Maybe for you the "eye candy" is the main reason you're fascinated with flight. For others, it may be the "magic" happening under the wings and the flight dynamics.

 

I must like the "magic" too! Afterall, I'm one who actually does build these RW things to fly my family and friends at 10,000' +, and around 200 mph.

However, I'd have never spend the RW money, time, etc.................if there was nothing to look at. I often read of new pilots, who feel that hops around the airport "patch" will make them happy. In short, they get bored rather quickly, and quit flying altogether. I like "sims" to go somewhere. In a few years, sims will be all that I have, to recreate memories. I'm all for the continued advancements in flight simming, and it won't matter which they are. I'll use all, that appeal to me.

:good:

My only problem with the UI as it is now is, that it is not efficent as it could and should be.

 

Chosing airports is one example but chosing AI is even more "wasted" time, especially because you have to adjust the AI manually for small/large airports. It takes minutes to do that if you have 20 AIs.

 

There are many other areas where XP is far behind what you can see in other sims and what is quite obvious:

1. Why it isn't possible to save joystick/key-assignments per plane?

2. Why do I have to click throught the whole path of a plugin over and over again for key assignments (Pilotview e.g.)?

3. Why is the font-size 8 (or is it 10?) so you have to hit your nose on the screen?

4. Why can't I access the rendering setting before I load the sim?

5. Why can't I save different rendering settings (useful because different flights may have different "priorities", right?).

....

 

I know....there are some plugins that solve some problems (not all)...but I see no reason why the obvious couldn't be integrated into X-Plane instead of needing to install (and update) dozens of plugins to make up for the shortcomings.

 

As I said, I don't care about the "style", the choice of words etc., that's not worth talking about and impossible to agree about. Just get used to it. BUT I want the UI to be more/max efficient so I don't have to spend/ i.e. waste minutes to set up XP10 for a specific flight.

Regarding the fact that this is version 10 it's really surprising how "basic" the UI still is. The quick flight screen is a first step, many others need to follow.

 

Well then, back to happy flying!

 

Cheers

Flo

64-bit has to follow. After that we can talk UI again… ;)

Step by step.

 

I acknowledge the simple effort and say thank you, while also seeing that the trip has just begun........

4. Why can't I access the rendering setting before I load the sim?

 

Never though of that one... a good idea!

 

With the length of time needed to load XP10, having as many things as possible available for change/selection before actually dropping into a cockpit would indeed be useful... especially if the changes you may want to make would require a reload/refresh of the scenery!

Flying has never been about one thing or another, but the whole of the experience. A car isn't about the handling of the car, but also where you're going, what you're hauling, and the journey it takes to get there, the same as an aircraft is about the reason for the flight as well as the sights and sounds along the way. If the simulated version doesn't behave (flight dynamics) as the expectations of the real thing, it ruins the immersion just as much as the graphical representation of the out-the-window view would ruin it if the grass were purple instead of green. For some, the fact that you fly flights you've actually done in a real aircraft or visit airports you've actually been to, the virtual world gives some clues as to the fact you are where you think you are. The Wal*Mart is 2.5NM near the turn from downwind to base, count 10 and start your turn to base. Those kinds of things are a bit too specific for XP, for sure, but the fact that the Las Vegas strip has no landmarks on it, the Statue of Liberty doesn't exist, the downtown high-rise skyline is in the wrong part of town (causing possible issues with approaches designed around that very skyline), these are things that ruin a flight to a known geographic location for some people, just as much as an aircraft that should be dying to take off at 65kts, yet won't rotate until at least 75kts or stalls when you put it into a >15degree bank at 80kts (none are examples of actual things in XP, but are strange behaviors that if existed, would be a no-go for flight modeling standards anyone would agree is faulty).

 

For me, I love XP. It has quirks that are different, but that is characteristic of someone else's take on how flight can be modeled by a machine that thinks in 1s and 0s. If you hold up a color, you may get a different name from each person who looks at it and that is a simple, singular sense (sight) compared the the auditory, visual and tactile senses that are engaged with aviation. The movement itself compared to your control inputs can give tactile and visual cues.

 

The environment in which I fly (weather or scenery) is just as important as how the aircraft behaves. One is not more important than the other. I have to believe that I am flying an aircraft (versus a boat with wings) just as much as I have to believe that I could be somewhere over a cityscape that REPRESENTS Orlando or New York City or San Francisco as opposed to some generic, unbelievable field of 3d buildings. When it is overcast, I expect to see clouds and a grey sky with subdued colors on all that is visible. When it's severe clear, I expect to see bright blue skies with vibrant colors on everything.

 

These subtle cues to color and light are very powerful and represent a feeling of being there. Of feeling the environment you're in. Capture those 3 things (flight model, scenery and atmosphere) to a T and there will be little for anyone to complain from any camp. XP, in my views, is 75% perfect flight model (the 25% missing comes from lack of necessary data - maybe a generalization of missing parameters could be used such as the moments of inertia, settings of Heavy Aircraft, Medium Aircraft, Light Aircraft, Aerobatic Aircraft could be used with different default values to get better ball-park dynamics), 50% world scenery (still missing buildings at airports, no coloring differences between overcast and clear days, plausible but unrealistic cities - without zoning data for residential/commercial/industrial/parks, can't see how to do this better, but maybe the ability to "building class" an area like land classing the ground would allow US to fill in these gaps as we are already expected to with WED and airport buildings.

Well after fiddling with the UI addition for the last few days, I will say that the changes made thus far do provide a better introductory experience. I would have probably stuck with Xplane much longer if it was more comprehensible to the non initiated upon start up. Some options, I am still uncertain if they are fully functional. For instance, I am unable to get an actual clear sky from the quick setup, but it could be a problem on my end.

 

Still playing with it.

make sure you don't have real wheather turned on.

For instance, I am unable to get an actual clear sky from the quick setup, but it could be a problem on my end.

 

The problem is, selecting clear skies in the quick setup screen, sets visibility to only 25 miles (IIRC).

To have 100% "true" clear sky colors and lighting in X-Plane 10, visibilty must be set to 80 miles or greater.

Try it, you'll see that with 80 miles visibility you'll have more vibrant lighting and colors.

Turned out to be my fault, as the quick settings don't override the download weather from the internet settings.

They need to add another option to the quick-flight option menu for the weather - Real World - so that if selecting another option, will disable the real world option and generate the appropriately selected option, selecting real world would re-enable the option.

The quick-flight landing page has so much potential! (*gee, where have we heard that before! snark!)

 

Honestly though - a real-world weather button would be great and a sync to real-world TIME button would be great.

 

How about some favorite scenario buttons? A selection of a few buttons where you the user have pre-programmed the location, time, and airport (*among other things?), so you can just click and launch.

 

There's a fine line between being a "quick-flight" page and a "OMGWTFBBQ look at all those options!" pages, but with a little measured thought, the quick flight landing page can certainly become a very welcome addition to the product.

 

Even a cute little "Randomize Everything!" button would be fun, too - at least on occasion.