LM would love to be able to move P3d to 64 bit, but the work involved in adapting the amount of legacy code that came across to them from their licensing of Microsoft ESP (the commercial version of FSX, and hence the current licensing rights for the much debated non-consumer usage licensing) is on a massive scale with some of the existing code dating back to the very early versions of MSFS.

 

I don't have a doubt they'll gradually get a version developed though, replacing fundamental core components with their own coding. Recompiling the final product to 64 bit will break compatibility with addons that have 32 bit executables through sim connect. Good news is LM is already supporting the development of sim connect such that when they do make the move they'll be able to support the developers. It should only be a small piece of work to recompile those executables to then allow them to continue working. Most sceneries therefore should be fine, but the gauges, dynamic sceneries (like Orbx flows) will have issues.

 

I fly X-Plane 10, FSX, FS9 and prepar3d myself. I think supporting those platforms that are still developing gives me more confidence to invest however - so my £ are now heading toward X-Plane and prepar3d add-ons.

 

Whatever the future brings it does look like it will be rosier than when we first heard of MS dropping Flight Sim 11 plans. Support whatever platform you perform - it's nice to be able to have a choice!

LM would love to be able to move P3d to 64 bit, but the work involved in adapting the amount of legacy code that came across to them from their licensing of Microsoft ESP (the commercial version of FSX, and hence the current licensing rights for the much debated non-consumer usage licensing) is on a massive scale with some of the existing code dating back to the very early versions of MSFS.

 

I don't have a doubt they'll gradually get a version developed though, replacing fundamental core components with their own coding. Recompiling the final product to 64 bit will break compatibility with addons that have 32 bit executables through sim connect. Good news is LM is already supporting the development of sim connect such that when they do make the move they'll be able to support the developers. It should only be a small piece of work to recompile those executables to then allow them to continue working. Most sceneries therefore should be fine, but the gauges, dynamic sceneries (like Orbx flows) will have issues.

 

I fly X-Plane 10, FSX, FS9 and prepar3d myself. I think supporting those platforms that are still developing gives me more confidence to invest however - so my £ are now heading toward X-Plane and prepar3d add-ons.

 

Whatever the future brings it does look like it will be rosier than when we first heard of MS dropping Flight Sim 11 plans. Support whatever platform you perform - it's nice to be able to have a choice!

Of course going 64 bit will break compatibility with 32 bit addons.  They would need to convert to 64 bits too. But it's still less work than starting from scratch with an X-Plane compatible version.

 

You say the development in X-Plane attracts you to invest.  The problem with X-Plane is it is changing and developing all the time. So your investment in something for XP10 might be incompatible with XP11. I prefer the stability of FSX which has allowed developers to do what they do best without having to second guess how the simulation engine is going to develop.

Is it not time to move towards a new sim that can accommodate these excellent add ons and allow us to use them to their maximum potential? FSX is fundamentally flawed and must be a nightmare to work with. 4GB of VAS? 32 bits? Limited core functionality? This is 2014, FSX is holding us back! Is it not time to move to a solid platform that allows continuous growth/progression without the need to tweak, fiddle and compromise?

We have the hardware for it, we have the add ons for it we just don't have the platform.

X-plane is 64 bit and takes advantage of todays hardware, not to mention it being a far more realistic flight model. As soon as PMDG jump ship to X-plane there will be a surge as the benefits are massive! Not to mention huge progression within simming in general.

So, why continue to develop for something as restrictive and archaic as FSX?

You keep marking my posts "disagree", fair enough, but I think it would be much more informative if you, as thread starter, posted why you disagree with these posts. Or perhaps explain what is so wonderful about X-Plane 10 that non-users might not be aware of. Then you might persuade more people to your point of view.

 

My personal experience of X-Plane is awful and it would take a great deal of persuasion for me to try it again. I know the flight model is better, but it's not that much better that switching to it is a no-brainer. FSX, with all the addons we now have available, is still a very immersive flight sim experience. New addons are still coming out which expand this experience, despite the fact that FSX itself has not changed. It's certainly not dead yet.

All your answers can be found in the following video:

 

 

 

You say the development in X-Plane attracts you to invest.  The problem with X-Plane is it is changing and developing all the time. So your investment in something for XP10 might be incompatible with XP11. I prefer the stability of FSX which has allowed developers to do what they do best without having to second guess how the simulation engine is going to develop.

 

This is another of those often quoted comments about X-Plane. Yes it is in constant development, is that a bad thing? No, and this fact is backed up by the increasing number of increasing complex aircraft available for X-Plane, the developers of which openly embrace the constant update cycle. Do aircraft break during updates? Yes but very rarely. Is this a major problem? Judging by the quality of aircraft available and under development, no. 

There are many extraordinary aircraft now available for X-Plane, some of which are coming very close to PMDG standards and actually exceed the standards of many other FSX developers. The feel of these aircraft, in particular the virtual cockpits is, in my very humble opinion, significantly better than FSX. Combined, with X-Plane's excellent cockpit view presets, navigating around the virtual cockpits is a joy, something that cannot be said for FSX even with Ezca given the time it takes to set up. That to me is important, because this is a flight simulator, and when flying I tend to spend my time in the cockpit.

This is another of those often quoted comments about X-Plane. Yes it is in constant development, is that a bad thing? No, and this fact is backed up by the increasing number of increasing complex aircraft available for X-Plane, the developers of which openly embrace the constant update cycle. Do aircraft break during updates? Yes but very rarely. Is this a major problem? Judging by the quality of aircraft available and under development, no.

There are many extraordinary aircraft now available for X-Plane, some of which are coming very close to PMDG standards and actually exceed the standards of many other FSX developers. The feel of these aircraft, in particular the virtual cockpits is, in my very humble opinion, significantly better than FSX. Combined, with X-Plane's excellent cockpit view presets, navigating around the virtual cockpits is a joy, something that cannot be said for FSX even with Ezca given the time it takes to set up. That to me is important, because this is a flight simulator, and when flying I tend to spend my time in the cockpit.

FSX VC is certainly not perfect. But EZCA doesn't take long to set up after initial installation. You can make a set of views in a few minutes, a one time process per aircraft type. I've no doubt complex addons can be satisfying in X-Plane. The problem is how long will it take before there is the range of addons available even close to FSX.

 

For me, the other major problem is the lack of scenery and airport buildings. Until a worldwide set comes as standard with X-Plane it's a very unattractive proposition for me.

IMO, X-Plane is a sim in constant flux. How do you develop anything for it when its constantly changing. At some point you just have to say. This is it! Ive been using it for a few weeks and all see for addon aircraft, beside the carenado stuff which are FSX aircraft and good quality, are Cartoonish kinda like the Just flight DC3/Connie FSX addons. Not knocking them, just not anything close to detailed. I hope it succeeds but I said that 10yrs ago.

All your answers can be found in the following video:

 

 

Ridiculous. I'm asking about your opinion not for an X-Plane promo video.

That is my opinion about X-plane and FSX. It is not a promo video... have you even watched it!?

It gives my thoughts on both FSX and X-plane and how they differ. There's nothing promo about it.

Oh look! another X-Plane Vs FSX (and now P3d V.2) thread.

 

Time for a "my sim is better than your sim" megathread methinks? They cause so much clutter and hot air..can't we quarantine them all in their own forum?

 

The X-P Vs FSX Forum. It's a winner!

 

(cue irate XP (or FSX) users telling me my comment is not helping)

 

Sorry, but these threads are so boring and have all been done, again (and again and again) They have no resolution! Stop it already!

 

Read the last fifteen topics on this subject to gauge where we are at today (then go fly your chosen sim and stop wasting time making pointless comparison. - you either like FSX or X-P or you don't)

 

Message Ends. *yawn

That is my opinion about X-plane and FSX. It is not a promo video... have you even watched it!?

It gives my thoughts on both FSX and X-plane and how they differ. There's nothing promo about it.

It's a very informative video

 

 

For me, the other major problem is the lack of scenery and airport buildings. Until a worldwide set comes as standard with X-Plane it's a very unattractive proposition for me.

 

The idea with X-Plane long was that you would either find an available scenery (even if it should be an equivalent of AFCAD with couple default buildings thrown in) online, or click it up yourself in included editor.

Obviously this is an area that leaves some people coming off of MSFS series offput, nevertheless it is being adressed (and sceneries with light buildup will start flowing in, or possibly already started in recent updates)

Just realized this thread is in the PMDG section, since it seems to be trending in more generic terms a better place for it would be hangar chat (If it stays around at all and don't get locked)

Whether it's framed in the context of PMDG or not, the question of  "What can X-Plane do for me?" is answered time and time again not by X-Plane's potential, but by its current condition and state of community adoption.

When Laminar Research and 3rd party developers bring more "can", "does", and "will" to X-Plane's table instead of "could", "might" and "hoped", I think you'll see things start to change a bit more. For some, these questions have been answered quite compellingly and they've started using (*or even fully switched to) X-Plane, and I find no fault in those who have made the move! But for many others there are uncertainties and gaps in the platform they'd like to see solidified before investing their time or money - the same can likely be said for developers looking at the platform as well.

 

I applaud PMDG's plan to dip a toe into X-Plane, and I think their measured approach is wise. X-Plane's community will benefit from having PMDG involved, but I think we all collectively can agree that one vendor is not likely to tip the scales in the grand scheme of things.

 

-Greg

IMO  PMDG / Carenado etc.... will eventually move to X plane  (Of course P3d will be by default). FSX may still be the workhorse but it is moving away slowly back in the box , then the only thing they have is P3d  which may still not be the numbers they want,  X plane is actually growing no matter even if it keeps developing and changing but if you notice at least from the screen shots that XPX is getting awesome. They do lack in the airport areas and stuff no doubt.

 

And If I am not mistaken quite a few stuff from Fsx works in P3d V2 (please correct me if this wrong)

 

 Heck people I am not taking LM or LR side. I am still with FSX

X-plane isn't the answer Open GL sucks and to me the lack of seasons and an overall very grey drab feel makes XP a rather dull future sim. With all the issues that XP has you'd think they would fix them but they don't its been years since XP10 and really nothing has changed since 9 and I swear the ground textures look the same as they did back when I bought XP5