OK, I`m shocked...

[starflight 8]

I'm hoping that 10.30 brings some goodness, and that the interview AVSIM conduct with Austin is productive, as I feel that if this sim increases its user base by 25-30% then it could definitely be a winner! Its still 50/50 imo. We need some good addons, for scenery (airports) orbx style and some AI and ATC. Some good seasonal textures would also be nice!

 

There probably aren't many add-on developers making enough (or expect to make enough) money on their X-Plane wares to devote their full attention to it. The author of World Traffic says sales aren't covering all the bills, the more popular SkyMaxx Pro probably isn't either, so both authors have full time jobs that can keep them very busy at times, which delays updates.

 

Then of course we have far too many XPers who are indifferent to one type or another of add-on, and many who *are* interested aren't satisfied with where it's at (sometimes comparing against more expensive FSX products with full time staff, support and/or much larger contributing communities), so they don't buy it. That's of course their right, but this further reduces an author's motivation for working on a very niche area (niche of a still-niche product (XP10), which is in an already niche market (flightsims) compared to other "gaming" genres).

 

But who knows, if the userbase does increase 25-30% maybe it'll finally reach a tipping point and the amount and quality of add-ons starts snowballing.

[CarlosF 1,241]

but you know, the one thing it didn't have for me, was soul

 

hmmm, I wonder how much it cost you to get FSX a "$oul".

 

 

 

I dropped back into FSX it was like, ahhh... nice

 

I bet XP10 will feel like that with $$$ worth of addons.

 

Don't get me wrong but I guess you already forgot what FSX is without its $oul

 

 

XP10 is a great sim with all the freeware out there just like FSX is with all its addon$.

[alpilotx 505]

There probably aren't many add-on developers making enough (or expect to make enough) money on their X-Plane wares to devote their full attention to it. The author of World Traffic says sales aren't covering all the bills, the more popular SkyMaxx Pro probably isn't either, so both authors have full time jobs that can keep them very busy at times, which delays updates.

Yes, I think many - if not most - developers can't afford to do what they do full time. But it might change over time ... (if - as you say - a critical mass is reached).

 

I for myself I am happy to only do it in part/free time what I do (even what I do directly for Laminar) beside a normal, full time job ... thus I can "afford" to make my work free-/donationwara (even though, there is another subtle aspect: my aim is to "spread th gospel" ... how good XP10 can be ... and this is the easiest with "free"). And just as an interesting side note: from my - conservative - estimates, about 2% of the users donate ...

[wolke85 150]

hmmm, I wonder how much it cost you to get FSX a "$oul".

 

 

 

 

I bet XP10 will feel like that with $$$ worth of addons.

 

Don't get me wrong but I guess you already forgot what FSX is without its $oul

 

 

XP10 is a great sim with all the freeware out there just like FSX is with all its addon$.

 

 

I agree on that.

But as Howard (and many others) i am also one of those (many) simmers who have by now spent lots of money into FSX and are (overall) happy with it.

So if i consider switching to X-Plane now or in the near future (and i really do consider this), then X-Plane has to offer some kind of perspective that there is a chance to gain some great immersion and "soul" which, in fact, i now have in FSX!

Sure i know the argument - the less people try XP, the less 3rd party devs come on board and vice versa ... i know.

But there is another factor, which also counts a lot in my opinion:

Until now Laminar - only my opinion - has simply failed to show that XP can be an alternative platform for many flightsimmers.

What i am trying to say is this:

Lets take the DCS series for instance ...

I was able to install the A-10 sim easily (just as it was the case with FSX and other flightsims such as the Rise of Flight or AeroflyFS) ...

Controls were set up intuitively and pretty straight forward.

TrackIR was configurated quickly as well and within a few minutes i was able to go flying in an A-10 sim, which offered real great immersion and realsim!

I was able to check it all out and fell into it!

It was convincing - it was ... plausible!

And so i quickly recognized: Okay ... Military sims are not my favourites, but other than that:

WOW! A cool flightsim - really! (You see: The is the WOW-momentum!) :wink:

If there would be something like that for civilian aircrafts too, then i'd be a real happy simmer-pilot (And i sure would spend quite an amount of mony for further sceneries, add-ons and so on here!)

 

Compared to this very good experience and first encounters with DCS, my first encounter with XP was more like this:

Okay .. where is the "start up" user GUI ... oh, here it is .. wait a second ... what the %&$/ should that be?

Well: It was the start up GUI :mellow:  ... okay it could be worse, but be it ...

Now, finally - and after quite an amount of time was spent to calibrate my flightcontrols - ... ready for take off and go into the first flight of the day in XP!!

... well:

This was the idea at least, because practically i now had some troubles getting used to the cockpitviews and as i was not able at this point to get Track IR running in XP (and hell yeah, i just want to go for a first spin ... is that so hard to achieve in XP?), i just told myself:

Be it this way - just go flying now!

Said so, done so ... advancing the throttle ... and then :blink: greetings from XP's "torque-effect"... well:

Ended up on the other side of the runway somewhere, but not in the sky as intended ... so:

Back to the start again ...

And so it went on quite a few times ... but then ... finally up in the air ... and now guess what!? ... No WOW! momentum - on the contrary ...

I felt very, very much "alone" out there ...

Wosrt of all though: The "plausible world" below and around me looked rather synthetic, calculated and designed than "plausible" and it sure was not immersive at all!

... Well:

I climbed higher and then ... the "horizon", ... i don't know what to say or how to describe it exactly, but it was blurry somehow, looking somehow odd and strange.

Now sure: My first attempts with FSX  where not that superb either, but at least i was able to go flying around anywhere i wanted easily and quickly, i was able to check out some points of interest, fiddle around with it, and well - just liked it somehow. (not a "Super WOW! momentum", but at least a "quite nice and okay effect" and definitely enough to say:

I am willing to spend more time with and money for this sim!

Now back to my (failed) first XPlane experience though ...

Okay boy, i told myself, as a dedicated flightsimmer You will have to do some readings anyways, get answers, find solutions ... and so i began reading through various XP forums here for instance.

But then, a little while later, i realized that there are no seasonal textures in XP, there are issues with the horizon and there are issues with the way how XP handles torque ... and it seemed as if those things had been mentioned several times by many, many, many users - but(!) - have never ever been really adressed by XP developers ... not so even until version 10.20+! :unsure: Okay, as far as i read here in #38, there seems be some sort of fix or "workaround" for the "horizon issue" (Thank You very much for the link provided here)

But overall:

All this mentioned here, is sad somehow - i think - and may be the reason why i - and so many others out here (as Howard for instance) - still hold back with XP and don't get into it (yet) so to speak.

 

I do really hope though - seriousy - that Laminar (or whoever is responsible "behind the scenes") recognizes that for the first time now since quite some time again, many potential flightsimmers seriously consider giving XP a real chance ...

Even well known 3rd party developers who have so far mainly or exclusively been developing for FSX  for instance (such as PMDG) will sooner or later be on board of XP too and - as some of the latest great 3rd party add ons available for XP clearly show:

This sim has lots of potential - but(!) - then again - until now it has somehow failed to turn its potential into an immersive flightsim for many flightsimmers!

If this does not happen (soon), then i think the statement saying that "there is a lot of potential in XP, but ..." will continue to resonate for another ten versions of XPlane!

 

But please do not get me wrong:

I have been very actively following the latest releases of AlpilotX's super fantastic mesh products, there are some superb airplanes available for XP now and further add-ons such as SkymaxxPro (hope i am spelling this correct) are really fantastic!

So i again want to make clear that i have a lot of interest in XP and i am really looking forward to give it a try again when 10.30 is out.

I just hope though in the very same time, that this newest version then will really offer a flightim, which proofs to have the potential to be an immersive "plausible" sim from the moment on i find myself sitting there in the cockpit of any plane of choice!

And i know:

What users and simmers may consdier to be "immersive" can vary a lot, but i can only point out at my positive "experience" i had with DCS for instance, mentioned right above, to make clearer what i am trying to say here.

And although mass does indeed not always mean quality, i just dare saying that - comparatively - so many flightsimmers out there flying around happily in FSX (even FS9), AeroflyFS, Rise of Flight, DCS or whatever rather than XP still, make it somehow obvious that XPlane's potential does not seem to be convincing enough for the daily useage as an "immersive" flightsim, worth spending too much time with and money on.

 

But again:

I will continue keeping an eye on XPlane's development, i will certainly try out 10.30 as soon as it will be available and i really hope that XPlane progresses well, because it sure has ... You know ... lots of potential!

:smile:

Cheers, Christoph

 

P.S.: All that written above here are just some personal notes of mine and are not "objective" at all and may be seen completely different by other flightsimmers out here. So please do not feel offended as these are only my 2 cents here.

P.P.S.: There have been some superb screenshots posted recently here in the screenshots forum at AVSIM, showing XPlane at its best i think ... and so again: There is lots of potential in this platform indeed!

[Rocky_53 1,579]

I agree on that.

But as Howard (and many others) i am also one of those (many) simmers who have by now spent lots of money into FSX and are (overall) happy with it.

So if i consider switching to X-Plane now or in the near future (and i really do consider this), then X-Plane has to offer some kind of perspective that there is a chance to gain some great immersion and "soul" which, in fact, i now have in FSX!

Sure i know the argument - the less people try XP, the less 3rd party devs come on board and vice versa ... i know.

But there is another factor, which also counts a lot in my opinion:

Until now Laminar - only my opinion - has simply failed to show that XP can be an alternative platform for many flightsimmers.

What i am trying to say is this:

Lets take the DCS series for instance ...

I was able to install the A-10 sim easily (just as it was the case with FSX and other flightsims such as the Rise of Flight or AeroflyFS) ...

Controls were set up intuitively and pretty straight forward.

TrackIR was configurated quickly as well and within a few minutes i was able to go flying in an A-10 sim, which offered real great immersion and realsim!

I was able to check it all out and fell into it!

It was convincing - it was ... plausible!

And so i quickly recognized: Okay ... Military sims are not my favourites, but other than that:

WOW! A cool flightsim - really! (You see: The is the WOW-momentum!) :wink:

If there would be something like that for civilian aircrafts too, then i'd be a real happy simmer-pilot (And i sure would spend quite an amount of mony for further sceneries, add-ons and so on here!)

 

Compared to this very good experience and first encounters with DCS, my first encounter with XP was more like this:

Okay .. where is the "start up" user GUI ... oh, here it is .. wait a second ... what the %&$/ should that be?

Well: It was the start up GUI :mellow:  ... okay it could be worse, but be it ...

Now, finally - and after quite an amount of time was spent to calibrate my flightcontrols - ... ready for take off and go into the first flight of the day in XP!!

... well:

This was the idea at least, because practically i now had some troubles getting used to the cockpitviews and as i was not able at this point to get Track IR running in XP (and hell yeah, i just want to go for a first spin ... is that so hard to achieve in XP?), i just told myself:

Be it this way - just go flying now!

Said so, done so ... advancing the throttle ... and then :blink: greetings from XP's "torque-effect"... well:

Ended up on the other side of the runway somewhere, but not in the sky as intended ... so:

Back to the start again ...

And so it went on quite a few times ... but then ... finally up in the air ... and now guess what!? ... No WOW! momentum - on the contrary ...

I felt very, very much "alone" out there ...

Wosrt of all though: The "plausible world" below and around me looked rather synthetic, calculated and designed than "plausible" and it sure was not immersive at all!

... Well:

I climbed higher and then ... the "horizon", ... i don't know what to say or how to describe it exactly, but it was blurry somehow, looking somehow odd and strange.

Now sure: My first attempts with FSX  where not that superb either, but at least i was able to go flying around anywhere i wanted easily and quickly, i was able to check out some points of interest, fiddle around with it, and well - just liked it somehow. (not a "Super WOW! momentum", but at least a "quite nice and okay effect" and definitely enough to say:

I am willing to spend more time with and money for this sim!

Now back to my (failed) first XPlane experience though ...

Okay boy, i told myself, as a dedicated flightsimmer You will have to do some readings anyways, get answers, find solutions ... and so i began reading through various XP forums here for instance.

But then, a little while later, i realized that there are no seasonal textures in XP, there are issues with the horizon and there are issues with the way how XP handles torque ... and it seemed as if those things had been mentioned several times by many, many, many users - but(!) - have never ever been really adressed by XP developers ... not so even until version 10.20+! :unsure: Okay, as far as i read here in #38, there seems be some sort of fix or "workaround" for the "horizon issue" (Thank You very much for the link provided here)

But overall:

All this mentioned here, is sad somehow - i think - and may be the reason why i - and so many others out here (as Howard for instance) - still hold back with XP and don't get into it (yet) so to speak.

 

I do really hope though - seriousy - that Laminar (or whoever is responsible "behind the scenes") recognizes that for the first time now since quite some time again, many potential flightsimmers seriously consider giving XP a real chance ...

Even well known 3rd party developers who have so far mainly or exclusively been developing for FSX  for instance (such as PMDG) will sooner or later be on board of XP too and - as some of the latest great 3rd party add ons available for XP clearly show:

This sim has lots of potential - but(!) - then again - until now it has somehow failed to turn its potential into an immersive flightsim for many flightsimmers!

If this does not happen (soon), then i think the statement saying that "there is a lot of potential in XP, but ..." will continue to resonate for another ten versions of XPlane!

 

But please do not get me wrong:

I have been very actively following the latest releases of AlpilotX's super fantastic mesh products, there are some superb airplanes available for XP now and further add-ons such as SkymaxxPro (hope i am spelling this correct) are really fantastic!

So i again want to make clear that i have a lot of interest in XP and i am really looking forward to give it a try again when 10.30 is out.

I just hope though in the very same time, that this newest version then will really offer a flightim, which proofs to have the potential to be an immersive "plausible" sim from the moment on i find myself sitting there in the cockpit of any plane of choice!

And i know:

What users and simmers may consdier to be "immersive" can vary a lot, but i can only point out at my positive "experience" i had with DCS for instance, mentioned right above, to make clearer what i am trying to say here.

And although mass does indeed not always mean quality, i just dare saying that - comparatively - so many flightsimmers out there flying around happily in FSX (even FS9), AeroflyFS, Rise of Flight, DCS or whatever rather than XP still, make it somehow obvious that XPlane's potential does not seem to be convincing enough for the daily useage as an "immersive" flightsim, worth spending too much time with and money on.

 

But again:

I will continue keeping an eye on XPlane's development, i will certainly try out 10.30 as soon as it will be available and i really hope that XPlane progresses well, because it sure has ... You know ... lots of potential!

:smile:

Cheers, Christoph

 

P.S.: All that written above here are just some personal notes of mine and are not "objective" at all and may be seen completely different by other flightsimmers out here. So please do not feel offended as these are only my 2 cents here.

P.P.S.: There have been some superb screenshots posted recently here in the screenshots forum at AVSIM, showing XPlane at its best i think ... and so again: There is lots of potential in this platform indeed!

 

Hi Christoph, you expanded on my somewhat short post and my experience in XP very eloquently. I in no way, want to knock XP, in fact I am quite sad that my experience was not a  wow! moment. I've been watching closely the development of XP and P3D, with an open mind, for some time now, so am disappointed. I really think it has massive potential, but like you said Christoph, if Austin really wants to catch potential customers then he's going to have to develop a demo experience that truly grabs them by the throat and shows them what they are missing, what XP can really look like. The limited demo experience at the moment, as you very clearly described, is a far cry from the immersive flying that many simmers enjoy in FSX.

[SouthPawPaul 11]

It seems also that many people forget (or more likely are blissfully unaware of) the struggle with developing a sim (and consistent UI) that can work on multiple OSs. I can tell you from a commercial software developer of some 15 years, it's a royal PITA.

Let's see FSX, P3D or DCS do that!

It does sadden me that folks feel that they can load up a stock sim like XPX and compare it to a highly modded (and tweaked!) FSX and then subsequently give up cause it falls woefully short.

I enjoy both FSX and X-Plane. They both satisfy my armchair pilot itch. Can't we all just get along?

[gheeD 62]

I feel like I know what you are talking about, when it comes to soulness and realism with the looks of x-plane. It's missing some of the vibrance that is in the real world, and in fsx too with addons... (FSX default does try to make the world feel like it has "soul" and vibrance, but it looks so 2006 and fails because it's so old.) 

 

X-plane world in default looks and feels so bland and sterile, if you could call it that. But even though this has been said like thousand times lately, its true, with HDR on, running skymaxx  and replacement lights that make 'em really pop out versus default lights, my X-plane has a totally new life. Every time-of-day is so much more vibrant and lifelike I find, that it beats FSX with addons textures and enbseries fake-bloom/hdr. X-plane with my addons feels like just the right amount of vibrant; what you would find in the real world in my opinion. FSX goes a bit over the top, sort of a glorified look most of the time like you would see in a movie. X-plane looks like what you would see if you were actually up there in the air, flying. 

 

My point is that even though in the demo you might not see what people have been so excited about in x-plane, doesn't mean it's not there.   Sadly I don't think you can experience the addons in the demo, and to see what many of the screenshots show you, you just need to take the plunge and buy x-plane and maybe skymaxx in addition to that + some freeware and that can really change your x-plane experience. :smile:

[jasonX 24]

I have the vanilla xplane install 10.25 without any addons and to me it looks anything but bland. It's probably just horses for courses.

[wolke85 150]

Hi Christoph, you expanded on my somewhat short post and my experience in XP very eloquently. I in no way, want to knock XP, in fact I am quite sad that my experience was not a  wow! moment. I've been watching closely the development of XP and P3D, with an open mind, for some time now, so am disappointed. I really think it has massive potential, but like you said Christoph, if Austin really wants to catch potential customers then he's going to have to develop a demo experience that truly grabs them by the throat and shows them what they are missing, what XP can really look like. The limited demo experience at the moment, as you very clearly described, is a far cry from the immersive flying that many simmers enjoy in FSX.

 

I fully second that Howard!

Cheers, Christoph

 

I feel like I know what you are talking about, when it comes to soulness and realism with the looks of x-plane. It's missing some of the vibrance that is in the real world, and in fsx too with addons... (FSX default does try to make the world feel like it has "soul" and vibrance, but it looks so 2006 and fails because it's so old.) 

 

X-plane world in default looks and feels so bland and sterile, if you could call it that. But even though this has been said like thousand times lately, its true, with HDR on, running skymaxx  and replacement lights that make 'em really pop out versus default lights, my X-plane has a totally new life. Every time-of-day is so much more vibrant and lifelike I find, that it beats FSX with addons textures and enbseries fake-bloom/hdr. X-plane with my addons feels like just the right amount of vibrant; what you would find in the real world in my opinion. FSX goes a bit over the top, sort of a glorified look most of the time like you would see in a movie. X-plane looks like what you would see if you were actually up there in the air, flying. 

 

My point is that even though in the demo you might not see what people have been so excited about in x-plane, doesn't mean it's not there.   Sadly I don't think you can experience the addons in the demo, and to see what many of the screenshots show you, you just need to take the plunge and buy x-plane and maybe skymaxx in addition to that + some freeware and that can really change your x-plane experience. :smile:

 

 

It seems also that many people forget (or more likely are blissfully unaware of) the struggle with developing a sim (and consistent UI) that can work on multiple OSs. I can tell you from a commercial software developer of some 15 years, it's a royal PITA.

 

Let's see FSX, P3D or DCS do that!

 

It does sadden me that folks feel that they can load up a stock sim like XPX and compare it to a highly modded (and tweaked!) FSX and then subsequently give up cause it falls woefully short.

 

I enjoy both FSX and X-Plane. They both satisfy my armchair pilot itch. Can't we all just get along?

 

 

Hello SouthPawPaul and Kim!

Sure we can get along - and in fact i dare saying that we do get along quite nicely here! Which is great!

And as long as the debate here continues in a kind, respectful and reasonable manner as it has done so far, i think we can certainly continue talking about facts, hopes, wishes or whatsever for current and possible future developments of XPlane!

 

But maybe i did not point this out clearly at first, so i will try again:

I really do not expect a stock/default XPlane to be as immersive or so as a highly "upgraded" FSX full of great 3rd party add ons. Really not!

But what i was trying to say is that i am at least expecting a sim, which gives me some sort of "convidence" that there is a real chance, that there is some good reason to keep it installed on my PC and try improving it continuously.

I have purchased a DVD of XPlane 10 when it was released in 2011 (if i recall correctly) and so i have not just tried out the demo - and although i - again saying - did never ever expect a stock/default XPlane to compete with an highly "3rd party -add-on-furnished" FSX, i at least hoped or expected to get some sort of "kick" telling me:

... Hey! XPlane seems to be really okay ... i will keep it installed and try it out, keep fiddling around with it and all that - but(!) - something like this never happened!

And i think i am by far not the only flightsimmer who had this kind of experience, otherwise, so i dare saying, XPlane would have certainly attracted more users for sure by now! (Yes i do really believe that this would be the case).

I hope i was able to make "my point" a bit clearer now, that i really do not expect a super high end sim from scretch at all, but i do indeed expect a sim, which makes me say:

Okay, this sim stays on my PC, because "there is something" i like.

And as i have also pointed out above: I never ever had a "WOW" effect with stock FSX either back then, but at least there was this "something" - be it the point of interests all around the globe, the basic flightplanner or even just the default AI or ATC, which all ain't perfect at all, really not! - but(!) - back then for me as a newbie to the sim it was sufficient in so far that i was telling myself:

Hey! - I will stay with this sim and see what i can get out of it ... and by now, a few years later, i must admit: It was worth it!

So far something like this has not happened to me with X-Plane though!

But as i have also pointed out:

I have really not given it up - in fact, i really hope for it to evolve and i will surely try out XP 10.30 ... and who knows:

Maybe by then i will experience "this changing moment" and tell myself then:

Hey! ... X Plane, You just got my attention - now let's go flying ... let's see how far we can get with You - ... and even the sky ain't no limit!

:smile:

Cheers, Christoph

[Anxu00 176]

 

 

Wosrt of all though: The "plausible world" below and around me looked rather synthetic, calculated and designed than "plausible" and it sure was not immersive at all!
... Well:
I climbed higher and then ... the "horizon", ... i don't know what to say or how to describe it exactly, but it was blurry somehow, looking somehow odd and strange.

The fuzzy horizon is the famous visibility bug in XPX and in my view, is the first item that LR must fix.  For entertainment sim this kills the soul of the sim for me.  I fly almost exclusively GA planes in XPX below 18000 FT for this reason.  As for lego brick plausible world, you need to still add Urban Maxx to fill in the gap where the algorithm does its work to add spices.  XPX certainly is getting closer to live up to the expectation, so I am waiting to see what 10.30 brings.  In my view LR will have a really good shot if it:

 

1.  Fix the visibility bug

2. XPX has a good weather injector to use SkyMaxx PRO well (FSGW promises this)

3. Fix the HDR performance issue

4. Have good GPS support (the default one really is even below basic IMHO)

5. Fix ATC

6. Fix AI traffic, the philosophy of running each AI plane in full fidelity is unrealistic

 

I have both XPX and FSX.  I stop adding stuff to FSX (well may be ASN upgrade) to avoid creating instability and just enjoy FSX until it craps up and die in future OS because of lack of support.  I cautiously add stuffs to XPX to support some good devs.  

[HiFlyer 9,361]

Wosrt of all though: The "plausible world" below and around me looked rather synthetic, calculated and designed than "plausible" and it sure was not immersive at all!

 

Its a pretty succinct way of describing many peoples first reaction. For myself, I think quite a bit of it has to do with the color palette. To my eyes, its very (very) muted, and doesn't match life memories of the real outdoors, which sets up a nearly subconscious rejection of the "reality" of what you are seeing.

 

Add in the repetition of many buildings "the projects" The default clouds that just don't quite do it. The lack of boats or numbers of other planes..... it goes on.

 

In the end you can get just the impression you described. "Sterile" Or as Rockliffe said, soulless. I describe it myself internally as "Borg-world"

 

But!

 

I haven't given up! Jspahns clouds do inject a bit of plausible reality. Clouds that your eyes see and your brain simply accepts and internally classifies as "cloud" and moves on, satisfied. (not so with the trees.......) And the New HD Mesh helps a lot with X-planes formerly slab-sided mountains.

 

There is a plugin that adds moving boats, and finally your brain can stop saying "where the heck is the water traffic? And can simply note the new, plausible addition and move on, satisfied.

 

Mono-color motor traffic? Another Plugin adds a bit of variety to the road vehicles and reduces the grey "Borg" affect.

 

Cities everywhere in the world look exactly the same? Bridges are just flat crossings across the water? (where is the Golden gate!!!!) No fix, and with the lack of seasons.........

 

People keep pleading for more time, or saying they see no problem, or promising good things are right around the corner, but my memory is that X-plane fans have been doing that for at least a decade (or more) Meanwhile, all those potential converts people have been waiting for are..... trying it, and all too often walking away, maybe with a promise to try again later....

 

Not to mention how person after person (after person) keeps mentioning the interface, to little effect........

 

Sometimes it seemed X-planes whole marketing plan seemed hinged on the assumption that FSX users would have no place else to go, and would naturally fall into X-Planes orbit by default, eventually. That is no longer the case (if it ever was)

 

I myself am sticking with it, and just purchased my first payware aircraft, and also purchased SkyMaXX Pro. I'm trying hard to accept the plausible world. (really! I'm trying!!) In fact, I just purchased a new graphics card with X-plane mostly in mind, and now get 50/60 fps in many areas, which helps a lot.

 

But as has been said, I've yet to locate the X-plane worlds "soul"

[Anxu00 176]

 

 

when I dropped back into FSX it was like, ahhh... nice. Don't get me wrong, I'll never say never, but for now, I will say no thanks

I do the same too for my FSX, but instead of saying no thanks, I would say I will check back later :lol: .  The one major reason that I use XPX is due to its smoothness.  What FSX does not kill in term of atmosphere it kills with the stutters on approach or whenever it decides to do so.  Nothing kills the feel more than have your super sophisticate aircraft sim slight pause as it turns and as the Airport runway is in sight.

[JimmiG 244]

Add in the repetition of many buildings "the projects" 

 

I just can't understand why they put those into the sim. They may look OK in Moscow or New York, but they completely ruin pretty much all other towns and cities and totally break the "plausible world" illusion. At least the HD Mesh V2 makes them a little less frequent, but any time they pop up I have to quite playing the sim and find somewhere else to fly.

[wolke85 150]

 

 

I cautiously add stuffs to XPX to support some good devs.

 

I will hold short for the 10.30 release, but then i will certainly reinstall XPlane again, put Skymaxx in and maybe get myself the great Saab 340 and check out some of AlPilotX's superb mesh-sceneries - and then i will see if it was worth the effort!

Guess i will really make this so!

Cheers, Christoph

[Longranger 148]

Its a pretty succinct way of describing many peoples first reaction. For myself, I think quite a bit of it has to do with the color palette. To my eyes, its very (very) muted, and doesn't match life memories of the real outdoors, which sets up a nearly subconscious rejection of the "reality" of what you are seeing.

Errrm, not quite. In fact they put some work into their colors. They are pretty much spot on and neutral, if you have a calibrated monitor. Considering that their main development plattform is the Mac this is hardly a surprise.

Mac Monitors are normally more expensive but have also much better capabilities than the monitors you find on many Windows PCs. I have to aggree, with my old monitor or my notebook the images look  dull, but after I upgraded my monitor the whole impression changed.

 

It is more a problem how to allow bettertuning capabilities without destruction of the neutral colormatching that is done in the background.