So... does anyone else get the impression that whenever a trend towards a positive outlook about XP creeps up, it's as if there's some sort of klaxon going off saying "WARNING! Enthusiasm rising! Must smack down!". This, of course, results in these "Ah, X-plane. How cute. Wake me when it's the fully featured 6-DOF full motion simulator FSX is." posts.

 

...or am I just imagining things?

 

Its not a bash. Its a dedicated hardcore FSX base that has been around a long time spend a lot of money in some cases thousands in addons and hardware, and net result while finicky to say the least, if all goes well, FSX looks beautiful especially with some of the newer stuff coming out. FSX with the appropriate addons is very very mature. Its hard to just jump over and adopt a new platform especially one that not proven as to where the market will go. Personally as nice as some parts of xplane are, I think alot including add on devs are waiting to see what LM does with making FSX code 64 bit somehow someway and that there is some sort of plugin 32bit to 64bit SDK for all the addons. That way all our investment doesnt suddenly go POOF!

 

Oh and can you imagine the mass exodus to xplane if there was this magical FSX to XPX 64bit port of all FSX addons?

Well, it's wonderful to see the well-reasoned posts covering this subject! I think the 3rd party DEVS actually LIKE the fact that FSX has ceased development, because that does remove the threat of something they charge money for becoming 'built-in' to the simulator in later revisions.

 

Honestly, I'm ok with spending a few bucks on XPlane and seeing what happens. I have dreamed about 64-bits for at least 2 years - and I don't see Lockheed making any definitive 'it will happen' statements. Partly because they probably are reluctant to experience the pain of re-coding something the size and scope of FSX 32-bit version.

 

The thing that I love about Austin and Laminar is they embody the very spirit of Flight itself - courage and a desire to cross new frontiers. You can see it in just how good some things look in XPX. I nearly fell over when my demo mode cancelled by control surfaces after 15 minutes and my plane headed toward a freeway overpass. Holy Moley the graphics were drop-dead beautiful and all STANDARD (default). On it's best day, even with every scenery and texture you can throw at it, FSX just doesn't look like THAT, period. Even if frame rates were identical, I would lean toward XPX for the roads and road vehicles alone. It was what stopped me dead in my tracks from the first moment I ever heard about X-Plane 10.

 

I'm happy to ride along with whatever Austin and Laminar bring to us. Like the line from the old Frankenstein movie - "It's Alive! It's ALIVE!"

 

PS: By no means and I saying I'll never fly FSX again - I'm sure I will. But the more FSX stuff that moves to XPX - well, then it becomes harder and harder to go back...

Well, it's wonderful to see the well-reasoned posts covering this subject! I think the 3rd party DEVS actually LIKE the fact that FSX has ceased development, because that does remove the threat of something they charge money for becoming 'built-in' to the simulator in later revisions.

 

Honestly, I'm ok with spending a few bucks on XPlane and seeing what happens. I have dreamed about 64-bits for at least 2 years - and I don't see Lockheed making any definitive 'it will happen' statements. Partly because they probably are reluctant to experience the pain of re-coding something the size and scope of FSX 32-bit version.

 

The thing that I love about Austin and Laminar is they embody the very spirit of Flight itself - courage and a desire to cross new frontiers. You can see it in just how good some things look in XPX. I nearly fell over when my demo mode cancelled by control surfaces after 15 minutes and my plane headed toward a freeway overpass. Holy Moley the graphics were drop-dead beautiful and all STANDARD (default). On it's best day, even with every scenery and texture you can throw at it, FSX just doesn't look like THAT, period. Even if frame rates were identical, I would lean toward XPX for the roads and road vehicles alone. It was what stopped me dead in my tracks from the first moment I ever heard about X-Plane 10.

 

I'm happy to ride along with whatever Austin and Laminar bring to us. Like the line from the old Frankenstein movie - "It's Alive! It's ALIVE!"

 

PS: By no means and I saying I'll never fly FSX again - I'm sure I will. But the more FSX stuff that moves to XPX - well, then it becomes harder and harder to go back...

fly in a snowstorm/cold weather and watch the windows freeze up or defrost when anti-ice is on.....or even during rain, the water/rain effects are amazing.

fly in a snowstorm/cold weather and watch the windows freeze up or defrost when anti-ice is on.....or even during rain, the water/rain effects are amazing.

 

I've already seen the raindrops on the windows... I have to say you're exactly right. STUNNING. Now if only Virtually (Umberto and team) would come with XP-Ground Services X, PMDG released the NGX for Xplane, and FSinn and AivlaSoft EFB both worked in XPX - well, I would be quite happy indeed. While I'm dreaming, FSDreamteam building all their payware airports to take advantage of XPX 64- Look out World!

welcome to the xplane 10 family :Hug: :drinks: Aerosoft AES will come, on the Aerosoft forums, a dev posted that they are working on it.

I very much enjoy both sims. played around with x-plane 5, 8 and now 10 I gotta say that when I set all my renderings settings to the max over Seattle I was awe struck. On my video screen was a flight sim that seems within grasp to have the capabilities to pretty much render a complete city scape. I have never seen so many 3D objects on my screen at one time. Ive gota an I980X running at 4.3 with 18g ram and a 680GTX 4g gpu, my lowest frames were at 17fps.

 

A little off topic question for you Robert, I noticed you have a 690gtx and I was wondering if it is a worth while investment for X-plane? I was considering going SLI but after I did a bit of reading on the Laminar website, I got the impression that I would be disapointed with it.

 

X-plane is a fine product out of the box, I wish that Laminar would just keep to optimizing and improving the important fundamental's and let all the third parties make all the candy.

 

I've already seen the raindrops on the windows... I have to say you're exactly right. STUNNING. Now if only Virtually (Umberto and team) would come with XP-Ground Services X, PMDG released the NGX for Xplane, and FSinn and AivlaSoft EFB both worked in XPX - well, I would be quite happy indeed. While I'm dreaming, FSDreamteam building all their payware airports to take advantage of XPX 64- Look out World!

 

Hi Robert, there is a ground services plugin over at the Org, although still in development it does provide basic pushback, gpu etc. It will work on 64 bit too (python scripts).

 

http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?app=downloads&showfile=15881

 

...AivlaSoft EFB both worked in XPX - well, I would be quite happy indeed....

 

Yes me too. Absolutlely love the Aivlasoft EFB software. Can't fly FSX without it. I thought an XPX version was on the cards, but that was a while ago now. Perhaps I was dreaming too. Hehe.

 

Rhydian

Its not a bash. Its a dedicated hardcore FSX base that has been around a long time spend a lot of money in some cases thousands in addons and hardware, and net result while finicky to say the least, if all goes well, FSX looks beautiful especially with some of the newer stuff coming out. FSX with the appropriate addons is very very mature. Its hard to just jump over and adopt a new platform especially one that not proven as to where the market will go. Personally as nice as some parts of xplane are, I think alot including add on devs are waiting to see what LM does with making FSX code 64 bit somehow someway and that there is some sort of plugin 32bit to 64bit SDK for all the addons. That way all our investment doesnt suddenly go POOF!

 

Oh and can you imagine the mass exodus to xplane if there was this magical FSX to XPX 64bit port of all FSX addons?

 

I've always had a different view about money spent on software. I don't see it as an investment as much as paying for entertainment, just like any other gaming software I purchase. At some point, I decide that I've gotten my money's worth out of something and don't consider it any sort of loss if I can't carry it over to newer or different platforms. With FSX, I know that everything I've bought for it will work for it, so if I ever feel the need to use FSX stuff, it's available. I've never had any sort of expectation that FSX products must work for X-Plane. The fact that some sceneries do is purely a bonus.

A little off topic question for you Robert, I noticed you have a 690gtx and I was wondering if it is a worth while investment for X-plane? I was considering going SLI but after I did a bit of reading on the Laminar website, I got the impression that I would be disapointed with it.

 

 

It's early days yet- but so far, I'm very happy with the GTX690 when running 64-bit X-Plane 10. I am loading the world-wide scenery pack, and I'm going to activate the new 777 and 787 planes I got from X-Plane.org store. We'll see how that shakes out. I'm pretty jacked though. It's almost like getting to go back in time and start my fascination with flight simming at the level I always HOPED it would be... but as yet had never quite gotten FSX to give me. While many have said that FSX is CPU-bound and gives little benefit to those with high end and not optimized for SLI- we'll have to see if DX11/OpenGL and 64-bits makes a difference in that prediction when applied to X-Plane 10. I'm willing to bet that the 690 will shine. I can also tell you that FXAA -is- supported in XP 10. [ FXAA is a fast shader-based post-processing technique that can be applied to any program [and] can be used in conjunction with other anti-aliasing settings to improve overall image quality ]

 

I build YouTube videos, have nearly 200,000 hits on my channel - all FSX till now. I will begin making X-Plane 10 64-bit videos using my Sony Cam and a tripod and we'll let the viewers decide between the two... but right now I got a b-load of configuration and setup waiting for me :dance:

 

It's early days yet- but so far, I'm very happy with the GTX690 when running 64-bit X-Plane 10. I am loading the world-wide scenery pack, and I'm going to activate the new 777 and 787 planes I got from X-Plane.org store. We'll see how that shakes out. I'm pretty jacked though. It's almost like getting to go back in time and start my fascination with flight simming at the level I always HOPED it would be... but as yet had never quite gotten FSX to give me. While many have said that FSX is CPU-bound and gives little benefit to those with high end and not optimized for SLI- we'll have to see if DX11/OpenGL and 64-bits makes a difference in that prediction when applied to X-Plane 10. I'm willing to bet that the 690 will shine. I can also tell you that FXAA -is- supported in XP 10. [ FXAA is a fast shader-based post-processing technique that can be applied to any program [and] can be used in conjunction with other anti-aliasing settings to improve overall image quality ]

 

I build YouTube videos, have nearly 200,000 hits on my channel - all FSX till now. I will begin making X-Plane 10 64-bit videos using my Sony Cam and a tripod and we'll let the viewers decide between the two... but right now I got a b-load of configuration and setup waiting for me :dance:

 

Bob, I'll probably start tinkering with XP 10 and 64bit this weekend. If I can get the C172 gauges to show on a 4th monitor, then I am willing to give this a shot. I'm still waiting on the author of G2XPL to email me the link to download it.

 

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

 

 

BTW, I got a 7 day suspension at X-Plane.org for asking where could I download G2XPL from. That was my very first and only post and I got a 7 day suspension. LMAO What a bunch of douches...

 

Is X-Plane.org the OFFICIAL support forum for X-Plane? If it is, that explains why XP hasn't taken off as fast as we would want it to. Who's gonna spend $70 on a software and then have to endure a bunch of douches when you try to get any support.

 

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

"What a bunch of douches" :LMAO: :LMAO: :LMAO:

Holy smoke guys... I did a quick lap at night with HDR enabled and I WAS BLOWN AWAY!!!! Just wow! I'm sorry, but especially when it comes to night flying, FSX cannot hold a handle to XP 10. No way. The more I try XP, the more I am digging it. Unfortunately in my situation, I think if I want to go with XP 10 for my home cockpit setup, I will be forced to get 2 more PCs in order to use them for the visuals, with a 4th PC for instruments. I definately can't afford 2 more PCs similar to my current one, so I need to really weigh in my options.

 

Perhaps, I can build two i5s with 580GTXs and then tone down my i7 so that all 3 PCs perform similarly as far as IQ is concerned? Which brings me to my next question... I really want to use G2XPL but if I go with 3 PCs, will that means that EACH PC will also need to have G2XPL running? That's 3x the download when it comes to the photoreal images!!!! Damn, so many options and decisions to just fly a simulator!

Perhaps, I can build two i5s with 580GTXs and then tone down my i7 so that all 3 PCs perform similarly as far as IQ is concerned? Which brings me to my next question... I really want to use G2XPL but if I go with 3 PCs, will that means that EACH PC will also need to have G2XPL running? That's 3x the download when it comes to the photoreal images!!!! Damn, so many options and decisions to just fly a simulator!

 

Hey Efrain!

 

Yes, the closer you look into XPXG (X-Plane 10 Global), the better and better she looks! Then you discover X-Plane.org which is the site that offers both freeware -and- payware for X-Plane, and the world opens up even more.

 

The free airport upgrades on X-Plane.org are stunning... far better than the 'default' airports that ship with FSX in my opinion. The daytime views today when I landed at San Diego (KSAN) were amazing.

 

I STRONGLY recommend you consider the MSi 4GB DDR5 GTX680 card. (with famous FROZER-III cooling system 20 degrees C cooler than the nVidia reference design!)

 

The important keyword is DOUBLE the VRAM memory on your video card. As you begin piling on the eye candy, particularly in HDR resolution, you will NEED that doubled Video card ram! Without 4GB (most video cards start at 512MB, then 1GB, 1.5 and till now 2GB was 'max') you will have issues if you want all your graphics at maximum.

 

Today you can get the 4GB version - this is a _MUST_ if you think you will want to fly XPlane at the maximum eye-candy levels!

 

I have the GTX690 which is a pair of GTX680 processors in SLI on one card, but each Keppler graphics processor only has 2GB per-side. Even though combined there is 4GB of memory, this is only a 'mirror', not 4GB available to the PC for gaming! So better for xPlane would be the GTX 680 but ONLY if you buy the top-model with 4GB of DDR5 memory. I am a huge fan of the msi brand nVidia cards because of what I regard is superior cooling design! My current card is EVGA, but the GTX690 is not available with any of the better cooling designs - only the 'nvidia reference design' is offered.

 

Please keep us posted on your progress. I bought the Javier Cortes payware UFMC (Universal FMC), he also has a 737-specific version for 20 Euros each. The default FMC in xPlane is sadly, not much like the real-world, and if you fly jets in FSX, you will NEED to upgrade the FMC. There is a FREE version available called xFMC which works "OK". I don't know yet if Javier's is better as I haven't got my unlock key from him yet.