FS Global Real Weather coming to XPLANE 10

[jcomm 5,925]

Yep, smoking is no good ....

[MSFS Ralf 149]

Yeah, just like smoking, most of us here quit and moved over to this forum to find something new. X-Plane is not perfect but it sure beats the smoke and mirrors of the other one.

 

I wish people would stop coming in here to try to offer us cigarettes... :wink:

As an ex smoker let me tell you that you've nailed it. ORBX scenery is cigarettes.

[FlyBoyMike 38]

As an ex smoker let me tell you that you've nailed it. ORBX scenery is cigarettes.

 

If ORBX is cigarettes then PMDG must be meth. I can't break away  :ph34r:

 

As for the weather in XP10 to me having an external engine such as FSGRW would be a huge improvement considering how much 10.30 has already improved in all other areas, it's a shame this will no longer happen. If I was to completely ditch FSX for XP then all the features and accurate weather depiction of ASN will really be missed.

 

The biggest problem I have with P3D is the price. I wouldn't buy the academic license knowing that I'm not eligible so only option is the professional one for $200 (more since I have to pay AUD) which I can't justify knowing that underneath it is still the same FSX/ESP engine with HDR, a new UI and a few other visual improvements.

[Anxu00 176]

 

 

I can't justify knowing that underneath it is still the same FSX/ESP engine with HDR, a new UI and a few other visual improvements.

I can tell you that it is not the case.  I have spent close to 4 years with FSX, and I can tell you that P3D v2 is not FSX.  I paid the pro license because I wand a sim that I can use and not have to look at autogen popping or texture flashing and stutters. If the engine and the code is the same then all the annoyance of FSX will still be there.

[FlyBoyMike 38]

I can tell you that it is not the case.  I have spent close to 4 years with FSX, and I can tell you that P3D v2 is not FSX.  I paid the pro license because I wand a sim that I can use and not have to look at autogen popping or texture flashing and stutters. If the engine and the code is the same then all the annoyance of FSX will still be there.

 

I'd happily try it out. But $200....just seems a bit steep, would have to be a significant improvement over FSX. Apparently they do some sort of trial where they will give a refund if not satisfied?

 

I also don't really have any aircraft to test it with (only have the FSX version of A2A C172) unless I install the Aerosoft AXE which seems to work on it.

 

I do find the flashing textures and popping autogen annoying from time to time but have learned to live with it. I notice that many people who move to P3D always had problems with stability in FSX, my FSX DX10 setup is very stable and has been for a long time. I think I've only ever come across an OOM once and that was over a year ago.

 

Hardware is also a concern for me particularly in graphics. I have a GTX 560Ti 2GB and find that it struggles to maintain good FPS over time in XP10 with HDR and all the settings I want for a good experience. I can't really afford to upgrade at the moment.

[Anxu00 176]

 

 

I do find the flashing textures and popping autogen annoying from time to time but have learned to live with it. I notice that many people who move to P3D always had problems with stability in FSX

Hi Michael,

 

I actually don't have stability problem with FSX, it's the micro stutters, texture flashing and autogen popping that I have trouble accepting.  Once I use P3D v2 (2.3 and above mind you.  2.0 initial release was a disaster) and have achieved smooth flying with HDR, shadows, beautiful landscape with seasonal texture and have real weather injection, I just can't go back.  Nowadays I only use FSX for only two planes: Flight1 Mustang and T182T.  Had Flight1 support moving these two birds to P3D v2, FSX would have been deleted.  

 

I agree with you that it's a significant investment and you need hardware.  The same can be said with XPX and hardware too.  I bet that if you turn down the settings in P3D to be the same as in XPX, your HW will be handling fine. I lost a bunch of sceneries that no longer work in P2D v2 and a number of aircrafts can't be used there.  However, the flight experience is well worth it to me and there are plan for FSX to support my add-ons in P3D down the road.

 

Back to the topic of XPX, I still don't see an offering any time soon for weather, the visibility bug, issue is still there and HDR rendering still have problem.  I still have XPX installed, but have not used it that much.  

 

LM offers a developer license of 9.95 per month for the Pro version, you can take a whole month to evaluate, which what I also did.  You don't have to use fancy aircraft just pick a comparable default ones and see for yourself.  

[snglecoil 1,828]

I can tell you that it is not the case.  I have spent close to 4 years with FSX, and I can tell you that P3D v2 is not FSX.  I paid the pro license because I wand a sim that I can use and not have to look at autogen popping or texture flashing and stutters. If the engine and the code is the same then all the annoyance of FSX will still be there.

 

I'm a user of P3D and optimistic with the progress LM has made to the platform. And as much as I don't like admitting this...it is most definitely still the same underlying ESP engine of FSX. Nice graphic enhancements and optimization aside, it still has MUCH more in common with FSX than not at this point.

 

I admit I really disliked XP when I first installed it. The more I use it, though, the more I appreciate what it does sooooo very well vs. what it lacks compared to the ESP-based sims...to the point I might have to call myself an X-Plane convert.    But, yes a more complete weather depiction engine or injector would be very welcome.

[fkane 6]

I don't think this will happen for this version of X-plane.I shared a few words with one of the developers a few weeks back and they sated that  plane will have to change their weather architecture to be able to work with FS Global. 

If all they need is the ability to position individual clouds, you should put them in touch with us. They could talk to the Skymaxx Pro plugin directly and bypass X-Plane's datarefs, potentially.

[petabread 67]

For me none of the active sky products were ever good until active sky next and in my opinion the fsrealwx and even the efass ultrawx provide an excellent source of weather for now. As far as xpx and givin it a try, I hated the demo, it didn't provide enough time to really help make my decision so I just took a chance. While it lacks ATC and an active sky next type weather engine, I use it for all types of flights and honestly for me, and this is an opinion, the sim heaven sceneries and world2xplane has made my NYC and several cities look 100x better than fsx which was important.

 

The final straw for me, I was doing a flight from Orlando to Las Vegas with the Pmdg 737, and on approach it just quit no warning no nothing and I was reminded how unstable fsx is.

 

Switched to x-plane and never looked back again.

[scotchegg 4,186]

If all they need is the ability to position individual clouds, you should put them in touch with us. They could talk to the Skymaxx Pro plugin directly and bypass X-Plane's datarefs, potentially.

*******, yes, FSGlobal and Skymaxx should definitely talk to each other. Do it. Do it.

[mtaxp 666]

Yes ! as sophisticated and acurate weather injector that talk to SMP , that's a WINNER.

 

@SkyCaptainA320 if you are in talks with FS GLOBAL REAL WEATHER team , you can suggest it to them!

[SkyCaptainA320 0]

I sure can try! I heard that there will as be a update coming for SkyMaxx Pro. I am so look out for that too.