Airports can be made to exacting standards with quality rivaling the best found in any simulation, but regional scenery replacement a la Orbx will remain a near impossibility in X-Plane so long as the procedure to create such underlying scenery is dependent on such a proprietary process.

 

-Greg

 

This is not true at all. Check Realscenery as just one example.

This is not true at all. Check Realscenery as just one example.

 

Realscenery is simply orthophotos, which is quite easy to do right now in X-Plane and indeed can be done on a global scale if someone desired, but that is decidedly not Orbx.

 

I'll concede that my statement is inaccurate if you can provide me with an example of an X-Plane 10 freeware or payware developer who is or has produced a scenery package remotely close to the following criteria:

 

250,000 mi

²

of refreshed terrain mesh, higher detail landuse data, proper and enhanced water data, wholesale autogen improvements, roads, rails, rivers, and new textures to boot, blended seamlessly into the surrounding world.

 

That is Orbx. Realscenery is not.

 

(*Heck - I'd like to see even 1 square mile of such a thing - it simply can't be done yet in X-Plane by anyone other than the Laminar Research team)

What about http://www.scenery4xp.com? That seems to comply with your conditions.

Bottom line is, if XPX is as good as many claim,why aren't we seeing the likes of Orbx,FSDT, Fly Tampa, PMDG, Qualitywings, Majestic developing scenery and aircraft for it. And where's Opus, REX. And Active sky and the many other addonn goodies. Something is not jiving. Sure its smooth and has some pretty stunning momments but until its enhanced and gets to at least par with FSX, I struggle to see why I would Invest in it at this point. One to watch fir sure,but there wont be a mass Exodus until those things are taken care of.

 

 

 

 

Bottom line is, if XPX is as good as many claim,why aren't we seeing the likes of Orbx,FSDT, Fly Tampa, PMDG, Qualitywings, Majestic developing scenery and aircraft for it. And where's Opus, REX. And Active sky and the many other addonn goodies. Something is not jiving.

 

X-Plane just went 64 bit;

 

It has taken FSX 3pd's 6 years to reach the level of quality most of the current addons offer. It's naive to think that in only a few months we want everything and anything that there is to be offer for FSX be available for XP.

 

Give XP a year and most of us will be amazed of what will be available and the best part of this is that most it will be 64bit.

 

When XP went 64bit, every 32bit sim and addon became obsolete.

 

XP 64 is the future, whether we want to accept it or not.

X-Plane just went 64 bit;

 

It has taken FSX 3pd's 6 years to reach the level of quality most of the current addons offer. It's naive to think that in only a few months we want everything and anything that there is to be offer for FSX be available for XP.

 

Give XP a year and most of us will be amazed of what will be available and the best part of this is that most it will be 64bit.

 

When XP went 64bit, every 32bit sim and addon became obsolete.

 

XP 64 is the future, whether we want to accept it or not.

 

FSX didnt have the technology to use and build on like today with XPX. And correct me if im wrong but x-plane8 came out somewhere 2005, and XP9 around 08? Now XPX and after all those years there still isnt much major devs hopping on. Just find it curious. I dont intent to make this a FSX Vs XPX war. I think there is huge potential with XPX, but with alot of missing components presently, devs need to come on board but they are holding back for some reason.

Perhaps the pending lawsuit, or the future of P3D who knows. Yes Im betting that in a years time, there will be a major shift in one of these platforms. Time always tells.

Bottom line is, if XPX is as good as many claim,why aren't we seeing the likes of Orbx,FSDT, Fly Tampa, PMDG, Qualitywings, Majestic developing scenery and aircraft for it. And where's Opus, REX. And Active sky and the many other addonn goodies. Something is not jiving. Sure its smooth and has some pretty stunning momments but until its enhanced and gets to at least par with FSX, I struggle to see why I would Invest in it at this point. One to watch fir sure,but there wont be a mass Exodus until those things are taken care of.

 

PMDG is designing a plane for XP (how is that for a bottom line?)

Carenado has been doing it for a while now

REX has done it for XP9 I believe, probably a matter of time before they do something for XP10

 

There is a strong and developing community designing scenery for Xplane, I don't particularly care if it's any of the names you mentioned.

 

Here's a sample of CYYZ coming, looks way better to me than anything for FSX. Oh and it'll be free. Oh and did I mention it'll have global lighting, good luck with that in FSX.

Nice! wish Seattle or Vancouver was more photoreal. I flew around there and its extremely generic save for the lone space needle. Everything else makes it look like some generic town with the same buildings.

 

The reason I mentioned the above devs is because they put out quality products, and have a reputation. But then again if the above photo is freeware, then you cant go wrong.

Love to fly to that airport almost makes want to get out of the cessna plane to get a whopper.

Before I go any further, I too want to make clear that I am not trying to play a "my sim is better than your sim" game. As a simmer since 1980-something on my family's Commodore 64 (subLogic FS2), I only want what's best for my hobby and when I see so much potential going unrealized, it gets me amped up.

 

What about http://www.scenery4xp.com? That seems to comply with your conditions.

 

It's closer, but I'm still suspect. They focus far more on their airports than anything in between, and it seems as though the core functionality of the product is XP9 based as opposed to XP10. I see their mention of custom scenery, but it strikes me as not being anywhere near the same as what Orbx has brought to the table.

 

It has taken FSX 3pd's 6 years to reach the level of quality most of the current addons offer. Give XP a year and most of us will be amazed of what will be available and the best part of this is that most it will be 64bit.

 

Well, Orbx's first "FTX" FSX scenery was released in March 2008, a year and a half after FSX was put on the market. The same methods and details are being used to this day with Orbx addons across the globe, and to great effect.

 

I know you're likely referring to X-Plane's 64-bit existence when you ask for yet another year, but it's important to note that XP10 has been on the market for 15 months already. Personally, I'm not looking for Orbx in X-Plane... I'm merely looking for the platform to be open enough to allow for it. At this moment, based on my knowledge of the topic, this simply isn't a realistic possibility.

 

Due to the amount of data - public and proprietary - which needs to be fed into the scenery creation tools, it's near impossible to retool, recut, and rework the global scenery in the ways which Orbx, Ultimate Terrain, and others have done on other platforms so long ago. That's part of my frustration with it all - X-Plane's platform is so much more powerful than the older FSX, but it also suffers from design decisions which put up roadblocks in areas which could benefit so much from 3rd party improvements.

 

It is what it is for now, but we'll see what updates down the road can do.

XP10 is finally reaching a level of core support that 3rd Party developers will notice. Developers will go where the money is and if there are enough paying XP10 customers they will be there.

XP10 is finally reaching a level of core support that 3rd Party developers will notice. Developers will go where the money is and if there are enough paying XP10 customers they will be there.

 

The whole worldwide flight sim community is sitting there ready to see XP10 64bit progress strongly. If there is too much reliance on proprietary content this will be a show slower if not stopper. You need to get momentum. LR would do best to focus on the killer core app and really robust SDKs. Leave content to 3PD's using those robust SDK's. This is the proven model, it makes sense, it spawns continuous hardware upgrades, and 3PD. Publish the expected duration of X version, perhaps starting XP11.

I agree with Greg largely in the spirit of what he said, but I disagree with him on some of the finer technical aspects. But to put it bluntly, low-level scenery creation in X-Plane is not a trivial task. However, the tools which LR provides namely Xres, and Renderman are the tools they use for creating land-class and for cutting v10 scenery. However, the problem is the documentation on how to use them is virtually non-existent. It would have been nice if they could provide a tutorial on how to use them ...

 

Anyways, here is example of a custom scenery I am making with X-Plane's scenery tools ... it's the continent of Antarctica. As you know it doesn't exist in X-Plane*.

 

Here is what the default land-class assignments produce.

 

 

Here is what it looks like now after my modifications

 

 

*And you have no idea how envious I was over Aerosoft's Antarctica-X! It was that fsx scenery which drove me to develop my own scenery for X-Plane, and I think textures in X-Plane look much nicer.

Anyways, here is example of a custom scenery I am making with X-Plane's scenery tools ... it's the continent of Antarctica. As you know it doesn't exist in X-Plane.

 

That is encouraging work!

_{I've been watching the development of XP for some time, and have ran it on a high-end system. I'm not nitpicking, but if we're going to say that "this blows FSX away", then let's inject a dose of reality. FSX was released 7 years ago, and is a 32-bit system. XPlane 10 in its latest form, when compared to the base, stock FSX without any addons, should outshine in performance and graphics if nothing else. It is 7 years later and game development has come a long way. XP10 has its positive points. However, first and foremost this is a flight simulator, not a "let's watch the vehicles on the interstate" and "how much eye-candy can we have out of the box" simulator. In some ways it's better than FSX. In others, it's not. Yes, it's getting better and has great potential. However, it's the minor, core items that keep me away. Examples:}

• _{Blocky shapes on many items including aircraft contours, runways and taxiways, etc. Taxiways when seen from above should not be polygonal in shape, they should arc as they do in RL.}
  
• _{Overblown lighting on the external A/C lights and ground traffic - extremely overblown and exaggerated. I realize that the lighting in FSX isn't great, but those red strobes for the beacons on the aircraft are too much. Not all are strobes in RL, many rotate, and they don't illuminate the upper and lower surfaces of the aircraft the way these do. Engine nacelles don't shadow the lights either; it's like the nacelles are transparent. Even the new 777WL is like this. Tone it waaaay back, please.}
  
• _{Aircraft tire screeching, even when gently applying the brakes when creeping forward onto a runway at less than 5 kts.}
  
• _{Not to nitpick, but real boats don't have position strobes. Really?}
  
• _{Blocky shapes in the cockpits}
  
• _{Dull sound}
  
• _{No AI traffic, actually seems to not have much, if any AI at all, just random acts.}
  
• _{Engine nacelles - fan rotor discs are much too forward, e.g., the 747. They have about 3-4 feet between the fan disc and the LE of the nacelle in RL, this sim has them at what appears to be about 18".}
  
• _{The aircraft, when executing a tight taxiing turn at slow speeds, leans like a bus, like it's almost ready to perform a rollover. Between that view and the tire screeching, its realism is lost and it becomes just a game. Just a game. No realism.}
  
• _{Lack of runway textures.}
  
• _{Whay, pray tell, is that sudden, occasional silence for about a second between when the aircraft leaves the ground and then returns as the gear goes up. I've even heard it in some YouTube videos as well.}
  

 

_{BTW, having to keep your DVD disc 1 in the drive is so 2005. Really? REALLY??? Go to FlexLM licensing and do away with this. I don't want the USB dongle either. Extra cost.}

 

_{I think that as things move forward, it will improve, but for now I'll stick with FSX. The issues above get worked out and PMDG brings over the NGX with its systems and REALISTIC lighting, and I'll give it another go. For now, I'll just continue to wait.}