Later, still thinking, I purchased Xplane for Ipad.And there it was. Good reviews almost across the board. (though many were obviously hard core simmers, they were still there, and talking about having fun) Simplified controls that adapted to the reality's and constraints of the Ipad market, A graphically informative and compact Ui, (some legacy stuff but not obtrusive) a non intimidating demeanor....... And no change to its computer namesake at all in that regard.

I was kinda thinking of that. Austin once said, on FSBreak ep. 22 I believe, that releasing X-Plane for iOS quadrupled LR's revenue. I think he would have never been able to sustain the long development time of XP10 hadn't it been for that pile of cash from all those casual simmers. I mean there is still a HUGE potential user base for XP10 that just needs to be reached out for.

But anyway:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q83tbRYQQas&feature=related

:(

Haha, you can run but you can't hide! :(

The 'nasty' thing about this program is its realism and complexityThis did make me chuckle for several reasons. One of them being related to my other PC-related hobby of being a grognard. Just like loading up in a default 747 or whatever....imagine booting up Gary Grigby's "War In The East" or John Tillers "Campaign Series" with no prior knowledge of strategy, tactics, weapon system generalities, symbology, topography ad naseum. Like the fledgling simulator pilot faced with a bewildering number of choices-not the least of which being "how do I fly/why am I flying/where am I going".

So how did you end up playing those games at all? Did you have any prior knowledge about strategy, tactics, etc. before trying a strategy game for the first time ever? If not, would you have stuck with it had that first game been insanely hard and impossible to tackle for a beginner?I literally grew up with flight sims. My first sim was F-19 Stealth Figher by Microprose, circa 1990. I was 11 years by then and my dad had bought it because he always admired airplanes and wanted to fulfill his secret dream of flying one himself. The sim was way less complex than what we are used today, but still it got him frustrated very soon because he couldn't tackle it and he didn't have the time and patience to learn it all.On the other hand, I, being a kid with a nearly unlimited amount of time and patience got quickly hooked on it, because it sparked my interest and I was willing to try everything until I got it right. Maybe one or two years later, I bought a sim named Airbus A320 for the Amiga. It was way more complex, featuring VOR navigation and other fancy stuff. But I couldn't understand it. So I dumped it shortly thereafter and continued flying other sims. There were a lot of sims to choose between these days and that let me continue this hobby. So over the years, I grew into more complex sims slowly but steadily.I'm sorry for my dad that he had to give up this dream because he never managed to learn all this stuff. But now, 22 years later, I might be in the same situation had I not gained all that sim experience in the years before. I imagine how I would react as a first-time simmer if I got into X-Plane. Probably I would have dumped it shortly after trying web demo, just because it's too overwhelming.

The same applies to other complex simulators....."Steel Beasts" comes to mind as does the Silent Hunter series.The only complex "realistic" simulator in my recent memory that could be instantly and easily dumbed down may have been IL-2 in arcade mode.

I really hate to bring up these comparisons with FSX but here we go again:I just downloaded the XP10 web demo again just to make sure how the experience is when you run it for the first time. You are greeted by the joystick calibration, fair enough. Just would be nice to know that you have to click the 'x' once you're done in order to dismiss the dialog.But then: Boom! you find yourself in the friggin 747! The most complex aircraft X-Plane has to offer. Lots of switches, levers and intimidating displays around you. In the menu you can click on About->Instructions and you'll get...ahem...a few lines text that tell you how to use the mouse are joystick for operating aircraft. And that's it.IMO this demo is NOT a good advertisement to get sim novices into using the product.Now compare that to FSX (Full version, granted I'm comparing apples with oranges).Tutorial flight one. You are in the Trike, the least complex aircraft the sim has to offer. A voice is telling you what keys to press and how to make a short takeoff and landing on the same runway. Subsequent tutorials include taxiing, approaches, etc. Later they take you into the Piper Cub, then the C172 and even later jets and helos.And if you want to dig more into the subject matter, you can use the flying lessons. Read some theory then apply it in interactive flying lessons. Step by step, you'll become more proficient.I know these tutorials in FSX could be done better. But I want to see something like that in X-Plane too. Not for me though --I know how to fly-- but so that I can honestly recommend XP to someone who wants try a flight simulator for the first time ever.

Its interesting that our experiences parallel each other so closely. I remember playing the heck out of stealth fighter with my unlimited free time, and then moving on to the other Sims that were available. I also remember those fondly remembered Sim franchises dying out one by one as the hardcore fans drove them into becoming so arcane, that the barrier to entry for new converts was nearly insurmountable.I am hoping Xplane10 can avoid that, but honestly, the signs are not good. Its a whole different mindset, and my doubts are kind of growing that the enthusiast market will be able to flatten the accessibility curve enough to attract the new people it needs for long term health. It may be up to the third parties to save Xplane from itself, if they can.

Edited February 21, 201214 yr by HiFlyer'

http://www.amazon.co...nDateDescendingOne of the many places I looked at for reviews. I was actually a bit afraid to link it in case enthusiasts decided to flood it with positive reviews to give the "correct" picture of things. The first thing you might note is the sharp and obvious distinction between obvious enthusiasts and even real pilots, as opposed to FSX fans and then just the average bored and bewildered Joe.Pretty please note how often the interface and general user experience is mentioned. This can be fixed!

Edited February 22, 201214 yr by HiFlyer'

The ui needs a massive overhaul. i was really shocked when i started x-plane 10 the first time. It told me "go away, you wimp - this one is for experts only"some configuration screens are way too cryptic and overloaded, others totally useless for end-users (e.g. debugging screens)I expect a consumable and intuitive experience - regardless of the complexity behind. apple showed to me that this is possible, and also FS 3rd parties devs try to simplify their UIs as much as possible (rex, etc.)I want to dive into the experience while planning & flying and forget the technology around me. But x-plane tells me every minute "Wake up little chicken, I am a super realistic software development beast - just look how many cool switches and parameters i have implemented"the welcome screen with puff algorithm in the background says it all...

I am hoping Xplane10 can avoid that, but honestly, the signs are not good. Its a whole different mindset, and my doubts are kind of growing that the enthusiast market will be able to flatten the accessibility curve enough to attract the new people it needs for long term health. It may be up to the third parties to save Xplane from itself, if they can.

I'm slightly more optimistic in this respect. Why you may ask? Because Austin is a capitalist and he knows the market decides what will be the next-gen sim platform.Now that P3D kinda tanked and simmers know that Flight! won't be FS11, he has a realistic chance of conquering the market. But he also needs support from addon developers. He's managed to get big names like Aerosoft in the boat. But who are their typical customers? Mathijs always portrays that ficticious customer as the beer drinking guy who has maybe an hour to kill in the evening.If those customers stay away from X-Plane, maybe because you can't use the UI while being slightly intoxicated or just because it is not as approachable, Aersoft will be out sooner or later. PMDG may have a different idea about their typical customer, but they won't cut it alone. And PMDG's commitment to X-Plane is still very careful at this moment, to say the least.And think about the new prospective simmers. At the current state of X-Plane, they might decide to try their first flying steps with MS Flight. Later, if these first steps turn into a real hobby, they may want to move on to a more complex sim. But if X-Plane stays the way it is, the gap between Flight and XP may be too wide to jump across for some of these people.And the people who don't want to move on after Flight? Some may say 'who cares about them?' But the would-be simmers spent their cash at Microsoft, not on X-Plane, not for 3rd-Party addons. Those may not be recurring sales that the X-Plane ecosystem has missed, but who cares where money comes from? These lost sales will hurt all of us because if X-Plane is a smaller market there will be less variety in add-ons.So why shouldn't X-Plane be as approachable so you'd want to recommend it to your Mom, Dad, Grandma and that guy who just fell off the bar stool? There's nothing wrong about that. It is the right way to go. Bigger user base wins -that's basic network effect theory.Capitalism is wonderful, but it can be cruel if you don't get it right. Austin is smart, he gets it. And I think he is smart enough to understand that he may need some help from other people like Aerosoft, who have more experience in dealing with average Joe customers.

Capitalism is wonderful .... Austin is smart, he gets it.

And apparently he's been on the loosing end of it this entire time. Austin's sim has always been a distant 2nd and he's lucky that it's not lower because there is no other real competition after X-Plane. He is where he is by virtue of there being no competition on non-windows platforms. I have X-Plane 8, 9, and 10 and the UI is not the so much the problem, as it is more the symptom of people like to pick out about what's wrong with X-Plane. It is more like a cheap cherry on-top of a plain ice cream sundae where they didn't add the toppings you had asked for. This is the situation with X-Plane, its feature set is currently a work-in-progress, and in some ways falls short of the bar set by FS2004 in terms of scenery when it was released to market -- nearly 10 years ago. Making the UI better isn't going to change the overall presentation. It's just putting lipstick on a pig ... it's still a pig. (but hey, they still have plenty of time to turn it into a really tasty ham one day) With that said, I completely agree with gregerm's assessment, most non-enthusiasts are going to go for eye candy first everything else is secondary.

Also enthusiasts go for eye candy, the ui is a vital part of the overall experience.There is not too much difference between nicely looking aircraft textures and a good map with weather information. Where is the different between an intuitive airport selection versus easy handling of transponder knobs...

@ Tom79I certainly hope soI think Xp10 is revolutionary. The included innovations are the first real jump in flight simulator technology since FS2004, and anyone who has seen procedural city design knows that the routines to fill in Xplane10 cities already exist and can take the Sim to a whole new level of world realism. I want it very badly to succeed, but the most beautiful diamond on earth is worthless on the other side of an impenetrable wall.This is a really old argument. I was a little-kid lurker on many long-gone sites (Terrified that the adults would find me and eat me or something!) And I remember the fights (flame wars, actually) between the moderates requesting accessibility, and the hard core requesting even more minutia. The hard core was always much more angry and adamant, and in almost every case the moderates lost. "Go play consoles if you want dumbed-down pablum" and "This isn't a game, this is for serious people!!" were the cries.Then I listened to the howls as the sites disappeared. :unsure:I understand your optimism, but I also remember angrily thinking back then "Dumb grownups!! What did they think would happen if they chased everyone away!!" :LMAO:The current state of the Xplane experience looks like a really good chaser.

Edited February 22, 201214 yr by HiFlyer'

And apparently he's been on the loosing end of it this entire time. Austin's sim has always been a distant 2nd and he's lucky that it's not lower because there is no other real competition after X-Plane.

History of competitors of MSFS:Pro-Pilot - Long dead and gone.Flight Unlimited - Long dead and gone.Fly! - Long dead and gone.X-Plane - Alive and well.Should tell you something about the capitalistic abilities of Austin.Marco

History of competitors of MSFS:Pro-Pilot - Long dead and gone.Flight Unlimited - Long dead and gone.Fly! - Long dead and gone.X-Plane - Alive and well.Should tell you something about the capitalistic abilities of Austin.Marco

A point.In fact as long as Xplane remains within the niche its created, I think they are almost invulnerable. The stated goal of taking the crown from FSX is where uncertainty arises, because all Sims that dared direct competition in that marketplace are history.The technical advantage is in Xplanes court, but can they leave that niche and compete in a mano-a-mano contest for the consumer market-space as Xplane is currently configured?Its almost impossible to believe that all these years later, Xplane has still not managed to create a passable rendition of water, when even a free game like flight-gear did it and forgot it aeons ago. Ditto on airports and etc. The focus on the internals of the engine is...... not a retail focus.This is a time of golden opportunity, but there is not unlimited time, and details matter.

Edited February 22, 201214 yr by HiFlyer'

I agree with Marco and Devon. X-Plane was late to the game and the staying in the niche helped its survival. But to come out of the niche, it has to dress up, get a haircut and show some good manners (to stay with Devon's earlier analogy).I'll try to play a little more with the web demo on the weekend to find some other things that could be improved and will hope that someone at LR reads this thread sooner or later.

The UI presentation doesn't bother me so much. But certain functions do (by their absence). As an example:When I select a single engine prop, I want my levers and buttons to be configured for certain functions. For a twin jet, I want levers and buttons assigned to other functions, and so forth for a fighter jet.So why do you have to re-assign each individual button *all over again* when you want to jump back into a particular plane? It would be an intuitive step for X-Plane to remember a set of button "profiles", and allow these profiles to be attached to aircraft when you load them.But, LR are making improvements. The right mouse click function is one example of that. I'd say LR should focus on function over style. That's what matters, and there's still lots of room for improvement here. I've reported some issues via the bug reporter.

The UI presentation doesn't bother me so much. But certain functions do (by their absence). As an example:When I select a single engine prop, I want my levers and buttons to be configured for certain functions. For a twin jet, I want levers and buttons assigned to other functions, and so forth for a fighter jet.So why do you have to re-assign each individual button *all over again* when you want to jump back into a particular plane? It would be an intuitive step for X-Plane to remember a set of button "profiles", and allow these profiles to be attached to aircraft when you load them.But, LR are making improvements. The right mouse click function is one example of that.I'd say LR should focus on function over style. That's what matters, and there's still lots of room for improvement here. I've reported some issues via the bug reporter.

I would agree to some extent, since a simulator is by definition about fidelity to the real thing. I would agree even more if this was the first, second or third iteration of the Sim. Stretching further, lets say it was even the seventh or eighth iteration of the Sim.At that point function over form, and time to affect same is perhaps reasonable. Unfortunately, we are now at the tenth iteration, and it is apparent by the recurring issues on the usability front that the focus has been primarily function for that entire time. The math, calculations and minutia of function have received copious attention, and there is nothing that says that has to stop. At this point though, one might wonder when exactly, time will be spared for even as much form as FS2004 had a zillion years ago.Again, its all a moot point if Xplane remains within its present marketspace. I think the patience in that segment may well stretch to the end of time.If however, they are serious about going after the FSX and the FLIGHT! market, I hope that there is some realization that the vast set of casual users in that space are unlikely to be willing to look beyond the extreme lack of anything resembling polish or friendliness or even usability, solely on behalf of an unending search for the last decimal place of perfect mathematical perfection. Not when there are other options available.Any attempt to approach the IPad/Android market in that way would have sunk without a trace probably within a week, and to their credit, they made the changes necessary to succeed. Can they be be persuaded to do it again?

Edited February 23, 201214 yr by HiFlyer'

I like the idea of a per-plane input configuration. Wouldn't even be hard to implement. Just add buttons in the repsective dialogs to switch between default assignments and plane-specific overrides.I mean simplifying the UI doesn't necessarily mean to make the sim less functional and less attractive for advances users. It's just a matter of hiding details in the right places where those who need it can access them.

If however, they are serious about going after the FSX and the FLIGHT! market, I hope that there is some realization that the vast set of casual users in that space are unlikely to be willing to look beyond the extreme lack of anything resembling polish or friendliness or even usability

I think a prerequisite of that is that LR need to hire more staff (assuming development on function isn't compromised). Can't remember how many make up the LR team, but I seem to remember 12 staff members being mentioned. Considering simpler games (e.g. Angry Birds) have bigger programming teams (and even bigger marketing / branding teams), LR would need to hire a lot more staff to apply the neccesary polish in a typical software lifecycle period.