Can't agree with you more Greg.

 

My point is: Why do people keep comparing apples and oranges? In my point of view FSX and XPX are in many ways different. I see FSX more like a game type of simulation with lots of eye candy, it does the job very well. XPX is more on the tech side, it also does the job very well. Both have strenghts and also flows, so why keep comparing.

 

I find it hard to believe that we will ever get a sim with all the goodies "The perfect sim", no way. The decision of which one to keep will come down to what ever flaws you are willing to accept. Some may decide to have them both."game like"-I don't play any on a computer ... Nada.

 

Not sure what apples and oranges have to do with it. Since 1981 and more importantly since 1989 when I first got my ppl have always looked for the program that would create the most complete experience on a computer at the time.Keep looking, evaluating, and re evaluating. Keep hoping, keep trying all, and giving them all the benefit of the doubt.

Spent more money on add ins for this version than any since Xplane 1. Had great hope. It is getting closer and I'll still use it here and there- a big improvement from the past...but still will be the least used in my present sim arsenal due to many of the jcomm lists along with my own. I'll still be watching...and hoping.Games-just don't do them on computers...period.

To Jcomm...........Thanks to IE8, which I think my daughter loaded while I was on vacation, these forums are screwed up. And I can't reply to PMs.

 

Larry, if you can at least read it, I've just sent you an alternative contact :-) (sorry for the out-of-post guys... :blush: )

<br />Games-just don't do them on computers...period.<br />

 

Me neither.

 

 

Larry, if you can at least read it, I've just sent you an alternative contact :-) (sorry for the out-of-post guys... :blush: )

Got it

The terms "game" & "technical" have me confused, when it comes to these sims. Actually, I'm not confused. I just don't think that either one is specifically technical, while the other is more game like.

 

To clarify - when I said "technical" (quoting another post in another thread), I didn't mean "more accurate" or "not gamelike." I used "technical" in the sense that Formula 1 commentators do when they refer to a course as a "technical circuit" - that is, one that deliberately creates different driving conditions in order to make a series of demands on the car or the driver or both. You find this in modern circuits like the ones designed by Hermann Tilke, as opposed to older ones like Spa-Francorchamps that may not be as deliberately thought out, but that are much more atmospheric and more enjoyable for both drivers and spectators. To me at least, X-Plane 10 offers a lot of technical subtlety that affects the feel of flight, but doesn't offer the same atmosphere out the windshield (apart from night flight, where it's as atmospheric as all get-out). I don't buy into the game vs. simulation fight - to me they're both simulations, but X-Plane right now feels chillier. I admire it, but I don't yet like it the way I want to.