I don't know how to upload a video but I saw one where a man made a full size sim out of the nose af a 737NG. He was being interviewd by a news team and said that he chose X-Plane 10 over FSX due to the fact that the flight model was more realistic. Any comment?

 

Thanks,

Ron

 

The truth of the matter is there are several grave flaws in the Xplane flight model which are very difficult to get around(and in some areas impossible). Mostly when it comes to stall/spin behaviour.

X plane 10 most realistic flight simulator ????? you're joking right ?

 

 

x plane 10:

cities with ugly shimmering autogens, with no ground textures

no good atc

no good weather

horrific wheel and brake sounds on ground

 

X plane 10 smooth ? not at all, go to paris or new york you'll have around 20-25 fps, 15 fps if HDR ON, or maxed traffic.

of course if you watch the sky you'll get 100 fps

 

Was this video made before Dale Sr. Passed? LOL

 

Ron

X plane 10 most realistic flight simulator ????? you're joking right ?

 

 

x plane 10:

cities with ugly shimmering autogens, with no ground textures

no good atc

no good weather

horrific wheel and brake sounds on ground

 

X plane 10 smooth ? not at all, go to paris or new york you'll have around 20-25 fps, 15 fps if HDR ON, or maxed traffic.

of course if you watch the sky you'll get 100 fps

 

 

You can make any flight sim look bad if you mess with the realism settings and I bet some messing around in plane maker too.

 

 

XP10 has quite a few things going for it that a dinosaur like FSX will never have such as the night lighting and 64 bit

 

I guess it's time to change your signature banner, Edoardo. :lol:

X plane 10 most realistic flight simulator ????? you're joking right ?

 

 

x plane 10:

cities with ugly shimmering autogens, with no ground textures

no good atc

no good weather

horrific wheel and brake sounds on ground

 

X plane 10 smooth ? not at all, go to paris or new york you'll have around 20-25 fps, 15 fps if HDR ON, or maxed traffic.

of course if you watch the sky you'll get 100 fps

 

This is freaken awesome lol. Nice job to whoever did this video. Shines the light on X-Plane and its defects / "more realistic" flight dynamics as some would prefer. Really this made my day.

This is freaken awesome lol. Nice job to whoever did this video. Shines the light on X-Plane and its defects / "more realistic" flight dynamics as some would prefer. Really this made my day.

 

I actually found the video quite impressive in many aspects, I can do alot of stupid and unrealistic things in FSX and P3D as well.

 

Happily I use and enjoy all three.

In X-Plane you can override the simulator to prevent actions like the video, this is done in the upcoming IXEG 737.

 

For me FSX has been uninstalled for the past 1,5 years. I have bought the PMDG 747 and used it many years ago with poor performance (hardware prob at that time also due to fsx = 10-15fps). i reinstalled fsx just for buying the NGX, this aircraft is the best in the aviation sim and still i don´t use it due to i can´t stand FSX, hate the stutters, CTD, bad lighting etc so sadly i have flown the 737 just 2-3 times. I wish it would exist for X-Plane because it is amazing.

 

This is also the first time i won´t be bying a new airliner that comes out from PMDG. I know the 777 will be fantastic, but if its not for X-Plane i am not going for it.

In X-Plane you can override the simulator to prevent actions like the video, this is done in the upcoming IXEG 737.

 

For me FSX has been uninstalled for the past 1,5 years. I have bought the PMDG 747 and used it many years ago with poor performance (hardware prob at that time also due to fsx = 10-15fps). i reinstalled fsx just for buying the NGX, this aircraft is the best in the aviation sim and still i don´t use it due to i can´t stand FSX, hate the stutters, CTD, bad lighting etc so sadly i have flown the 737 just 2-3 times. I wish it would exist for X-Plane because it is amazing.

 

This is also the first time i won´t be bying a new airliner that comes out from PMDG. I know the 777 will be fantastic, but if its not for X-Plane i am not going for it.

 

Prepar3d offer's a very reasonably priced version of their software. Using it is a stable and very smooth and stutter free experiance, if you can maintain 20fps or better. I've not had a crash to desktop in the 6 months I've been using it and has let me enjoy many of my favorate addon's trouble free.

 

It's how FSX should of been at release.

I don't see much of anything that can hold it back now.

 

Just fix those damn mouse clicks in the VC for changing radio freqs etc.... we need mouse wheel usage and larger clickspots.

 

XP10 has a lot it could bring to the table. I should know I just bought the Regional pack and am learning to use it.

 

It's taking some time to get used to using both. The lack of mouse wheel/tiny clickspot is my biggest gripe so far. Second main issue is the poor "land class" implementation. I put quotes around it because XPers call it Land Use Data. Along with that you've got a random collection of buildings in odd spots. If you fly in a big urban area, like socal, you'll find tons of grassy squares mixed with short buildings, then spots with tall buildings. It looks bad. I recently downloaded some photoscenery with decent resolution near LAX city center, and with the autogen (even though it's commonly not lined up with the photoscenery), it feels much better. Downside is photoscenery for LAX is around 3 GB.

 

Other than that the lack of buildings at default airports is frustrating, but I'm flying at night only, for now, so it's not a big issue.

 

Night flying... Completely obliterates FSX, even with Orbx or UTX night poles...

 

I love it. Extremely realistic. Sometimes tough to see the runway till you're lined up. The downside is that to look incredible you need HDR rendering. This drops your fps significantly in urban areas. Sometimes mine drop to 10 in socal with the photoscenery and some freeware addon airports.

 

The people with XP who tell you you don't need a monster PC are lying. Well, not really, they just aren't using HDR rendering. I've got what I consider a monster PC and it chokes with big cities and HDR at night. Oh well, I like the eye candy. The realism from XP10 night flying is superb... try the demo at least.

 

Then we come to addons. Definitly getting better in the XP world, but many of my favorite MSFS planes aren't available. RXP for 64bit is a no-go as well right now. So that limits you to Navigraph supported addons (the popular ones CRJ/ JS32 etc). XP does have built in navdata updates but it's been a while since the last one and the stock "GPS" "FMS" is really bad... so it's tough to use the RNAV waypoints...

 

All in all, give it some more time with 64bit maturing, and addons created in better quality, and we'll see a polished sim. They need to work on land use data too.

is this true that the scenery lacks definition? By this I mean no character and no landmarks. The demo has seattle but i havnt been able to identify what Seattles downtown really looks like. The only thing that popped up is the space needle.

 

Are all these sceneries just generic? And to get it you have to buy all these sceneries for every area to get it right?

SEA is the only "nice" looking place. Maybe Innsbruck is too...

 

The rest are simply generic. Downloading OSM data helps a little.

 

From my scenery, the only way I can what is what is looking at roads and rivers and water bodies. At least FSX has decent landclass so you can see towns etc...

Wow, last time I saw this topic, was half lengh respect now.

 

I've discovered XP recently and I was been impressed by the quality of the scenery (default) and the quality of flying.

Everyone can do this experiment:

take the demo of xplane.

Set the situation of landing at ksea and set tail wind.

Do the same with fsx.

Now land with both simulators. With FSX you can do, with XP you cry.

Who's right???

I don't answer. Let you do it!

 

There's also another side to take in consideration for a SH. Xplane is still a bit poor with addons, so the first one who put a good product, becomes the leader at the 100%. Ok, for PMDG, this not a problem, it's a leader, but take in consideration for who wanna make an airbus.

Who's there for fsx? Aerosoft, airsimmer, wilco ecc. So it's difficult to take advantage to the others producers and the above all, the market is full!

Who's there for xplane? One product, not well made. So the first one puts in the xplane world a good product has the 100% of the market.

 

For pmdg, I think, even if there are a 737 and a 777, no one has the pmdg quality. So also in this case pmdg has the 100% of the xplane market! Selling, 60% or 100% is a great difference from the point of view of the money.

Also 'cause xp is multyplatform, that's to say runs on win, mac and Linux, (40% of the users in the world use mac), so it's possible to improve the sells more than only with fsx.

It is a vicious circle of sorts.

 

Majority of people dont want to change to X-Plane "because I already have all those addons for FSX and there are no good tubeliners for XPL anyway". Bigger developers are not too much interested in XPL "because there is not enough of a customer base to be viable, compared to FSX".

 

I feel the only way to break the circle is for big name developers to lead the way into XPL. Aerosoft seemed to try with sceneries, but lately I have not seen any higher-profile releases recently. IXEG is working on a good-looking 737, but they don't have a history and a following in MSFS world. Ramzess &co. released a 777 that is supposedly OK, but they also dont have a following in MSFS world and I have yet to read somewhere how good it actually is.

 

Now, if PMDG, arguably THE biggest name in MSFS addons today, were to enter full swing into X-Plane, I am betting there will be at least some people that would follow them, gradually adopting X-Plane platform. As for me, I am nowadays 90% FSX / 10% XPL person. I expect it will shift dramatically once IXEG 737 becomes available. And even more so if a PMDG product enters the XPL market.

I think you can say PMDG has the market in its hands! If it moves to XP you'll see a huge part of the market moving to xplane!

This thead caught my eye. I must admint, it is frustrating that Pmdg are so MICROSOFT-centric.

 

I saw a thread once, were somebody asked Pmdg, if they were able to produce a flight simulation program,themselves? Is it hard to do this? From somebody who has little programming knowledge?

 

Computers are computers, surely alot is possible, if the flight sim bench marks are changed?