Austin's interview...

[airlinejets 709]

Anthony,

Youtube seem to be having huge problems with sharing videos today. They all come up as advertisement instead of the video.

Ugh, it seems to be specific to Firefox. I reset Firefos and it works now.

[jasonX 24]

It's good to know that you guys that keep complaining about XP have a 64bit alternative. I've tried Flightgear and just don't see any reason to even consider it having it on my drive (no offence to the great dev's involved) but it is still waaaay far behind maybe in 3 years or so. Hmm, I wonder what would XP offer in 3 years!

 

Look, we all know XP has its flaws but this is the only sim that for now, presents a viable future. Be glad that Austin is even considering tackling some of these flaws. I'm sure that eventually he will address most of them if not all. Remember this is a 5 or so team deal.

 

Oh and please don't start saying that he should be hiring more dev's so that LR can get those issues out the door quicker. This is Austin's project and his alone. So, who are we to criticize his business model!

 

Lets just enjoy what we have and be happy with what's coming!

 

Carlos

+1 Fully agree. Thankyou Carlos

[Muskoka 104]

"So, who are we to criticize his business model!"

 

We are "Paying Customers"....this is an open forum group, that gives us the right to criticize whatever we like, including Xplane?

 

Don't know anything about FlightGear, but it's free I hear? That fact alone should cut it some slack when compared to a "retail" offering. If Austin wasn't making a dime off of Xplane (my dime), you would never here from me, or a lot of others I would imagine. XPX is still a half finished product, with nothing more than promises for the future, promises that we've been hearing for over a year. And quite frankly, the stuff were waiting for to complete Xplane, has never been "usable" in any version, items being, atc, ai traffic, the list goes on. After close to 20 years of development, what is all of a sudden going to change to bring these missing pieces to fruition, just promises?

 

The fact that we paid for a product, and 15-16 months later we still don't have anything that closely resembles a complete flight simulator, gives one all the right in the world to come here and complain. We didn't get what we paid for, and don't know if we ever will......period.

 

Years ago, when demos of software products were a reasonable download size, I would download them, and if they were "worthy", I would keep them, maybe even buy them. Well, with the huge downloads today, 3gb for a demo d/l is a joke, and not possible for me and a lot of others, we have to rely on the marketing hype of the developer, and this was hyped way beyond belief. This has ruffled a lot of feathers, and again, gives a paying customer all the right in the world to show their displeasure. Sure, everyone has the option to return the item for a refund, but once again, were told to sit tight and wait for the goodies to come, we'll it's been close to 20 years, and over a year into this "Beta" and were still not seeing the essential missing pieces. But we've been promised their coming. We've always been promised their coming.

 

Who promised? I haven't seen Austin publicly say that any of the glaring flaws in Xplane are going to be fixed or overhauled. Has there been any mention of "fixing" the lousy Atc, the dumb as stones Ai Traffic, the flight model issues that some have, the terrible visibility limits at altitude, the poor weather depiction under certain circumstances. It seems, in most cases, that "he" thinks these things are just fine and don't need touching at all. What promises are we waiting for? Third parties to fill these gaps, good luck. I really hope I have to eat these words, but so far, for many years, it's been nothing more than empty promises. In fact, the only thing that has been realized since release, is 64 bit, a great thing, but there is so much more to do, and those missing pieces should have been in place long before this was made available to the public as a advertised complete "worlds most advanced flight simulator".

 

My thoughts.....

 

Glen

[CarlosF 1,241]

We are "Paying Customers"....this is an open forum group, that gives us the right to criticize whatever we like, including Xplane?

You can criticize all you want, but nothing is gonna change. LR have their priorities set based on customer feedback.

 

There is a BIG difference between complaining and Feedback you know.

 

Just enjoy the ride instead of complaining about the same thing over and over and over and over.

 

LR offers a demo, its free to try out you know. If you bought XP and didn't like it, well just take your loss and move on. No point in complaining about the same issues over and over and over and over again.

Who promised? I haven't seen Austin publicly say that any of the glaring flaws in Xplane are going to be fixed or overhauled.

Did you see anybody from MS dot that?

. Has there been any mention of "fixing" the lousy Atc, the dumb as stones Ai Traffic, the flight model issues that some have, the terrible visibility limits at altitude, the poor weather depiction under certain circumstances.

That's all included in the demo.

we'll it's been close to 20 years,

If its been so long and you knew how things work with LR, Why did you buy it in the first place?

Third parties to fill these gaps, good luck. I really hope I have to eat these words,

You may very well will!! (no offense, I just couldn't resist)

[Muskoka 104]

Carlos, huge downloads are not a viable option for a lot of people out there, especially those in rural areas. So, we have to rely on the marketing hype, and yes, take a chance.

 

Well, I believed the hype, again, and jumped in (XP10) right from the beginning, after being rather disappointed with XP9, which I also purchased. Was the Xplane 10 "hype" anywhere close to being true, not even close. And, the hype has yet to be realized today, with no announced improvements for the future. Who's developing an ATC program? Who's developing an AI Traffic program? I don't need to list any more.

 

Nothings going to change? Then Xplane will never be more than it already is, an unfinished, feature lacking, flight simulator.

 

I will continue to comment of the pitfalls of Xplane, so others are exposed to both sides of the "truth" coin. Don't like it, don't read it. Negative comments are just as valuable / warranted as positive ones, it's all feedback. Some of you are only happy if the feedback is positive, something kind of hard to do at the moment with the current state of XPX.

 

No need to bring up "MS", were not talking about it here. Were talking about Xplane and it's shortcomings. Shortcomings that the "leader" appears to be blind to. We'll, there are a lot of us here that are not blind, are hoping for something much better, and will continue to speak our peace. Whether you see it as "complaining" or not is rather moot, it's all feedback of some sort. If the developers were smart, they would take the "feedback" as constructive criticism, and do something about it. Something they haven't done yet, so the "feedback / complaining" will continue.

 

Don't like what I have to say, just ignore it, and me. I don't mind one bit, you won't hurt my feelings. Facts, are facts though, and can't be ignored, I can.

 

Glen

[LAdamson 240]

 

You can criticize all you want, but nothing is gonna change. LR have their priorities set based on customer feedback.

 

It had better change, because LR wants to dominate the desktop flight simulator world. The product is being promoted as being vastly superior to the competition. And it will have to be superior in order to attract a significant increase in sales, which has the benefit of attracting needed 3rd party work.  And yes..................I do complain. I've been at odds with this "superior flight model" thing for many years now. The interview just try's to market the notion, farther.....

 

L.Adamson

[CarlosF 1,241]

The product is being promoted as being vastly superior to the competition.

We all have the right to post our thoughts, Austin has the right to call his Sim what ever he likes.

I've been at odds with this "superior flight model" thing for many years now

This is from Austin's interview and I quote:

"And then we send copies all the time to all the major aerospace manufacturers. Boeing, Lockheed Martin,"

 

If companies like Boeing, Lockhead Martin find the "superior flight model" right for them to use it, then why should I complain about it.

I'm not an aeronautical engineer but I'm pretty sure that there are a few of them within these companies that probably already had their input in this area.

 

Some of the problems with users complaining about this so call "problem" is their joystick settings.

 

I too went through the same learning curve and the first time I tried XP 9 I thought there was a problem with the way aircraft flew in it, but after spending some time working with the joystick settings, it completely changed my thoughts for the better.

[Geofa 108]

...and thus we complete the recurring cycle since xplane 3 when I started , of speak no evil, hear no evil, see no evil.

 

Yep-must be my joystick-all of the many different models I have:;

 

I sent a copy to my geico agent too... :lol

 

 

Ps. Anyone heard from Billy V. From South Africa who was a big fan in the early days and used to banter here?

[CarlosF 1,241]

I sent a copy to my geico agent too... :lol

lmfao!!!

 

Good to know people still have some humor. Good one Geofa.

[rick_studder 4]

It's pointless to compare flight models between simulators — you have to do that between aircrafts. Both XP and MSFS have add on aircrafts with good flight models, so it's doable in both sims.

 

I'm rooting for XP and think it has a lot going for it. What I think it does better than MSFS: default graphics, feel of speed, fluidity, atmosphere/weather. The latter is an example of what you get with a mostly benevolent dictator like Austin: Why is the turbulence so exaggerated? Because Austin wants it like that, I guess, and then we have to deal with it. According to Morten (at IXEG 737) wing flex isn't taken into account in XP's flight model, which contributes to the overdone turbulence effect. Why hasn't Laminar fixed that? Or why can't they at least make it possible to adjust the turbulence with real weather on? Seems like such an easy fix, but no. The AI solution is also a let down. It's a cool idea that each aircraft has its own flight model, but it doesn't scale well at all.

 

That said, XP is only getting better and I'm quite hopeful. And I also think there is a winner for the best current sim, and it's neither XP nor MSFS. It's DCS (Warthog, Mustang P51). Will we ever see a civilian version of DCS world? I doubt it, but it would have been nice.

[gizmosellsbunnys 106]

XP-10 not prefect but its start toward something that will slowly overtake fsx in terms of features, visuals, scenery it will take a couple years to do so.  XP is not perfect the autogen is off, lack of season, flight physics, atc problems.   Like about XP-10 it uses the GPU and cores on your computer while fsx does not. My hexacore is useful for X-plane and useless toward fsx.  The cockpit alone in X plane has shadows and graphics that fsx does not. Want to see Mega Scenery type scenery for X-plane as it would look just as nice, but i know making photoscenery for Xplane is lot harder than FSX, but 3d objects seems more user friendly.  In all, fsx and XP-10 in making is about the same in complexitiy. 

[jcomm 5,939]

And I also think there is a winner for the best current sim, and it's neither XP nor MSFS. It's DCS (Warthog, Mustang P51). Will we ever see a civilian version of DCS world? I doubt it, but it would have been nice.

 

100 % with you on this!

[galaio 0]

It's pointless to compare flight models between simulators — you have to do that between aircrafts. Both XP and MSFS have add on aircrafts with good flight models, so it's doable in both sims.

 

I'm rooting for XP and think it has a lot going for it. What I think it does better than MSFS: default graphics, feel of speed, fluidity, atmosphere/weather. The latter is an example of what you get with a mostly benevolent dictator like Austin: Why is the turbulence so exaggerated? Because Austin wants it like that, I guess, and then we have to deal with it. According to Morten (at IXEG 737) wing flex isn't taken into account in XP's flight model, which contributes to the overdone turbulence effect. Why hasn't Laminar fixed that? Or why can't they at least make it possible to adjust the turbulence with real weather on? Seems like such an easy fix, but no. The AI solution is also a let down. It's a cool idea that each aircraft has its own flight model, but it doesn't scale well at all.

 

That said, XP is only getting better and I'm quite hopeful. And I also think there is a winner for the best current sim, and it's neither XP nor MSFS. It's DCS (Warthog, Mustang P51). Will we ever see a civilian version of DCS world? I doubt it, but it would have been nice.

DCS only simulate a scenery area, XP and FSX simulate the world and all his variables. A more complex work don't you think?

 

 

Sent from my LG-P760 using Tapatalk 2

[rick_studder 4]

DCS only simulate a scenery area, XP and FSX simulate the world and all his variables. A more complex work don't you think?

More complex I don't know. Bigger, sure. Most of the good things from DCS would scale well — flight model, atmosphere/weather, even a lot of the terrain solution.

 

The fact that they model the whole world does not absolve FSX and XP from a lot of their current shortcomings. DCS sets a standard; XP and FSX should see and learn.

[jcomm 5,939]

@galaio:  What variables?

 

Indeed Earth's Atmosphere is more precisely modelled (in terms of ISA temperature profile up to it's outer limits) in XP than in FSX, but unless you're willing to fly rockets, there's no gain from that. Now, "flying rockets" or any Orbital vehicles is one of the reasons I preferred XP over FSX, but now I can also do that with FG 2.10 :-), although IMO with an even worse perception of scenery at distance than in XP10, and I believe this will be addressed sooner or later in 10.30/40/..., making it look at least as good as FSX)

 

When it comes to what you call "variables" please understand that XP's atmosphere is plain ISA, with not even Td being taken into consideration. The air can be as moist as you want, or dry, and that will change nothing! At least in FSX you can use external code to force the consequences of flying on a non-ISA atmosphere, and indeed it is possible to have such an atmosphere, at least in as far as the temperature profile is concerned...

 

In DCS, although I haven't taken the time to investigate how the atmosphere model behaves at the tops, all of the thermodynamic effects of flying in cold / hot / dry / moist air are carefully taken into consideration and have quite an impact on many (don't guess how many)  variables, from flight dynamics to engine performance!  This is UNIQUE! and, I should say - Ultra Realistic!!!

 

Yes it is still a limited scenery in DCS, but it gives you the best flight dynamics model available today! The worst part of it for me is that I can't get much satisfaction from the belic side of the sim, ands it's sophisticated air-war avionics, just as I couldn't care less if the same building types appear allover the World in XPlane10, provided I can get at least an idea of rural / urban types, their coverage and density... On the other hand, I would like to see the daylight when in RL there is daylight at the place and time I am replicating in the sim... and other basic things like being able to use the Map to plan my flights and observe beyond the current scenery tile, etc..  I would like to see those problems with roll from torque and ground handling at least addressed, etc...