The power of marketing...

 

Then I hope they'll not get performance issues like with other Orbx products:

 

Exactly, Nail it on the head, Orbx does things under the gloss and beauty that I think is questionable from business and ethics standpoint.

http://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/showthread.php?266774-No-more-Orbx-phew!!

Mitch (Sesquashtoo) is kind of hoping for an Orbx addon like this, for X-Plane.....so it must have something special.

Larry, hi....I LOVE my XPX experience. I just took a night flight into KFNT from KOAK.

 

There is nothing yet out there to beat XPX in the night environment. I am ecstatic now that in FSX, FSXG's night textures and lighting system has brought XPX night life 'love' to that simulator. But, I am no defined 'groupie'.  My enthusiasm has to earned. My posting enthusiasm on anything on AVSIM is genuine. It has always been genuine.  I bought FSXG and the beautiful state of Michigan has been brought to life. Suburbs looks like the real deal....rural looks the part as it actually is, to this poster.  What sheer joy I experienced in following interstate I-75 up through Saginaw, Bay City, up to the U.P. and beyond to the Painted Rocks.  Wow.....

 

I would love to see this, how do I translate it...er....well, here's a try;....'luxurious spread of texture, unbroken, having real life symmetry'... to a wonderful product such as the Xplane franchise. I'd drop the $99.95 so fast, to bring this visual joy to XPX that I am now smiling over in FSX.

 

Larry, for myself, the night environment is enveloping and mystical. It is a time of concentric reflection inwards with ensuing peace, and when you fly at night, over a landscape of lights, streets clearly defined by those lights, your mind reaches out...you become one with the majesty below your wing, the sheer immense space you are flying over reminds you of the excitement, and the danger of going where humans were not designed by Nature to be....  FSXG has brought that feeling and delivery now to FSX. You are alone up there...high above those lights, and the feeling is now delivered in a most realistic way for that product.  I would have spent that money for a absolutely non-hit in the FPS delivery of this, let alone now how good and realistic FSX is now in the daylight.  We already have one of the best night flight environments delivered by XPX. I would like to see BOTH strengths, for FSX and XPX.   FSXG has given me the as real as it gets (to date for this product) night environs, sans superior XPX road traffic logic and graphics. I want ORBX to now give me in the daylight what they have brought to the plate in FSX, for XPX.  If they did....what a powerhouse would be coming from these two platforms.  I still have O.O.M. issues with FSX. I do not have ANY issues of this kind with XPX 64 bit.  I fly my 40 or so minutes at full graphic FSX output, and enjoy every minute of it.

 

I so wish to see the now FSXG daylight viewcape in my XPX 64 bit, and fly to any part of the world, and GET THERE....absolutely get there as my system can also get there (12 GB, system RAM).  If you fly FSX, to not have FSXG fill out a companion 'ORBX'ish world beyond the confines of your purchased regional, is in my P.O. a user experience deficit.  I now can fly beyond Central Rockies, and keep going in PLAUSIBLE mind-set. That is what my latest investment has delivered to  FSX. I now have 'visual continuity'...and LOVE IT!

 

Happy flying, Larry...

 

Mitch'er

Mitch (Sesquashtoo) is kind of hoping for an Orbx addon like this, for X-Plane.....so it must have something special.

but Mitch made an XP10 Thread saying OSM + Simheaven is ORBX :lol: 

 

"We have lift-off! SimHeaven OSM+AUTOGEN is ORBX GLOBAL!"

but Mitch made an XP10 Thread saying OSM + Simheaven is ORBX :lol: 

 

"We have lift-off! SimHeaven OSM+AUTOGEN is ORBX GLOBAL!"

True '5'...but, that referenced the 'intent' of FSXG for FSX.  OSM does attempt that to date. It unfortunately does not  give the scope and effect as what the now RTM FSXG gives to FSX.  OSM is trying to do that. I appreciate SimHeaven for giving us OSM 'love'. Without it..oh gawd!  It's the graphics that are not there yet.  An FSXG version...well....oh boy!

An FSXG version...well....oh boy!

 

OpenStreetMap buildings in FSX, that's not new. You can find screenshots in this thread:

http://www.pilote-virtuel.com/viewtopic.php?pid=451707#p451707

 

But it's a lot more complicated to import OSM files in FSX. They use ScenProc.

 

We X-Plane users are lucky to have OSM2XP which is very easy to use.

Add to it the free photo scenery, and you have a perfect match!

 

I am progressively installing ZL17 areas, covering mostly Portugal and Spain, and the islands, but will continue with other parts of Europe.

 

Larry, hi....I LOVE my XPX experience. I just took a night flight into KFNT from KOAK.

 

There is nothing yet out there to beat XPX in the night environment. I am ecstatic now that in FSX, FSXG's night textures and lighting system has brought XPX night life 'love' to that simulator. But, I am no defined 'groupie'.  My enthusiasm has to earned. My posting enthusiasm on anything on AVSIM is genuine. It has always been genuine.  I bought FSXG and the beautiful state of Michigan has been brought to life. Suburbs looks like the real deal....rural looks the part as it actually is, to this poster.  What sheer joy I experienced in following interstate I-75 up through Saginaw, Bay City, up to the U.P. and beyond to the Painted Rocks.  Wow.....

 

I would love to see this, how do I translate it...er....well, here's a try;....'luxurious spread of texture, unbroken, having real life symmetry'... to a wonderful product such as the Xplane franchise. I'd drop the $99.95 so fast, to bring this visual joy to XPX that I am now smiling over in FSX.

 

Larry, for myself, the night environment is enveloping and mystical. It is a time of concentric reflection inwards with ensuing peace, and when you fly at night, over a landscape of lights, streets clearly defined by those lights, your mind reaches out...you become one with the majesty below your wing, the sheer immense space you are flying over reminds you of the excitement, and the danger of going where humans were not designed by Nature to be....  FSXG has brought that feeling and delivery now to FSX. You are alone up there...high above those lights, and the feeling is now delivered in a most realistic way for that product.  I would have spent that money for a absolutely non-hit in the FPS delivery of this, let alone now how good and realistic FSX is now in the daylight.  We already have one of the best night flight environments delivered by XPX. I would like to see BOTH strengths, for FSX and XPX.   FSXG has given me the as real as it gets (to date for this product) night environs, sans superior XPX road traffic logic and graphics. I want ORBX to now give me in the daylight what they have brought to the plate in FSX, for XPX.  If they did....what a powerhouse would be coming from these two platforms.  I still have O.O.M. issues with FSX. I do not have ANY issues of this kind with XPX 64 bit.  I fly my 40 or so minutes at full graphic FSX output, and enjoy every minute of it.

 

I so wish to see the now FSXG daylight viewcape in my XPX 64 bit, and fly to any part of the world, and GET THERE....absolutely get there as my system can also get there (12 GB, system RAM).  If you fly FSX, to not have FSXG fill out a companion 'ORBX'ish world beyond the confines of your purchased regional, is in my P.O. a user experience deficit.  I now can fly beyond Central Rockies, and keep going in PLAUSIBLE mind-set. That is what my latest investment has delivered to  FSX. I now have 'visual continuity'...and LOVE IT!

 

Happy flying, Larry...

 

Mitch'er

 

 

Mitch, It's great to see someone write with such enthusiasm, for a range of different & sometimes competing products. One week you're all hyped about FS9, and heard about some great features of X-Plane 10 around the same time. You're willing to try XP-10 and found it had some wonderful things that FSX or FS9 didn't. And now you've found an addon for FSX that is also a new wonderful experience, and it's something that XP-10 isn't providing at the moment. And best of all, you share your enthusiasm with lot's of detail! I much prefer this open thought pattern, instead of I've switched, and not looking back, or lipstick on a pig type of reply's. It's your style of writing, that lets others really know what's available out there. You provide a great service for a number of different products, and don't worry about taking sides. Keep at it!!!

 

L.Adamson

 

P.S. --- I still like the looks of that first X-Plane video Murmur gave links to, in the switched to X-Plane thread. And I'll say so

He means this... And yes, it's default stock lighting: :smile:

 

 

Thanks for the video of a night-time landing at EGLL.  I wish I had more time for simming (to much work makes for a boring life I guess   ), but I finally got to try this approach tonight at EGLL.  Not sure which runway but I tried all 4.....

 

I am getting spectacular airport lighting, plus airport buildings which look cool too (is there a list anywhere of stock airports that have buildings, etc. as EGLL does?).  But my city lighting on the EGLL approach is much more sparse, no glow of a distant city like in this video.  I see roads (perhaps the most off-airport lighting), but not as much other "city lighting" as in the video.  I checked my rendering options and they are all high- is there something else that I need to do to replicate that lighting in the video on an XPX stock install?

 

Thanks-  I love the smoothness and the flight models, very nice.  I'm looking forward to doing more with this sim!

 

Bruce.

I can't comment on the quality of FTX Global, but reading the posts at the FSX forums suggests me it must really be good.

 

That's good for the FSX users! For me it is great to know I can have, at least, the same ( well, less the seasonal textures for the time being ) in X-Plane 10. Good enough for me :-) specially when I didn't have to pay more than what I spent in the base package ( X-Plane 10 Global Edition ).

 

 

I've got FTX Global and although it is much better than the default FSX textures, it doesn't really knock my socks off, like I thought it would.  At least not so far.

It will be a long time before you ever see a night landing in FSX or P3D like the one in that video taking place in XPX64.  That knocked my socks off.

I like FSX, and it runs good for me as long as I stay away from certain places, but XPX64 is most certainly the future of the hobby.

Doing a night landing at Heathrow in FSX, most likely would have put me over the 4GB limit and humbly sent me back to the desktop.

Thanks for the video of a night-time landing at EGLL.  I wish I had more time for simming (to much work makes for a boring life I guess   ), but I finally got to try this approach tonight at EGLL.  Not sure which runway but I tried all 4.....

 

I am getting spectacular airport lighting, plus airport buildings which look cool too (is there a list anywhere of stock airports that have buildings, etc. as EGLL does?).  But my city lighting on the EGLL approach is much more sparse, no glow of a distant city like in this video.  I see roads (perhaps the most off-airport lighting), but not as much other "city lighting" as in the video.  I checked my rendering options and they are all high- is there something else that I need to do to replicate that lighting in the video on an XPX stock install?

 

Thanks-  I love the smoothness and the flight models, very nice.  I'm looking forward to doing more with this sim!

 

Bruce.

 

I am not familiar with the aria you are talking about but I am guessing it is the new autogen that has no lighting. Hopefully that will get fixed soon !

Old discussion FS vs Xplane, totally useless, but if you want to compare, the Flight model - every time i try x-plane i feel if im sitting in a flying ROCK, im not saying FS is much better, Regarding performance, gfx...etc are not the most important for me.  OK we all know FSX FS9 Xplane are all far from the real thing and real feeling, but for procedures good to use them. So if you like xplane Fly with it, if you like FSX fly with it. Just FLY , you know without tweaking, downloading, testiung, defrag...etc forget those and FLY:)) lot of people spending their time editing cfg, install new airports ( never flying there) FLY this is the only thing i can say dont optimize enjoy the FLYING:)

Thanks for the video of a night-time landing at EGLL.  I wish I had more time for simming (to much work makes for a boring life I guess   ), but I finally got to try this approach tonight at EGLL.  Not sure which runway but I tried all 4.....

 

I am getting spectacular airport lighting, plus airport buildings which look cool too (is there a list anywhere of stock airports that have buildings, etc. as EGLL does?).  But my city lighting on the EGLL approach is much more sparse, no glow of a distant city like in this video.  I see roads (perhaps the most off-airport lighting), but not as much other "city lighting" as in the video.  I checked my rendering options and they are all high- is there something else that I need to do to replicate that lighting in the video on an XPX stock install?

 

Thanks-  I love the smoothness and the flight models, very nice.  I'm looking forward to doing more with this sim!

 

Bruce.

That was a phenomenal video.  I can't speak for anybody else, but you could have fooled me, that that was not a real-life night approach!  Wow. There is no sim on the planet, other that XPX that can produce that graphic night hours output....stunning!

 

Mitch

I have FSX (which I don't use anymore), Prepar3D and X-plane 10. I bought X-plane mostly to show support (we don't have too many realistic (civilian) sims here, do we) and partly to keep on track where the developement of the X-plane goes. If it seems superior, of course I jump the X-plane wagon.

 

First, many on this thread seem to miss the point of FTX Global and its impact on FSX/P3D. Yes, SimHeaven OSM/Autogen packages are nice for many european countries, but this kind of approach has limitations like any photoreal scenery: it consumes _A_LOT_OF_SPACE_. Install SimHeaven sceneries for the Europe and US alone and you have large hard drive full of sceneries, which also have also huge loading times. Also OSM data is adequate for Europe only and most of the other countinents just suck. This is of course not criticism for the SimHeaven developers, but just a fact how OSM is nowadays.

 

FTX Global approcah is of the basic "generic" textures, like X-plane default or many of its addon sceneries. The point is that with FTX Global you really transfer the look of the FSX/P3D to new level just by installing this 4.3GB download package (about 9GB installed) and it just replaces those 7 years old original textures world wide. If you want to have even better results, purchase or use some freeware landclass and/or mesh (payware costs from under 10 bucks to perhaps 17 per continet for the landclass, mesh varies a lot, good freeware is also availble). All that is optional, still. ORBX will deliver during this and next year tailored landclasses and meshes for the FTX Global, cityscapes and stuff if you want to opt those. For now, it is just as a texture set far superior than FSX original, Ground Environment X or X-plane original. Comparing X-plane OSM/autogen and FTX Global is apples and oranges: with FTX Global you get beautiful, but not photoreal whole world just with few gigabytes. Photogen delivers reality, but with cost of disk space and quality is dependent on original photo data, which varies (like it varies with the ones I've seen with X-plane). About the night lighting, FTX Global delivers some beautiful stuff with 3D lights without pretty much any FPS hit. X-plane default is beautiful, but with addon sceneries from SimHeaven they seem to suffer a lot. To me, it seems that many of the OpensceneryX buildings have just awful night textures (or lack of them).

 

About the rest of the stuff: I'm not that convinced about X-plane "superior performance". I use triple monitor setup and X-plane was far more difficult to get to work with decent visuals and nice FPS than Prepar3D was: XP10 seems to require higher AA to get most of the shimmering away and for one good GPU (see my computer specs) it starts to get tough with 6080x1080 pixels with high AA. Also, like FSX/P3D, X-plane also runs beautifully default, but when you start to add more complex sceneries, you run to performance troubles. 64-bit is nice of course, for the memory address space, but I don't suffer from OOMs with 32-bit P3D either, so there is practically no difference. ATC, air traffic, aircraft ground handling (it is actually bad with FSX/P3D, but with X-plane it is abysmal) and payware addons are the one where FSX/P3D shines over the X-plane. Weather engine in X-plane 10 is quite bad (like it is with default FSX) and at least I don't know any good alternatives for it, and I'm not that fond of the look of the X-plane clouds either (I've tried several freeware addon textures also). I only own a couple of payware aircraft for X-plane so far and they are unfortunately behind the not only the best but also decent FSX/P3D contemporaries.

 

For myself though, X-plane is an interesting platform. There are tremendously good qualities and I would for certainly use it as my main platform, if it would deliver as a whole. This is of course just my opinion, and many X-plane primary pilots probably think otherwise. But all this is based on personal experiences, isn't it? With FTX Global FSX/P3D got another update that improves especially VFR and take-offs and approaches for tubes _globally_ tremendously. I don't care about what platform I use, only what delivers the best experience for me. X-plane is not quite there yet, but it may be sometime in the near future.

I have FSX (which I don't use anymore), Prepar3D and X-plane 10. I bought X-plane mostly to show support (we don't have too many realistic (civilian) sims here, do we) and partly to keep on track where the developement of the X-plane goes. If it seems superior, of course I jump the X-plane wagon.

 

First, many on this thread seem to miss the point of FTX Global and its impact on FSX/P3D. Yes, SimHeaven OSM/Autogen packages are nice for many european countries, but this kind of approach has limitations like any photoreal scenery: it consumes _A_LOT_OF_SPACE_. Install SimHeaven sceneries for the Europe and US alone and you have large hard drive full of sceneries, which also have also huge loading times. Also OSM data is adequate for Europe only and most of the other countinents just suck. This is of course not criticism for the SimHeaven developers, but just a fact how OSM is nowadays.

 

FTX Global approcah is of the basic "generic" textures, like X-plane default or many of its addon sceneries. The point is that with FTX Global you really transfer the look of the FSX/P3D to new level just by installing this 4.3GB download package (about 9GB installed) and it just replaces those 7 years old original textures world wide. If you want to have even better results, purchase or use some freeware landclass and/or mesh (payware costs from under 10 bucks to perhaps 17 per continet for the landclass, mesh varies a lot, good freeware is also availble). All that is optional, still. ORBX will deliver during this and next year tailored landclasses and meshes for the FTX Global, cityscapes and stuff if you want to opt those. For now, it is just as a texture set far superior than FSX original, Ground Environment X or X-plane original. Comparing X-plane OSM/autogen and FTX Global is apples and oranges: with FTX Global you get beautiful, but not photoreal whole world just with few gigabytes. Photogen delivers reality, but with cost of disk space and quality is dependent on original photo data, which varies (like it varies with the ones I've seen with X-plane). About the night lighting, FTX Global delivers some beautiful stuff with 3D lights without pretty much any FPS hit. X-plane default is beautiful, but with addon sceneries from SimHeaven they seem to suffer a lot. To me, it seems that many of the OpensceneryX buildings have just awful night textures (or lack of them).

 

About the rest of the stuff: I'm not that convinced about X-plane "superior performance". I use triple monitor setup and X-plane was far more difficult to get to work with decent visuals and nice FPS than Prepar3D was: XP10 seems to require higher AA to get most of the shimmering away and for one good GPU (see my computer specs) it starts to get tough with 6080x1080 pixels with high AA. Also, like FSX/P3D, X-plane also runs beautifully default, but when you start to add more complex sceneries, you run to performance troubles. 64-bit is nice of course, for the memory address space, but I don't suffer from OOMs with 32-bit P3D either, so there is practically no difference. ATC, air traffic, aircraft ground handling (it is actually bad with FSX/P3D, but with X-plane it is abysmal) and payware addons are the one where FSX/P3D shines over the X-plane. Weather engine in X-plane 10 is quite bad (like it is with default FSX) and at least I don't know any good alternatives for it, and I'm not that fond of the look of the X-plane clouds either (I've tried several freeware addon textures also). I only own a couple of payware aircraft for X-plane so far and they are unfortunately behind the not only the best but also decent FSX/P3D contemporaries.

 

For myself though, X-plane is an interesting platform. There are tremendously good qualities and I would for certainly use it as my main platform, if it would deliver as a whole. This is of course just my opinion, and many X-plane primary pilots probably think otherwise. But all this is based on personal experiences, isn't it? With FTX Global FSX/P3D got another update that improves especially VFR and take-offs and approaches for tubes _globally_ tremendously. I don't care about what platform I use, only what delivers the best experience for me. X-plane is not quite there yet, but it may be sometime in the near future.

Awesome post Dude! :good:

For me I am more and more on-rails with X-Plane, and even intense prop torque can't spit me away from it...

 

I installed P3D to test FSGRW... It's a great weather injector, downloaded a few files, traveled around the World experimenting with their effects... liked it, but, still far far away from what weather effects give me in x-plane 10...

 

Then I loaded X-Plane and visited each of the airfields I had been in P3D, with FSGRW doing it's best to turn the weather into something really thrilling for those extreme weather conditions, but, I must admit, it falls short, very short from what X-Plane provides... 

 

Usability of cockpits, etc... that's another matter, and I agree FSX / P3D still do a better job. But some add-ons for X-Plane while not allowing for that GNS 430 we have by default better in FSX / P3D than in X-Plane, still have a lot to offer. Just give it time....

 

In the meanwhile, just like many, I feel overwhelmed by those approaches to scenery areas which aren't that big, unless you add photographic scenery.