How would you rate X-Plane 10 in its current beta cycle?  I give it an "8" and it looks to be a "10" by Fall/Winter 2013 :clapping:

 

Can't rate it, because I can't test it at this time. However, if the supposeable need to trim for torque roll is solved, then it's rating from me will be a lo higher.

 

I haven't considered this roll as a challenge, or just a trim problem to correct with aileron trim. It's been a source of irratation for me, for a long time.

I would give it a 6. Still lacks realism (weather, sun/moon cycle) and the released payware addons aren't credible enough for me yet. The interface is very confusing even if complete and takes me ages to configure just a joystick. Mouse wheel for buttons please...

 

On the plus side, it has great graphics, good performance and possibly a good future. I can't see it having a '10' in under 2 years.

8,5

Id give it a 7.5. Its come a long way since XP10 was released, but still has many issues that need to be resolved.

I still prefere it over FSX, but id like to see better land class, clouds and ATC before I can up my score.

 

Rob

The interface is very confusing even if complete and takes me ages to configure just a joystick. Mouse wheel for buttons please...

 

I agree with this 100%.

 

Took me 10 minutes to get my Saitek yoke and TQ working in FSX and FSUIPC. Took me half an hour and some google searches to do the same in the X-Plane demo.

 

I'd give it a 7 though.

I guess I'd rate it about a 5 right now.  I'd like to rate it higher but as many have argued, it still lacks polish (no seasons, funky AI, implausible cities...)  What worries me is that it'll arrive at a "good enough" visual level and then development resources will be redirected into XP11, which will head off on its own three-year development cycle, and the promise will never be fulfilled.  I hope that's not the case but I'm still having a hard time committing to it fully right now.

Let's see how a used car dealer would handle it. It is worth a 10. But I have to lower the rating for autogen and seasons. I give you 8.

 

 

Let's see how a used car dealer would handle it. It is worth a 10. But I have to lower the rating for autogen and seasons. I give you 8.

 

I'll come up to 6 but not a point higher... ok, maybe 6.5...  B)

I give it a rating of 80 percent---or 8. I don't think anything can be hard rated a step-back and evaluate--10, Five, in that it is always morphing, being added to. If you ask from an emotional base, rather than a hard, step-back evaluation feature, for feature, than I could easily rate this product a '10'. Approaches, day or night with the flight models, and sensitivity of same, create very hand's on, and active involvement with elevated enjoyment of same. As anybody would agree, night approaches with the sim notched up...will set you on your ear!

So, step-back, feature content- A.I., ATC, etc....an 8.
Total all in flight immersion (the feel of flying?) a 10.

 

 

I give it an "8" and it looks to be a "10" by Fall/Winter 2013

 

A bit of context: I first bought X-Plane in 1997 when I was exclusively a Mac guy and it was the only general purpose flight sim available for the platform. I stayed with it until 2008, well into the version 9 cycle. That year I got a dual-boot Mac/PC box, dipped a toe into FS9, and after that I never had a single urge to return to X-Plane. When I moved on to FSX I completely forgot about X-Plane. Then last week, after all of the the recent hype about 64-bit, I installed the latest demo (10.21), spent several hours with it, and was no more impressed now than when I abandoned XP9 5 years ago.

 

The UI is still a mess -- obviously designed by an aeronautical engineer for someone other than hobbyists. How about a choice of menu systems: one for the "I wanna study the lift/drag coefficients of this 8-engine six-wing monstrosity I'm building in PlaneMaker to fly on Mars" crowd, and another, simpler one for the rest of us?

 

Ground environment graphics: bleh, nothing special. Weather engine, sky rendering: bleh. Cloud-rendering, double-bleh. Availability of fully-developed airports and enthusiast-level aircraft: triple-bleh -- and wishful thinking isn't going to change these significant deficits by the end of 2013. Scenery and a/c development cycles take a very long time.

 

This sim has been around since the mid-90's -- nearly 20 years -- and it seems to develop at a snail's pace. It's time for Austin to sell the program to a company with the resources required to turn it into something truly exciting and marketable.

 

Overall: 6. By the end of 2013, maybe 6.5 if one of Austin's "updates" doesn't fubar a bunch of stuff.

 

 

Wow people complaining about XP's UI. Seriously!!!

 

I wonder how the "other sim" would be rated with the included OOM and CTD's and without all the $$$ invested in 3rd party add-ons.

NaMcO, on 15 May 2013 - 2:05 PM, said:

 

I would give it a 6. Still lacks realism (weather, sun/moon cycle) and the released payware addons aren't credible enough for me yet. The interface is very confusing even if complete and takes me ages to configure just a joystick. Mouse wheel for buttons please...

 

On the plus side, it has great graphics, good performance and possibly a good future. I can't see it having a '10' in under 2 years.

^this^

...and as for it's chances of ever being a "10"...minimum 3-5 years more time and ONLY if they invest alot more money into the development as compared to what they've invested thus far.

 

Problem is, there isn't a good enough return to invest as much as is needed to make a "10". Therefore, it is more likely to never become one...unless some rich eccentric flightsim addict decides one day to just plop $20M-$30M because he needs something interesting to keep him busy.

Wow people complaining about XP's UI. Seriously!!!

 

I wonder how the "other sim" would be rated with the included OOM and CTD's and without all the $$$ invested in 3rd party add-ons.

I love the xp10 UI and learned it pretty quick.     u mentioned that other sim :ph34r:  and I hear them coming into my thread :lol: 

 

 

I wonder how the "other sim" would be rated with the included OOM and CTD's and without all the $$$ invested in 3rd party add-ons.

 

But, this thread isn't about "let's compare X-Plane to FSX." What it's getting at is how well X-Plane meets users' expectations of what a sim should be. If posters can stay within the bounds of simply answering that question, the thread might actually survive.

 

My hope long ago was that Austin would base base further development of the product more on user input than on what tickled his brain at any given moment. Whether this ever happened is unclear. What I do know is that for me and my friends who used to fly X-Plane, the product continued to morph away from functions and features that would have sustained our interest.

 

If an alternative didn't exist would I still be flying X-Plane? Probably, though without much excitement, and I'm grateful I do have an option.