in a way, X-Plane 10 is no better than MS Flight - you'll have to wait and see to find out what missing features will make their way into the program. I can't believe I'm about to "defend" MS Flight, but at least with Flight you aren't paying ahead of time for the privilege of waiting for missing items to get created and included.

X-Plane no better than MS Flight? I would not even think about about it, XPlane IS a simulator and Flight IS just a game, this is the reason the word "simulator" was stripped from Flight.The only difference between me paying ahead for XPX and you paying for Flight (DLC) is just TIME, I just chose to do it now and not later.

Edited February 7, 201214 yr by zPirata

I am going to buy XP10 and the JRollon CRJ on the 29th.My way of saying, "thanks, MS!".

I think I have to repeat what I wrote on page one after reading the next pages of this thread

lol

Edited February 7, 201214 yr by woweezowee

It's 10.04 beta. Not 10.4By comparison, XP9 was considered stable at 9.20 or 9.22. I actually find it confusing how X Plane users are being patient about this, submitting bug reports, etc... but FSX users who, apparently are willing to make the move, are literally "pushing" X Plane to be a final product with missing features and missing fixes and posting about them in forums. It's like they're trying to discredit X Plane. Presumptuous on my part? possibly. LR make no secret that X Plane is in beta. But if you cannot accept it, then simply don't buy it. No one forced anyone to buy it. I know that if I saw a new piece of software, I would not go near it until I saw reviews and feedback from other people. No way would I blindly shell out $eighty for something I know nothing about. And just to show X Plane 10 is still in beta...X Plane 10.03 was a RC. Not a finalized product. 10.04 was a new beta version.Edit: I remember seeing someone said Austin slaps a beta label on x plane as an excuse for it's bugs. I'm still scratching my head over this one. If a product is buggy, it's the developers responsibility to label it a beta until the bugs are out. At least that's how I see it. Even the biggest dev's in FSX cannot release a bug free product. They need at least 1 or 2 service packs...up to and exceeding 6 months after the initial release. X Plane has been out about 2 months. Show some patience...like you show patience for FSX products.And correct me if I'm wrong, even PMDG have a support ticket system for bug reporting so they can fix their products. And that's just for an addon. X Plane is an entire flight simulator! I continually find it confusing that FSX users give Austin and the Laminar team very little slack but they extend all the slack in the world to revered FSX developers. Just seems like an incredible double standard.

It's entertaining to watch some of the XPX haters twist in the wind.... they've got some kind of nuclear powered angst about it. I don't even think "Super Nanny" fix this one .At the end of the day XPX is on the rise and the MS franchise is a rotting 800lb gorrilla carcass...It does indeed feel like a victory to me!

If it's so easy then why can't buildings be present by default?

honestly, i would rather have no buildings than those ugly default buildings in FSX. I hear when the WED comes out people will create the airport sceneries and then they will be distributed.

Edited February 7, 201214 yr by falloutgamer65

Over the past two months, there is no mention whatsoever that what you were buying from Laminar Research for $ was a beta package.

In Europe: No. Aerosoft was quite precise in telling its customers what exactly they sold the end of December. "An early version" implies a Beta. Szure, some people were underwhelmed, but at least in europe you have at once better street maps and geographical data, than in any version ofg FSX INCLUDING payware! For Airports and City Maps we still have to use X-Plane 9 Scenery and City Maps (which even contain bigger buildings within the airports, so all bigger airports have at least a few buildings. Many more than any Autogen could dare to place.)X-Plane 9 had to lean back to its community, but now in 10 there is the community and a lot of commercial companies involved. You can say that there currently several times more people involved in XPX compared to Flight. Flight will be able to make better use of its island, but if they want to map the world they will have problems.

Even now with the finalization of 10.03, there's no mention about the "ongoing development process" which delivers to the purchaser an arguably incomplete simulator as of today, and spawns of beta after beta going forward.

You shouldn't overestimate 10.03. 10.03 is only a stable branch for people who don't want to be involved in further beta testing. Most major bugs are resolved. 10.04 is mostly performance improvements especially in 3D graphics. They are still working on the Terrain Editor.If you look at their blogs, they schedule terrain improvements at the moment for 10.05 at the earliest. In fact Aerosoft waits for its release of the normal X-Plane 10 Version. And I get the strong feeling that they will at least wait for 10.05 before they declare anything ready.

honestly, i would rather have no buildings than those ugly default buildings in FSX. I hear when the WED comes out people will create the airport sceneries and then they will be distributed.

I'll post a default ss of KDTW in FSX and you can do the same using default XPX and we'll see which one has "those ugly default buildings".

here we go again, another thread hijacked and diverted to fsx vs xpx land. When are you dudes going to inform yourselves properly? We all know xplane at this stage has many blank airports, ON A CLEAN INSTALL - but a basic search in google quickly shows that, as ever, our great community has built dedicated scenery that's far more representative of the airport than any FSX block structures.http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?app=downloads&showfile=195And that's before the new scenery tools are released.Please get back on topic now, or set up another thread in your FSX rant section, so we can keep ignoring it. How many negative FSX threads are posted there by clear Xplane fans by the way? Not many I bet, as they're too busy enjoying flying or building more addons for their sim.

I'll post a default ss of KDTW in FSX and you can do the same using default XPX and we'll see which one has "those ugly default buildings".

You have a fascination with that airport don't you. How about LOWI (Innsbruck) default in both sims. I'd rather not, as Simon is completely right. But just to prove a point, I'm willing to compare LOWI default. When will you understand, Jim? We don't care if you hate x plane. Making these comparisons is just childish and immature.

One of your very own called them "ugly default buildings" not I.One of your very own said it was easy to place buildings not IOK, I'll compare LOWI default, showing the beautiful Fall foliage of Europe of say October 1st. Let me know when you have posted.

Who called XP10 airport buildings "ugly"? There ARE none.It IS very easy to place buildings. But to do it for the whole world is tedious to say the least.Feel free to post LOWI. You don't need my permission to do so.I still don't know why you continue to post here. You don't like X Plane. You have no intentions of getting X Plane. Yet you keep coming back. Can't stay away, Jim?

I will meet you after school by the flag pole :(

There are only 2 key people who keep dragging an otherwise productive forum, into an X Plane vs FSX soap opera. One of them is Jim.VERY surprising considering he provided very gentlemanly support for Activesky.

One of your very own called them "ugly default buildings" not I.One of your very own said it was easy to place buildings not IOK, I'll compare LOWI default, showing the beautiful Fall foliage of Europe of say October 1st. Let me know when you have posted.

Jim,Would you please change your attitude and your picture.

What happened here. This was about Flight. Geez. Can we get back to some humour again?Bob