anyone remember "stunt Island"?

 

Holy cow you just slammed me with nostalgia. Loved that game.

 

You mentioned that A2A "hacked" the FSX flight model to improve it. I'm also well aware of other developers, who have highly improved the flight models since they were originally designed back in 2005 & 6. And what do you know? These improved models are very much supported. And it's the same with a vast amount of scenery, & mesh upgrades, as well as replicating systems, upgrading graphics, so forth & so forth.

 

Therefor, to implicate that FSX is dead, or not being supported.......is quite mis-leading. Don't you think?

 

Quite frankly, what real difference is there between FSX/3rd party additions for FSX, and Laminar with it's 3rd party vendors? Not much, as I see it. FSX is a platform being improved by other programmers. XP is a program being improved by Austin Meyer & other programmers. Austin is not a creator of the universe, mother nature, nor did he invent the laws of physics. He's just another programmer.

 

L.Adamson

 

Larry

Here's what is known as fact.

FSX is unsupported by Microsoft and Aces.

It still suffers from OOM errors and CTD's

If there is a problem with FSX, there is no one you can contact to address any issues. And I know even you won't say FSX is perfect and bug free.

Even PMDG have said there are issues with FSX they wish were addressed when FSX was still supported.

A2A have to create their own flight model within SimConnect to work around what FSX has as stock.

I never said there was anything wrong with 3rd party developers continuing to develop for FSX. I'm happy they are.

If they didn't, what's the alternative? Learn the SDK for another flight sim? Who knows how long that'll take!

It shows the commitment they have to keep the FSX market moving forward.

 

 

Holy cow you just slammed me with nostalgia. Loved that game.

 

Thanks for the video-boy does that bring back memories.

 

Yes thank God Xplane 10 has been so amazingly bug free and stable since I have owned it.

Happy New Year!-and a toast to stunt island!

Jason, many thanks for understanding our position. This is not an FSX versus XP war. Sometimes I think LR misses the a few steps only to make a very large community happy and Austin could boost his sales if he would be open minded and takes a look at the standard of the other side. I don't care about HDR, 64bit and other internals. A desktop flightsim is about visuals. And a little sound an force feedback, lol. Happy New Year.

Jason, many thanks for understanding our position. This is not an FSX versus XP war. Sometimes I think LR misses the a few steps only to make a very large community happy and Austin could boost his sales if he would be open minded and takes a look at the standard of the other side. I don't care about HDR, 64bit and other internals. A desktop flightsim is about visuals. And a little sound an force feedback, lol. Happy New Year.

 

HDR certainly helps visuals and 64bit allows for larger management of RAM memory, so in theory, you can use larger higher resolution texture files which should help visuals as well.

Yes, I know. I meant visuals as what I see, scenery, landmarks, seasons, autogen and weather, not the technical stuff behind it, but you are right. I use UTX as base scenery, ORBX regions and add on airfields. 64bit and HDR is better technology, but not an improvement when it comes with bad autogen and missing objects. If we could have it all...

Perhaps you should leave the conversation to people better equipped to help FSX users.

 

A better place for FSX users to get help would be the FSX forum, don't you think?The X-Plane help department was doing fine till the FSX defense squad came along.

Obviously we were talking about Fsx users querying xplane, not something that really happens in the Fsx forum.

 

All I was implying is that us xplaners seem to understand better the pov of Fsx guys if we are Fsx guys as well. It seems some xplane guys who have no interest in Fsx change the flow of the threads in to an argument when others might just leave it as something like 'yeah, xplane won't do that yet, it's not going to be for you'. It's not bad to say that and it doesn't diminish the fun I get out of xplane. It shouldn't for any other xplane user either.

 

 

 

 

A better place for FSX users to get help would be the FSX forum, don't you think?The X-Plane help department was doing fine till the FSX defense squad came along.

Obviously we were talking about Fsx users querying xplane, not something that really happens in the Fsx forum.

 

Jason,

 

I'm not criticizing your interventions. If you read the first few posts of this thread, you'll understand fully what I meant. This thread was derailed at the beginning by obviously biased FSX advocates.

Well, the reason I'm here is that I'm interested in how XP comes along. If I need help for FSX I go somewhere else. But it works nice anyway. The attitude you show is well known from the org and from the master himselfs. The elitism and this attitude is what will prevent XP to get more customers. I will not disturb your party again.

Well, the reason I'm here is that I'm interested in how XP comes along

 

To quote you Ralf;

 

"No seasons, no landmarks, no working ATC and AI traffic. No ORBX, no Tongass Fjords X and nothing that comes even close. If you can live without all that, it might be worth it."

 

 

It doesn't sound like you're very interested in X-Plane to me.

 

 

A better place for FSX users to get help would be the FSX forum, don't you think?The X-Plane help department was doing fine till the FSX defense squad came along.

 

Interesting to me that this is the usual recourse and final answer when the point can no longer be defended. Despite the fact that the group of people you are labelling as defenders own and use Xplane seems never to have any bearing. Very strange.....

 

I haven't really used FSX since Xplane 10 came out so I don't think I meet the criteria of a FSX defense squad. I actually have as many critics of fsx as I do Xplane but it is really no longer a factor since one it is no longer alive.

 

I actually just have a problem with distortion of truth and it seems many of the extremely longterm users of all flight sims posting in this thread do to.The op asked for advice about getting Xplane. I actually advised him to do so. However, for instance posting two screen shots with one sim at its worst and one at its best and implying that is the truth is simply not. Claiming there are not problems with Xplane is not. Dismissing the fact that when one examines a new flight sim and tries to determine if there are enough improvements and functions from their previous sim to change is a valid point-dismissing this is not.

 

...and imho this damages Xplane greatly! When people sense they are not getting an honest opinion of a product many walk away. Even more dangerous is when one buys a product and then finds out it is not at all what they expected, it is even worse for the product. a business model of not being truthful is dangerous. One that dismisses its customers is doomed.

 

If one for instance embrasses the two screen shots submitted above as the truth, has owned FSX for many years, and then fires up Xplane and explores the world, do you really think that person will be a happy camper? If a person enjoys a feature set, and perhaps requires it, does it do any good to dismiss this and not be honest about what Xplane offers and does not? Does it do any good to talk about ctd's on FSX ( I personally have never had one) and then not mention the instability of Xplane (I can no longer run 32 bit) that have kept manufactures from issuing patches ( I have a direct quote from Carenado on another thread on this)due to its moving target for the last year?

 

It may be a short term strategy, but long term I believe great damage is done. Honesty is always the best policy. Seems politicians can't ever learn this and it always backfires on them-yet they never learn.

 

I still recommend buying Xplane-but for the honest reasons I submitted above-pure and simple... And I think the Op could become a convert for Xplane if he is given an accurate picture both of what Xplane is and is not. That is I believe what he requested, and yes it may or may not be worth it to him.

It is true that looking at the beginning of the thread a couple people said some blanket statements that were silly and admittedly that got Goran taking one literally and posting FSX at worse vs xplane. A post that I didnt mind as it did show the absurdity of what the troll said. It may have been forgotten why Goran posted those shots.

 

Of course it all went sideways as it does. Somehow we just have to ignore the trolls that throw in one liners and not devote the rest of the day to proving them wrong as we usually then throw in our own bias.

 

I think the FSX regulars here gave good advice as it was balanced. Just like we don't need the silly one liners against plane we dont need the blind faith to switch to the new technology. I think the more experienced xplane guys need to also temper the one liners made by the fly by night xplane guys as well - not just let it fly because it's pro xplane.

 

Remember, there are a lot of diehard xplane guys that are not moving off 9, so we dont have to espouse to fsx guys about their dyeing technology.

<br />It is true that looking at the beginning of the thread a couple people said some blanket statements that were silly and admittedly that got Goran taking one literally and posting FSX at worse vs xplane. A post that I didnt mind as it did show the absurdity of what the troll said. It may have been forgotten why Goran posted those shots.<br />

 

I was a bit surprised to see a number of X-Plane users surprised by my 2006 stock default FSX pic, that I posted after those two screenshots. Some thought it was 3rd party. Some thought it didn't exist. And yet,it was FSX as originally released, and looked just like that. What this tells me, is that some who claim they came from FSX only to go on to X-Plane without looking back..........really didn't see much of FSX in the first place. BTW-- when I thought I had an FSX CTD -- it was the mother board instead.

 

L.Adamson --- FS9/FSX/XP8/XP9/XP10 demo -- still on the HD