Pause the demo ( P key), and make all the setting changes you want.

To me that kind of makes XPX sound less like a valid Flight sim purchase and more like an investment in an ongoing trial and error science project! :lol:

Well, you obviously didn't understand my remark. This is a problem of nearly all Software development processes. It doesn't matter which company or even the market they target. You have many trial and error phases. This is the simple reason why it is without sense to publish timetables or even problems you are working on. If a possible solution didn't give the results that you wanted it is can result in a totally different timetable and featurelist for the next version..

I don't believe BET is enough of a game-changer to be that trump card, and the fact is that years after the final end of its competitor, X-plane is still unable or uninterested to date in matching its features, even in basic things. I'm not even talking about all the great 3rd party stuff, I mean basic features, like seasons, etc.

 

That's what I mean by unfinished.

 

Well ... you know ... it depends on what you define as "basic". X-Plane is (as commonly known) a FLIGHT simulator in the first place and not a screenshot simulator. Thus it has things like BET - with the consequence of wake turbulences behind a starting or landing aircraft or behind a tanker when you are doing an air refueling in your fighter jet, and also turbulences in thunderstorms. Just today I saw a video on youtube done in censored , showing a landing in a thunderstorm - the plane didn't move a little (due to turbulences) but landed like on a sunny day with absolutely smooth weather.

Additionally XP has e.g. icing, birdstrikes, icy runways (here they are, the "seasons" ), slipping, ... Things which should be contained in a flight simulator as basic things. A plane flies well and correct without seasonal textures etc., but not without a bird striking your engines, icy runways, ...

This has to be understood by anyone who wants to understand X-Plane !!

 

And finally: XP gives you the feeling of being up in the air and flying - that was the short version.

Longer version: I was a FS9 user at its time, then FSX came up. I was very disappointed that you can't run it satisfactory even with high end hardware. So I tried X-Plane, at this time XP8. And ... can you imagine? All the default aircraft had only a 2D cockpit, very few of the available addon aircraft had already a 3D cockpit, and most of the planes had still intransparent windows - only from the outside, but of course not from the inside :lol:, otherwise I couldn't have enjoyed this sensation of flight and being there. From this point on FSX still remained on my HD, but untouched for 99% of the time (only from time to time I fired it up again, to see whether the feeling of flight has improved, but it still felt kinda static).

 

Finally, what is "basic features": it depends on what you expect in the first place - a nice looking or a nice flying sim ...

To me that kind of makes XPX sound less like a valid Flight sim purchase and more like an investment in an ongoing trial and error science project! :lol:

 

Uhmmm ... even Windows is a permanent trial and error science project - or why do you have to update it every week with patches? Unless YOUR version of windows is finalized (where did you get it, me wanna have), MINE ist not ...

 

Agreed. I had to restart the demo over and over and over, and just when I felt I was getting a feel for it, it would end.

 

During being in the menus to change settings, the time doesn't count backwards, so you can explore the menus for hours, if you like. And you still can fly the plane after the 15 minutes, at least with the autopilot (things which most of the people don't know).

It's a matter of choice ... as everything in life :-)  We have to give away something, in order to get other stuff.

 

In this give & take process, X-Plane 10, ELITE and somehow DCS World and probably IL2 BoS, won my choice....

Hey I am going to XPX hope this thing does not shut them off .

This kind of thing can be as problematic as not saying anything at all.  Laminar has repeatedly stated why they don't announce their intentions or their schedule.

 

 

This blog already provides frequent updates on many things XP related and should be more than enough to fill your needs.

 

Thank You for reminding me about the XP blog here - honestly appreciated!

As i have pointed out in one of my earlier posts above (#30), i am still a newbie to XP, so - honestly:

I knew about the blog about XP, but have lost trace on it - my fault and so i really appologize for messing things up here.

At least - The postive side effect of this mess might be though: Myself and maybe others, not that familiar with XP but also following this thread as well, get aware of that specific blog now!

 

Somewhat strange ... I don't remember people complaining about a missing roadmap about the future development (lets say next 2, 3 or 4 years) back in the days of FS8, FS9, FSX. People played with their current version of FS, simply waited what comes up with the next evolution and where satisfied with what came up - or where not satisfied, but that's a different story.

 

And ... regarding this neverending "unfnished" thingy: even FS was permanently unfinished - or why did Microsoft release FS9 after FS8 and FSX after FS9 when FS was "finished"? :ph34r:

The only difference between XP and FS in this regard is the period of updates.

 

And as already mentioned by others - the XP blog is much more than Microsoft ever did in regard of announcements.

 

... there are so many threads, discussions, complaints and all that, but ... as i have been away from flightsimming for a few years and did leave out several MSFS versions i did not follow the discussions around them either.

But one thing i can say for now and for sure:

I did not complain about X Plane at all.

My point is and always was, since i began following and contributing to various XP specific threads here at AVSIM, to clearly show my interest and support for this evolving sim but also to express my hopes and wishes for it and its future developments.

And judging by all the many recent postings all around here at the forums where people have pointed out to be current XP users but also from those who pointed out to be "potential future" XP users, i am and was not the only one doing so.

I am mentioning this because in all these many posts i did not read that much of "complaining", but in most cases pretty well argumented, constructive criticism, wishes and hopes of how to - potentially - improve things.

No more and and no less.

And by keeping that in mind i am really looking very much and most positively excited forward to XP 10.30!

So again:

Thank You very much JGregory for pointing to the XP blog here and all the many others for this ongoing, interesting discussions here!

 

"emotional bias" 

 

 

A phrase I use often to describe when talking to people in the industry........

 

Is X-Plane perfect?  no not by a long shot......  Again is FSX/P3D perfect......no not by a long shot...

 

The fight that persists is trying to convince developers that X-Plane is the future, it really is a robust platform to develop on....

 

I think the emotional bias hurts X-Plane more then anything else, lets face it Microsoft pioneered the niche we call flight simulation and users are committed to the origin....

 

 

I love coming here to AVSIM because I get the most intelligent discussions on the subject.  I highly respect the opinions here.  How does X-Plane break over,  ###### I know how but I am limited by time and resources....

 

 

I am working on winter and autumn as we speak.........Now what we need is a solid ATC and world traffic........Oh torque steer.....

 

After that we are good.......seems small doesn't it? It is......

 

Other problems can be worked out very easily......

 

 

Guys just my opinion on what we need, I also respect other opinions on what we need....

Sounds very promising.

Well, let's see what the next upgrade of XP will offer.

And instead of waiting i have now decided to reinstall XP10 again on my PC and start playing around with it over the next few weeks ahead and try out some of the great stuff available for it already!

:smile2:

Finally, what is "basic features": it depends on what you expect in the first place - a nice looking or a nice flying sim ...

 

Actually I think that I (and most people) expect both nowadays. Otherwise, why the sudden rush of people proudly showing off their screens (almost all using SkyMaxx I would add) In the screenshot forum? Why when they talk about X-plane do we hear repeatedly about the night views and how they look so cool? When people using other sims comment and ask questions, how many people ask for detailed info on turbulence and icing, and how many ask for screenshots? LR's slowness to address visuals as a primary factor was always in my eyes one of the leading reasons they languished, prior to XPX, and other people finally addressing it for them helps explain a lot of the renewed interest.

 

I remember watching comparison videos back in the XP8 and then XP9 days (unfortunately after making my purchase) and just shaking my head.

 

Uhmmm ... even Windows is a permanent trial and error science project - or why do you have to update it every week with patches? Unless YOUR version of windows is finalized (where did you get it, me wanna have), MINE ist not ...

 

That argument doesn't really work for me. Those patches are by and large to address vulnerabilities or update code, not to address big swaths of missing functionality. I read each of those updates and their descriptions one by one, and the vast majority are vulnerability updates and for the malicious software tool. Windows as shipped was as complete as they could make it (barring executive decisions) Many even said it was bloated with too much!

 

It was not, "We may provide an actual working browser later, give us some time." That would have been anti-competitive. They threw everything but the kitchen sink in there!

 

During being in the menus to change settings, the time doesn't count backwards, so you can explore the menus for hours, if you like. And you still can fly the plane after the 15 minutes, at least with the autopilot (things which most of the people don't know)

 

I knew that and used it, but that didn't help me in flying around and getting an overall feel for the sim. And also I was never in the UI much anyway: I avoided it as much as possible, and its only the minimal updates that were finally made that allowed me to make my current restless peace with it. How many people have again and again commented on that UI? And how many have countered "Its fine for me, and it doesn't have to look like a toy, its functional!" and how many potential buyers have said "Fine." and wandered back to their primary sim?" I never even considered purchasing XPX until those minimal changes to the UI were made. And even now in other sub-forums you can find people mentioning in passing that they bounced right off of it and gave up.

 

There's flight sim engineering, and there's human engineering. I'm never sure how much importance LR places on the second part, but look and feel is a widely used term for a good reason. In the end though, the thing to understand is that I want them to succeed.  :unsure:

 

Well, you obviously didn't understand my remark. This is a problem of nearly all Software development processes. It doesn't matter which company or even the market they target. You have many trial and error phases. This is the simple reason why it is without sense to publish timetables or even problems you are working on. If a possible solution didn't give the results that you wanted it is can result in a totally different timetable and feature list for the next version.

 

Perhaps, but that's kinda what beta testers are supposedly for, to catch as many of the most glaring bugs (or at least make the company aware of them) before the initial release. I have never liked being a paying beta tester, but I signed up for the process this time because I felt that we were now at the point where developers were beginning to step in a bit more to take up LM's slack. I might have purchased even earlier, but I never saw Aerosoft be quite as energetic with the sim as it seemed they intended to be at first, and that made me pause, just as many developers seemed to have paused during that time, watching to see what would happen. More to the point, I don't believe I was one of those who asked for more frequent or detailed information updates. My overall message to LR could probably be interpreted as waving my hand and saying "Wake up"

 

I'm excited that LR is even considering going on Steam, but the explanations for incompleteness so many here accept are just not going to fly there. Nor should they. There are certain base expectations for a product outside of this community (and even within it) and I think most of us know that.... I think its an excellent opportunity for LR; a possible game changer if they proceed. But...... I also think they might want to to consider being more proactive and wake up a bit about things that  may not be burning issues from a purists perspective, but might make a lot of difference from a sales perspective.

"emotional bias" 

 

 

A phrase I use often to describe when talking to people in the industry........

 

Is X-Plane perfect?  no not by a long shot......  Again is FSX/P3D perfect......no not by a long shot...

 

The fight that persists is trying to convince developers that X-Plane is the future, it really is a robust platform to develop on....

 

I think the emotional bias hurts X-Plane more then anything else, lets face it Microsoft pioneered the niche we call flight simulation and users are committed to the origin....

 

 

I love coming here to AVSIM because I get the most intelligent discussions on the subject.  I highly respect the opinions here.  How does X-Plane break over,  ###### I know how but I am limited by time and resources....

 

 

I am working on winter and autumn as we speak.........Now what we need is a solid ATC and world traffic........Oh torque steer.....

 

After that we are good.......seems small doesn't it? It is......

 

Other problems can be worked out very easily......

 

 

Guys just my opinion on what we need, I also respect other opinions on what we need....

 

Seems you got the crucial point. Strange to read though that ATC and AI is not on LR priority list (few fixes for 10.30 if I've understood correctly last Ben's interview).

 

By the way I cannot find anymore Urban Extreme PPP textures and other packs. WHere is the link? New site looks great but doesn't work atm.

 

Regarding XP, well, eyecandy was the reason I try the demo after the Switzerland greetings of Hollow1slo. Then I got stolen by the greater flight sensations and immersion so now XP beats FSX unquestionably on both features. Of course now it's time for developers to feel the momentum and start developing great airport ans scenery like FSX have.

Nobody would argue that FSX + freeware addons is a second-rate simulator compared to XPX + freeware

Well ... you know ... it depends on what you define as "basic". X-Plane is (as commonly known) a FLIGHT simulator in the first place and not a screenshot simulator. Thus it has things like BET - with the consequence of wake turbulences behind a starting or landing aircraft or behind a tanker when you are doing an air refueling in your fighter jet, and also turbulences in thunderstorms. Just today I saw a video on youtube done in censored , showing a landing in a thunderstorm - the plane didn't move a little (due to turbulences) but landed like on a sunny day with absolutely smooth weather.Additionally XP has e.g. icing, birdstrikes, icy runways (here they are, the "seasons" ), slipping, ... Things which should be contained in a flight simulator as basic things. A plane flies well and correct without seasonal textures etc., but not without a bird striking your engines, icy runways, ...This has to be understood by anyone who wants to understand X-Plane !!

On the otherhand, Microsoft had the access to Jeppeson aviation data, quite a long time before X-Plane. This included topography (for airport elevations), airport layouts with accurate building and taxiway locations, and navigation data-bases. X-Plane is still limited with it's VOR range.........from what I'm told.

 

Actually I think that I (and most people) expect both nowadays. Otherwise, why the sudden rush of people proudly showing off their screens (almost all using SkyMaxx I would add) In the screenshot forum? Why when they talk about X-plane do we hear repeatedly about the night views and how they look so cool?

I agree 100%! Otherwise, what's the point? At least for people like me. I need a flightsim to somewhat take the place of real flight, which I enjoyed for decades. This includes the flight model, believable graphics, and what I see in the sky and earth below. These days, it's all possible, and accomplished all the time. It's the recent X-Plane videos and screenshots, that keep my interest in once again upgrading with many $$$, to use flight simulation. To just think I'm "flying" because someone says I am, won't cut it.As to turbulence in thunderstorms, I just read this months "Aftermath" section in Flying magazine. This article deals with a A36 Bonanza that shed its wings and tail while encountering severe thunderstorm turbulence. I myself, carried enough equipment in real life, to completely avoid thunderstorms. I just stayed completely away. I had enough "almost" real time weather overlayed on the GPS screen, thanks to satellite uplink, that I could make decisions well in advance. Actually, the Bonanza pilot had this too, and more. Even a stormscope. There is always a few minute delay with uplinked weather. He just figured he was going to find a hole or pass in the weather front, and went for it. I kind of figure that simulated flying into an intense thunderstorm, is like flying into a simulated mountain. Should usually be the same results.

One strongpoint for developers committing to deliver high quality addons for XP in the future is that they will find a larger audience with few competitors. Let's take IXEG and their 737, if ever they will publish it  ^_^

In FSX you get of course a broader customer audience but you must face lot of similar product, for example regarding medium liners there is already the PMDG, the IFLY, the AIRBUSX. A new developer could end up selling few pieces even if the FSX basin is wider than XP. On the other side I bet most of XP users will buy IXEG as soon as it hit the virtual shelves.

 

Same for high quality airports. Let's take next release of EGLL: aerosoft and UK2000 will share the same market while in XP there would be only one since the basin is not wide enough for two developers to start the same project.

 

 

By the way I cannot find anymore Urban Extreme PPP textures and other packs. WHere is the link? New site looks great but doesn't work atm.

 

 

Sorry about the delay in updating the site........UM will be going through an overhaul and I will have new texture packs with these......Just waiting for 10.30 to drop first before I get working on this....

 

 

Seems you got the crucial point. Strange to read though that ATC and AI is not on LR priority list (few fixes for 10.30 if I've understood correctly last Ben's interview).

 

 

I also think a 3rd party will be a better option for AI, something along the lines of Ultimate Traffic....

 

But in order for it to work we need a larger number of lego brick airports added

 

ATC yeah thats up to LR.......

John,

 

I just hope you don't forget about Linux users, of which I am now one ;-)

John,

 

I just hope you don't forget about Linux users, of which I am now one ;-)

UM will still work with Linux

As far as AI goes there is World Traffic. Now the downside to World Traffic is that it's overly complex and on it's own it seems incomplete. There are a ton of utilities and addons to get an Airport up and running. It currently has an Airport Random Generator to get you traffic in and out of a hub, the downside is creating gate & taxi routes can be a complex tedious chore just for one airport. I've had over 50 AI in the air with no fps hit, but since there are no taxi routes they just appear and disappear out of Air. There are a few guys who have created custom routes for alot of Airports, but like alot of things in Xplane, they are scattered and no single fix for the masses. The Dev is pretty active though, so it might mature into a more user friendly complete package.

As far as AI goes there is World Traffic. Now the downside to World Traffic is that it's overly complex and on it's own it seems incomplete. There are a ton of utilities and addons to get an Airport up and running. It currently has an Airport Random Generator to get you traffic in and out of a hub, the downside is creating gate & taxi routes can be a complex tedious chore just for one airport. I've had over 50 AI in the air with no fps hit, but since there are no taxi routes they just appear and disappear out of Air. There are a few guys who have created custom routes for alot of Airports, but like alot of things in Xplane, they are scattered and no single fix for the masses. The Dev is pretty active though, so it might mature into a more user friendly complete package.

Yes I bought WT to support what it looks like the only effort in the direction of a working AI package. As soon as more people develop new ground routes for airports I hope he can pack them together to release an airport package. We must remember that great AI addons like UT, WOAI and MY Traffic in FSX were born with little coverage and grew up thank to user's work.