Hello everyone! As it says in the title, i'm switching to XPX. My previous sim was FSX/P3D, which was great for the addons but horrible for FPS. About 2 weeks ago I downloaded the Xplane 10 demo and it was (still is!) amazing! Just the quality of Seattle with the frames I was getting was just too great. With around everything maxed (except for HDR) I get between 25+ FPS. Now i'm thinking of buying it and making it my perm sim. I will also be buying the 777 addon and the CRJ and possibly a pilot edge sub if i enjoy the trial. I just have a few questions since i'm a complete noob .

 

Whats the difference in all the XPX versions? For example, There is Xplane 10 and Xplane 10 + Global scenery ; XPX North america, XPX Europe.... To my understanding all X Plane 10 software packages now include global scenery unless you bought a specific region? On Amazon.fr (I live in France), the is an X-Plane 10 for 43, the only thing i'm concerned with is that it is an "Import Anglais" (English import) which is not a problem since English is my native language but will I still have global scenery?  (http://www.amazon.fr/gp/product/B006H0YSAK/ref=ox_sc_act_title_2?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=A2BWG95L99NC8P)

 

Second, I know that the demo area (Seattle) has "enhanced scenery" from what i have heard. So how is the rest of the world scenery wise? Are the still plenty of buildings?

 

I heard that almost all airports don't have buildings or terminals?

 

How are the 777 and CRJ aircraft on FPS?

 

Any good scenery addons or should I keep the default?

 

Thank you everybody for taking the time to read my post, I know it's a bit long but it will be a big step for my sim .

You will find yourself tweaking again.  I don't own the 777 but I have the CRJ.  Frame is ok with the CRJ.  You can maintain 20+ with it with some lower setting.  XPlane 10 does not have default airport buildings, so be prepare to search for freewares for the location you fly and to buy sceneries.  AI is not functioning well yet and there are places in the world where the rivers are not correctly depicted.  I am waiting for 10.50 or somewhere close to 10.9 to come back.  I lost more than I gain going to XPX.  The gesture is different.  You do not have second monitor support etc.  at the end I just went back to FSX and lower my traffics autogen setting etc. and just be happy with it.  The grass is always greener on the other side but XPX needs more time to grow up to displace FSX.

Second, I know that the demo area (Seattle) has "enhanced scenery" from what i have heard. So how is the rest of the world scenery wise? Are the still plenty of buildings?

Heya Arthur,

 

Yup, they have buildings alright, and if the autogen settings are cranked high enough it will put a high rise in a corn field.

 

I was fiddling around with it yesterday and some things really impressed me, some not so much. As I was sitting on the tarmac at my reference airport KTTD (Portland Troutdale, a decent size muni east of Portland, Oregon) adjusting my joystick settings, a 747 with shuttle orbiter carriers came down the taxiway. Not so realistic. Then again, as I was sitting there once again (whoops, had yaw and roll reversed!), a train went by south of the airport. There is indeed a train track there in real life, and this train was detailed! Very impressive.

 

Once airborne the autogen engine placed random high-rises here and there. There are indeed numerous "clusters" of industrial parks, city centers, etc around KTTD, all very well rendered by Orbx PNW, not so much by X-Plane. The buildings for one have a "same-ness" to them - no visual gestalt for different places at all.

 

I ordered the World Edition through xplane.org. For 80 bucks you get the entire world on 8 DVD - took about 5 hours to install, but at least the I have a good start!

 

Have fun! In a way, XPX sort of reminded me of the Linux operating system compared to the Windows of FSX/P3D. A different beast, to be sure!

 

JKH

Good luck with that!

 

See you back in the FSX section, after the novelty has worn off, and the frustration kicks in! 

Is this the FSX that is full of novelty and causes frustration for no-one?

Hello Artie and Welcome,The different versions include different regions of The World "Global" would be everything.One thing you will find with XPlane is although airports and citys may not be populated by default there are fantastic free-ware entrys created by XPlane users that are by far better than any I've found in any sim.Lots of them available here...

http://x-plane.org/

:smile: Welcome Aboard and enjoy The great freedom of open source the XPlane 10 provides 

I run both FSX/X-Plane it's very fun to switch between them... It's 100% true that only the default airport has buildings all other airports that you don't have scenery for just have runways/taxiways 777 FPS is slightly worse than the CRJ-200 I have both and they both work like a dream. I would recommend the Jardesigns A320NEO to it's alot of fun to fly. 

Well, honestly, I'll give you a few things to compare between the two platforms:

 

1) Have you spent a lot of $$$ in FSX add-ons? Can you relax some of the graphics settings in it so that you can fly even the airliners for hours without a CTD? Then go for it! After all you have that resource, and it is not going to get better nor worth... It is just as it is, and ever will be, since the Acceleration pack was released, long ago!

 

Is FSX a good simming platfor? Sure it is, just don't do like the other did to the golden eggs chicken...

 

2) Are you interested in experiencing  better weather physics effects, namely turbulence and wind variations, rain/hail effects, a much more realistic set of consequences of not doing what a RW pilot is supposed to do when there is significant weather around you? Then X-Plane10 does a much better job even compared with FSX / P3D with the best weather injectors.

 

3) Do you want AI traffic, very plausible, populated airports all around the World even in the default scenery? Then FSX has it, better than X-Plane10, although things are improving, and just as other aspects of the simulator, you have at the least the chance of getting a much better product along the 10 series. Then, we can't forget what freeware osm/orto/mesh is doing for X-Plane10 right now! You can populate your World for free, and you'll get an acceptable level of plausibility, and in some aspects, a much better looking set of towns all around the World.

 

4) Are you an airliner fan, or someone who at least likes to fly using a good GPS replica of the real thing? Then, unless you want to spend a fortune in X-Plane professional solutions, FSX has it, and you have those unbeatable PMDG airliners, some very sophisticated GA with glass intruments almost fully replicating the real G1000 or Avidyne ... X-Plane10 is still lacking the same level of quality in this type of offer, but again, 3pds are slowly turning into this promising platform, and the future can bring a much more bright scenario!

 

5) Do you like to fly rotary wing? Ten X-Plane10 beats hands down any add-on you can have for FSX.

 

6) Do you want to fly by the book your prop or jet aircraft? Do you want to be able to manage your engine and get realistic outcome even if it isn't a sophisticated injected/turbo/turbprop/etc... Then, forget about both FSX and X-Plane10:

 

7) X-Plane10 reciprocating engine model does a better job than FSX when it comes to having a correct relationship between MP and prop RPM, as well as Mixture and the way it affects EGT, FF, etc... In FSX / P3D you get, on even your best add-ons, the most unrealistic response. Some very sophisticated models can do some magic outside of the sim (A2A), but they always depend on some of the kernel code, unless they're completely independent and then you have another problem - they don't sense environment around them as FSX native aircraft do... But then again X-Plane10 hasn't got the most sophisticated recip engine model either. You'll happily climb in you C172 taking off from KLXV with your mixture set to full rich, and get up to the higher altitudes... In FSX at least your engine will quit unless you lean it right on the tarmac!

 

8) Do you want a realistic feel from a prop aircraft, in terms of flight and effects of having a prop spinning somewhere pushing / pulling you? Forget about X-Plane10 - it is completely wrong in this area and desperately needs a fix! But, do you want to perform sideslips/fwd slips with your aircraft without having to buy special brands of add-ons like for FSX, and still be able to have a realistic turn physics, including the amounts of rudder required to coordinate your turn, the ability to perform a standard rate turn with more accuracy than in most FSX / P3D add-ons, then X-Plane10 will give you that...

 

9) Does it irritate you to get on-top, and look around you and not be able to see the horizon like in RL, but instead have an irritating halo? Then forget X-Plane10, the same applying for now regarding fog, although fog and haze aren't either the strongest points of FSX / P3D...

 

10) Does it irritate you to have a Moon and stars in your simulator, well, let's forget about the starts..., and while in FSX you get the exact Moon phase you're seeing in RL, it get's completely out-of-sync with reality in X-Plane10, then, close your eyes to the Moon in X-Plane10...

 

11) Are night lights on towns, cars, and the traffic on your roads something you look after in a flight simulator? Then X-Plane10 is the right simulator for you! As a matter of fact the all experience of flying at night in X-Plane10 (less the Moon, the starts, the cloud rendering) is a must have in X-Plane10!

 

12) Is there a PMDG-like add-on for X-Plane10 ?  IMHO - No!

But... are there good examples of airliners? Yes - the Worldliner 777 and Peter's A380, (the only two I own, but I'm told FlyJSim's 727 is also a must have) are already very promissing, with Peter's flight dynamics being great while the systems are very far from the level of sophistication of a good airbus for FSX, and the 777 being (I hope) still a work in progress, with talented developers working on it. Things can get better, and the interest of PMDG in X-Plane10 is also a sign of something we can always expect of very good for the future!!!

 

13) Are there A2A / RealAIr / Milviz type add-ons for X-Plane10? Yes and No... There are some good examples like models by X-Aviation, and even some Carenados, but don't expect the same level of sophistication / quality in the avionics if that is important for you, because they're very far away from what is offered for FSX!  Flight dynamics and graphically these models are great though, even if negatively affected by X-Plane's "torque bug", but that being solved (some day), they'll be on pair with similar products for FSX, I believe... The poor turboprop model of FSX for instance is btw not that much better in X-Plane10, but again, it can improve, just like any thing in the X-Plane10 world, while mnothing in the FSX World can get any better!

 

To sum up what I tried to express in this rather long post (sorry), I can only offer you my reasons for keeping X-Plane10 in my disk (today is sunday, so, I have re-installed it, but one never knows what might happen in two days!!!!) - It has future! I don't know if it is going to be a BRIGHT, a Bright or a bright or even a shy future, but things are progressing, and the team behind it and some excellent freeware contributors are doing their best.

Wow those are some great answers from everybody! And to the people here who use XPX frequently, how important is the GPU compared to FSX? I know in FSX the GPU was barely used but in X Plane apparently it is very important along side the CPU. I have an i5 2500K @ 4.3ghz and an AMD Radeon 6870 which might be getting a little out dated with all the newer generation GPU's. I'm thinking of upgrading and getting a Nvidia 680 since there is a very big sale at amazon right now, so I think if I have that i'll be able to get even better graphics and FPS. 

Well, ...... best.

 

Epic answer, J.C.  I don't have any interest in X-Plane (yet), but I enjoyed reading your comparison.

When A2A start porting their aircraft to X-Plane, I may consider changing platforms, but not before.

 

I have a lot of scenery, aircraft, & other add-ons for FSX, and following the latest advice on tweaking the config files plus using DX10 I now have a simulator that looks good & performs well under all conditions except heavy weather.

 

Yes, it doesn't take full advantage of either multi-core cpus or generous amounts of memory, but given those restrictions, it is still one damn good flight simulator!   ^_^

This could turn into a popcorn thread...

I have the NVIDIA 680 2GB model running at 1920x1200 screen resolution. It performs very well on XP. Frame rates are wonderful compared to the same card on FSX. I use very high settings on XP.

 

FSX is CPU bound (the FPS is limited by CPU power), while XP is (currently) GPU bound, so the GPU is very important on XP.

 

 

Wow those are some great answers from everybody! And to the people here who use XPX frequently, how important is the GPU compared to FSX? I know in FSX the GPU was barely used but in X Plane apparently it is very important along side the CPU. I have an i5 2500K @ 4.3ghz and an AMD Radeon 6870 which might be getting a little out dated with all the newer generation GPU's. I'm thinking of upgrading and getting a Nvidia 680 since there is a very big sale at amazon right now, so I think if I have that i'll be able to get even better graphics and FPS. 

You can maintain 20+ with it with some lower setting. 

 

???

I have the NVIDIA 680 2GB model running at 1920x1200 screen resolution. It performs very well on XP. Frame rates are wonderful compared to the same card on FSX. I use very high settings on XP.

 

FSX is CPU bound (the FPS is limited by CPU power), while XP is (currently) GPU bound, so the GPU is very important on XP.

Im actually going to buy that card. Do you use HDR? What about plane addons? And do you think i will see an improvement from my HD 6870?