating flying to the polulated areas-and xplane just doesn't make it ...yet...there-both buildings, and looks wise.Still worth it imho.

[falloutgamer65 0]

Honestly, there is no harm in buying it. The night lighting, water, and weather cannot be beat. And although it is lacking in some places such as urban environments , these WILL be addressed and keep in mind that the updates come regularly and are free. And there will be add- ons that come out that will make it way better, just like fsx. You can buy it now and experiment with it, and if you don't like some aspects of it, such as the scenery or aircraft, just go back to fsx for a bit and wait for it to become better. Or if your a sim nut like me, you can use both at the same time. Since i just got the ngx, i use fsx alot more for longer routes where i like to simulate procedural realism, however, if i want to do a vfr flight through the mountains in a cessna 152, i use xplane. Maybe this will change around 10.2 when xpx is stable and/ or when the 737 classic & xp jets 777 come out. Also cant wait for Goran's dc-3 and the beaver to come out aswell. And on a side note, im sure austin and laminar know what peoples concerns are and are doing everything they can. On a another side note, this flame war between fsx and xp is just ridiculous. Technically they are just pieces of simulation software, why does it matter which sim people chose to use?

[Mountain Man 142]

FSX is very adaptable, flight model wise, so what core do you speak of.

Mainly the inefficient coding and overall instability which lends it a sluggish, disconnected feeling even on modern hardware. The latest version XP10, in comparison, runs like a well oiled machine.

[jasonX 24]

Yes but it's fun as long as ppl stay civil. Not easy sometimes tho.

[snip]On a another side note, this flame war between fsx and xp is just ridiculous. Technically they are just pieces of simulation software, why does it matter which sim people chose to use?

[greggerm 312]

If you are a scenery junkie like I am, I'd recommend waiting it out.X-Plane 10 is operable, flyable, and for many, quite enjoyable! As Geofa says above, there are certain aspects and interests which will be very satisfied with X-Plane 10 in the short-term. Unfortunately for me, the components of a simulator which make it enjoyable (*scenery elements) are quite unfinished and/or buggy.M_AV purchased the product and is very disappointed in its current state. I share his disappointment, but without the sharp edges of having made the purchase. This marks the first time I was very excited for a flight simulator's release and DIDN'T pull the trigger on buying it. For once I had willpower to wait, and I will continue to wait until either I have A.) a moment of weakness, or B.) Laminar finishes/repairs the issues at hand. You will need to take a critical look at the demo and judge what is and isn't important to you based on its current status. Since we've heard very little from Laminar Research as to what might be fixed (nevermind when), I don't feel it is safe to say that everything you might feel is important will be addressed. As an example, I'm given to understand that X-Plane 9 never did get seasonal textures from Laminar Research - the community ended up relying on 3rd parties to develop them well after the fact. Omissions like this in XP10 raise questions as to what seemingly industry standard things will be left on the side of the road.If you have a good, enjoyable installation of FSX going for you, you probably do not have a compelling need or reason to purchase X-Plane 10 at this time - except for sheer excitement of a new sim and curiosity.If only they had released the product in a more complete fashion, we wouldn't be having this discussion.-Greg

[jasonX 24]

But in xp9 we did get traffic driving on the correct side of the road. Left side in Oz, UK and right in the others ;)ps: Back to all on the right in XPX (for now)

Edited January 20, 2012 by jasonX

[Bobber 0]

Agree with Greg 100%. I am enjoying both sims for now...while understanding that X10 is a work in progress. I love eye candy and scenery (Lord, my credit card knows that LOL) but X10 offers great aspects too. It's like Geof said, if you're a simmer, why not?I can also see how simmers can find it unsettling to pay $ some USD for a work in progress though...totally see that.I'm just taking the good with the bad, and enjoying both sims at the moment.