Froogle agrees XP is the future. And....

[atomicfrawg 33]

I agree x plane is fine but the graphics suck everything looks so bland and lifeless and with full settings I get worse performance than I do with FSX which is why I still use fsx. Aerofly has my vote the graphics are great and so is performance. The creator of x-plane should work on making it pretty.

 

Not so sure that I would say the graphics suck.

 

 

[pryoski 84]

Have you been living under a rock?!?! Froogle is only the cooliest FS genius out there!He reviews products and does tutorials too

 

Until very recently, I'd never heard of Froogle ... and I'm guessing that not many in the X-Plane community had either, and not to the extent that anybody really cared about his opinion.

That said, there are some benefits (maybe) to making X-Plane more "mainstream" .. but that which everyone seems to think is common sense, logical and a given can be the antithesis of what many of the people who were drawn to X-Plane in the first place want.

My best guess is that many X-Planers are afraid that the influx of MSFS user will push X-P development to look and feel like MSFS/FSX. I've seen many a thread of people who complain about the XP interface (the interface most XPners use and love) and wish that it was more like FSX's interface/menu system (one that I personally dislike very much). A lot of this is most likely due to what one is used to ... but now that I've had some familiarity with both, I must say that I still prefer the XPlane way of doing it.

I've been very happy with LR as a small approachable entity over the years .. there've been some big gains over time and a lot of community involvement with the primary developer. The same is not true of FSX, and if Laminar were to grow much bigger would this be lost?  So it's understandable that there were concerns when Scotchegg first presented the X-Plane universe (well, the XP universe that I was acquainted with) with the Froogle vlog which when encountered for the first time could feel like a frontal assault on the bulwarks of an X-Planer's simming existence!

 

To cap ... after I'd simmered down, I agree that he has some cogent points .. and I've responded to that end on his Vlog, however remember to that what one man sees as an obvious choice, can very well be an unmitigated disaster to another ... note that I'm also in the camp that I quite categorically do not want X-Plane to be more like FSX, but I wish Aerofly would bring their damned Twotter Extended into X-Plane. :lol:

[JasonHarris 96]

I dont see how it should matter one way or another if the plane community has heard of him or not.  Implying  he has no 'kudos'  the xplane fraternity doest know him is just a bunch of  self gratification.

 

    There is the saying that no publicity is bad publicity.   Certainly good publicity is good publicity.

 

     I would put it out there that a good amount of the american population doesn't know who David Cameron is.   So you don't know his name, thats not what matters, it's what he can do for you.

[pryoski 84]

I dont see how it should matter one way or another if the plane community has heard of him or not.  Implying  he has no 'kudos'  the xplane fraternity doest know him is just a bunch of  self gratification.

 

    There is the saying that no publicity is bad publicity.   Certainly good publicity is good publicity.

 

     I would put it out there that a good amount of the american population doesn't know who David Cameron is.   So you don't know his name, thats not what matters, it's what he can do for you.

 

Dear Mr. Harris,

You don't see how it should matter" ... and yet it does to some. To communicate effectively, both sides of the argument need to develop some empathy for the other perspective. Otherwise we end up with conflict.

 

When you say " Implying  he has no 'kudos'  the xplane fraternity doest know him is just a bunch of  self gratification", I feel that your choice of words and the way you deliver them is incendiary and can easily stir emotions away from the result you proclaim to support. The truth is I'm not implying .. I and many others didn't previously know  of this man.

 

Being diplomatic about our perspectives allows the discussion to continue ... and I'll add that both sides of this discussion need to do this so that we may reach some sort of middle ground and people may feel less threatened by visions of unwanted change.

 

As I had just finished writing in my previous post .. one man's "good" might very well be  another man's "disaster". How to get around that? Through abstaining from making emotive commentary is a mighty good start.

 

I would also posit .. that the state of the American population or the recognizability of some mediocre British polly is (or is he from Canadia or maybe Zimbabwe??), has nothing whatsoever to do with, nor furthers the aims of this discussion.

 

Cordially,

Kris P.

[JasonHarris 96]

Kris, my post happened to follow your's, I think, but it was more about the attitude to the people at the thread in the other forum.

 

   Yes, I don't see how it should matter and I dont need to empathise with any one to see their point of view.

 

   For example,   Froogle publicises xplane and some of his subscribers decide to buy xplane.    Some xplane users dont know froogle and dont give him any credence.  I dont need to empathise with their pov on this point when we already have more xplane users.   The fact that dont know froogle or dont like him has nothing to do with extra customers he might have brought over.

 

     What is it you expect me to empathise about with these guys?  

 

      My point, possibly too subtle, was that the PM of a large country has some sway and lets say he brokered a free trade deal or something to help the USA, does it matter that a lot of the population dont know his name?

 

     There was a bit of self grandiose in that thread because some people don't know him, they dont need him.  Good for them, they have a view but there are a lot of views I dont need to empathise with.

 

   BTW, there is nothing much that I would argue about your post, but I had to respond to the one you quoted me.

[jcomm 5,950]

I wasn't aware of Froogle until 3 weeks ago when I first heard about him!

 

I've been in flight simulation for years! 

 

Saw his video where he expresses is thoughts about the future of civil flight simulation and really appreciated what he says, and even how he says it.

 

If he is indeed seen by that many simmers than I consider that video as a very contribution towards making X-Plane 10 more interesting to "inspect" from simmers coming from other platforms.

 

Kind of what Robert Randazzo did when he mentioned X-Plane and the possible project they'll have for it in the future.

 

I will certainly follow his channel at Youtube. Why not!  He breathes the same air that I breath - Aviation / Simulation :-)

[pryoski 84]

Yes jcomm, I subscribed to his Vlog as well. And I have very little issue with what Froogle himself has to say. My concern is that I see a split in my community.

It's the discussion that has happened around the disclosure of the Vlog that concerns me. This debate (how it's playing out on all the forums) has the potential to derail and destabilise the future IMO. I've never been a fan of strong arm tactics and will, out of empathy side with those who get strong-armed because that is my nature.

Lets look at it dispassionately; the MSFS community is the larger community. When (and if) they make it to X-Plane (encouraged all the while by Froogle), they will become the dominant voice in the X-Plane community.

It's the same reason that governments guard against an influx of a single large group of foreigners into their country ... the change is tantamount to a revolution ... and one that many of my friends probably find alarming, truth be told (including me .. I would not like X-Plane to be MSFS-ized, my simming culture  is X-Plane .. NOT FSX.

THIS is why I urge people to have empathy .. if people cannot understand this, I have little hope for further discussion and I will choose my side to coincide with my loyalties on this subject, despite that this could have been (and still can be) a GREAT thing ... but I have diminishing faith in that, I will wait and see.

 

Kind regards, Kris P.

[scotchegg 4,207]

I partially understand where you're coming from pyroski, but I don't see it as that big an issue. On one forum a couple of people reacted (in some cases very) badly but most see some value in having a passionate simmer as an evangelist for XPlane to a new market, as shown by the positive response by most of the actual devs. And the devs and the community who don't want to donate / subscribe / watch / whatever always have the option of saying "Thanks, but not interested at the moment", rather than crying "ATTACK! ATTACK! THE FSXers ARE ATTACKING!".

 

Personally I don't see sides. I see simmers who want a good sim. Some new converts will want exactly the same out of that experience as you do, be it ground handling, torque represention, winter textures, whatever. More options must be a good thing.

[Murmur 3,944]

Lets look at it dispassionately; the MSFS community is the larger community. When (and if) they make it to X-Plane (encouraged all the while by Froogle), they will become the dominant voice in the X-Plane community.

It's the same reason that governments guard against an influx of a single large group of foreigners into their country ... the change is tantamount to a revolution ... and one that many of my friends probably find alarming, truth be told (including me .. I would not like X-Plane to be MSFS-ized, my simming culture  is X-Plane .. NOT FSX.

 

I don't see it as a danger, but rather as an opportunity to make great pressure on Laminar Research to make much needed improvements to X-Plane.

 

What do you think the switching "FSX'ers" would pressure for? We all know they'll primarily demand seasonal textures, better urban scenery, better weather/environment depiction, better AI and ATC, a better depiction of scenery from hi altitude.

 

These are all aspects where default FSX is still _vastly ahead_ of default X-Plane, and _all_ of them are of paramount importance in order to have a realistic immersion.

 

Take the infamous "torque bug": probably it's thanks to the increasing pressure of FSX'ers coming to X-Plane and complaining about it, that the discussion has became more urgent so that Austin has finally decided to tackle it.

[jspahn 268]

Personally I think X-Plane has the ability to completely destroy FSX but I think it will be up to 3rd party development to do so.  

 

Before I get slammed for making that statement, Im not an X-Plane ###### as a matter of fact I am not a big fan of how polarized the flight sim community is sometimes.

 

The polarization between the two groups is really what is keeping X-plane from the mainstream market.  Out of the box FSX is a terd and the same can be said for X-Plane, what is needed is a push from innovative groups to bring that wow factor to X-Plane.

 

When you can suspend the belief of sitting in front of a computer you will have a good all around simulation.  Take me as an example, I am a casual simmer, I like the visual aspects of the simulation genre.  Take the mecahnical and visual mix in some FPS and you will perform magic.

 

Just wait until these clouds hit, it doesn't fix everything  but just like how the community here discovered UrbanMAXX, it will extend X-Plane and open some eyes to the simulator.....

 

EDIT:  F@nboy is blocked....really?

[Murmur 3,944]

Personally I think X-Plane has the ability to completely destroy FSX but I think it will be up to 3rd party development to do so.  

 

"Ability" is the key word. I too think that X-Plane can look very good and even better in many aspects compared to FSX, but currently all the limitations I listed remain, and they're all very important for immersion. It's the old story of "X-Plane has potential".

[jspahn 268]

"Ability" is the key word. I too think that X-Plane can look very good and even better in many aspects compared to FSX, but currently all the limitations I listed remain, and they're all very important for immersion. It's the old story of "X-Plane has potential".

Agreed 100%

 

How do we solve that in your opinion?

 

Now me I started as a user who was completely disappointed with the 'Plausible" concept when 10 came out, I decided to take action and help out......

 

With that said I have dived  deep into the scenery system for X-Plane10, my limiting factor right now is time but I have envisioned a complete rewrite of the global terrain textures.  I am one person trying to take down a giant.  But yes the potential is there for something completely amazing:

 

 

 

 

This is an early look at WinterMAXX, which will resume once the clouds and UM update are out......

[airlinejets 709]

 

 

Personally I think X-Plane has the ability to completely destroy FSX but I think it will be up to 3rd party development to do so.

 

Exactly! Why does everyone expect Laminar to do it all? That's nonsense. There are so many things still missing and the opportunities abound. Froogle represents exposure and that will eventually trickle down to the third party developers that have been on the sidelines. Numbers mean everything.

[jspahn 268]

Exactly! Why does everyone expect Laminar to do it all? That's nonsense. There are so many things still missing and the opportunities abound. Froogle represents exposure and that will eventually trickle down to the third party developers that have been on the sidelines. Numbers mean everything.

If I had a dollar for every time I was contacted with "you should work for LR"  or "you should sell that to LR"..... 80P

[alpilotx 505]

How do we solve that in your opinion?

 

Now me I started as a user who was completely disappointed with the 'Plausible" concept when 10 came out, I decided to take action and help out......

Thats exactly how I started 6-7 years ago ... when X-Plane 8 came out, and Ben was talking about some forest technology included .... but no scenery was there, which used it. So I did my Europe / USA forests project .... learned a lot (extremely lot)  ... and came close enough to Laminar  ....

 

 

With that said I have dived  deep into the scenery system for X-Plane10, my limiting factor right now is time but I have envisioned a complete rewrite of the global terrain textures.  I am one person trying to take down a giant.  But yes the potential is there for something completely amazing:

John, be careful ... this is nothing short of a "gigantic time sink" B)  ... I know the guy who did the existing texture set (well, I know him very very well ), and I know how much time he needed (= many years!) to invest to bring us where we are today. And he is still not finished ... (bu at least he is now slowly becoming pleased with the results - even though, he also has endless ideas for improvements - and always bugs me if I could change this or that in the landclass data etc.).