It's that x-plane is still far behind the competition on many key aspect.

 

...

 

The flying part is actually good.

But its not behind, as a platform for development even PMDG says that its basically vastly superior. Its being developed and when they send messages to the devs they get answers. If you read between the lines you basically see that PMDG says they want to develop for it, but they won't commit because they have one hiccup in the plan: will FSX customers support the platform? 

 

This is what I mean by chicken and the egg. Nobody plays FSX for the aircraft included in it. Its just a medium for payware and freeware add ons. Its also not like its hard to start becoming familiar and enjoying the existing supply of content be it free or pay so that you can break down those artificial utterly irrational barriers against liking it. UI is a problem but a small one. I don't see how it should be any different than trying to decode an FMS for the first time, which involves just as much reading if not more.

 

Until more people invest themselves in X-Plane there won't be any progress, there won't be a swell of third party products that basically everyone agrees is the sticking point. There isn't a single thing missing from X-Plane that precludes people making it a part time sim. If people don't even play it how can they even know whats happening with third party products? I bet most people who say its not good enough don't even know half of whats available because they're constantly comparing it to an unrealistic standard while ignoring the benefits.

 

I'm not an old man. I don't get cranky when things become even mildly unfamiliar. I plan to be a simmer in 10 years. I don't want to still be playing FSX in 10 years. 

As the discussion here is mainly about the X-Plane UI, I also have to contribute something. Well, the big difference between the XP UI and the one of the other sim is that it is ..... different. With every new software, you have to learn something new, and even if it is actually easier, first it is more complicated. But when you get used to it ...

 

A UI is (mainly) consisting of keyboard shortcuts and the menus, right? As shown here, the XP UI is (much) better in many aspects than the one of its competitor.

 

Visually the XP UI isn't this nice, agreed. It is somehow like an electrical cabinet, not necessarily nice, but very effective, compared to some consumer electronic products which have to look nice to be bought (the rude awakening comes afterwards :o). I for myself like better the effective way - time is money ...

 

Glad being able to help .

But its not behind, as a platform for development even PMDG says that its basically vastly superior. Its being developed and when they send messages to the devs they get answers. If you read between the lines you basically see that PMDG says they want to develop for it, but they won't commit because they have one hiccup in the plan: will FSX customers support the platform? 

 

This is what I mean by chicken and the egg. Nobody plays FSX for the aircraft included in it. Its just a medium for payware and freeware add ons. Its also not like its hard to start becoming familiar and enjoying the existing supply of content be it free or pay so that you can break down those artificial utterly irrational barriers against liking it. UI is a problem but a small one. I don't see how it should be any different than trying to decode an FMS for the first time, which involves just as much reading if not more.

 

Until more people invest themselves in X-Plane there won't be any progress, there won't be a swell of third party products that basically everyone agrees is the sticking point. There isn't a single thing missing from X-Plane that precludes people making it a part time sim. If people don't even play it how can they even know whats happening with third party products? I bet most people who say its not good enough don't even know half of whats available because they're constantly comparing it to an unrealistic standard while ignoring the benefits.

 

I'm not an old man. I don't get cranky when things become even mildly unfamiliar. I plan to be a simmer in 10 years. I don't want to still be playing FSX in 10 years. 

 

Its like a baseball #1 Draft, Eventually he has to make the transition between potential to actually living on theses premises. I know XP10 is all potential but it doesn't look like its going to make it to the show.

Its like a baseball #1 Draft, Eventually he has to make the transition between potential to actually living on theses premises. I know XP10 is all potential but it doesn't look like its going to make it to the show.

Based on what? And whats the alternative? A legacy 32bit engine that takes the most advanced module created for it and gives players OOMs?

 

The thing about baseball draft picks is that their success is not based on the complex relationship between content creators and consumers.

 

If we really want to labour the metaphor, FSX is like that player that won't retire. One day its gonna happen, so you better draft deep or you're gonna be in trouble. FSX players who won't look at X-Plane basically refuse to draft deep.

 

 

Until more people invest themselves in X-Plane there won't be any progress

 

In my opinion, it works the other way around...... i mean, who goes to a bad restaurant over and over again to support the owner so he/she can hire a better chef?( BTW i'm not saying XP10 is bad). 

Based on what? And whats the alternative? A legacy 32bit engine that takes the most advanced module created for it and gives players OOMs?

 

The thing about baseball draft picks is that their success is not based on the complex relationship between content creators and consumers.

 

If we really want to labour the metaphor, FSX is like that player that won't retire. One day its gonna happen, so you better draft deep or you're gonna be in trouble. FSX players who won't look at X-Plane basically refuse to draft deep.

 

That's it. People rather support an old legacy 32bit engine with OOM errors than moving to x-plane 10. That should tell you a lot of about the state the application.  I want to move to X-Plane 10. That's why I got it in the first place.  I heard good things about 10.30 that will resolve some of my GPS complain. If they can do over the ATC and polish their interface, it would be a big step in the right direction.

 

Until then, X-plane 10 will remain in the double A (Baseball analogy)

I got X-Plane 10 in the mail yesterday after playing around with the demo for a week, and so far I'm really happy. I was inspired by watching Helipilot7 fly it on Pilotedge.

 

For me it has been a great experience. It runs MUCH smoother on my computer than FSX did, and I don't think that it looks bad at all. In fact, with some of the add-on scenery I've found, it looks really nice, especially at night. And personally, I find the roads MUCH better than in FSX. I was able to take off from KSTL, follow the highways around, find my parents street, where my wife works, and my house just by navigating the roads, something I've never had much luck with in FSX.

 

I have to be honest. I don't understand a couple of the main complaints. For one, the AI. Yeah, the AI sucks. But so does the default FSX AI. It seems to me anyone who really cares about AI is using an online service, which X-Plane supports.

 

And I think the UI is fine. So far I haven't had any trouble finding what I'm looking for. It is FAR better than it was back with X-Plane 9, which is the last time I had played around with it. And anything that isn't immediately obvious I've been able to quickly find by googling.

 

Maybe I'll hate it more as time goes on, but so far it has been a really positive experience for me.

I bet most people who say its not good enough don't even know half of whats available because they're constantly comparing it to an unrealistic standard while ignoring the benefits.

 

+1

 Very well summarized!

 

 

I know XP10 is all potential but it doesn't look like its going to make it to the show.

 

It would all depend which show you're attending to, I like the 64bit show better, its smooth with hardly any tweaking, on the other hand, the 32bit show has too many OOM's, stttttutttters, blurries and wayyy, wayyy wayyy to much tweaking involved.

 

 

If they can do over the ATC and polish their interface

 

How many people use the default ATC in FSX? XP10 needs a third party ATC program.( I know Pilot2ATC will work with XPX but it's in its' infancy). It need an AI traffic program. It will eventually get a weather injector. I have to admit, there are times when I'm flying XPX when I say, man that looks just like the real thing. I don't always get that with FSX,FS9, or Flight.

Strange, I really want to love FS-X (if only to justify all the add-ons I bought) but I have come to the conclusion I'v become a 100% X-Planer now (eeeh make that 90% still need my steam gauge a300 fix very now and then).

 

I just can't stand the blurries. The tweak, get it right then fly somewhere else and start again dance is tedious. I've never been able to hit a consistent sweet spot in FS-X. X-Plane give me a sharp beautiful view and a constant 30+ frame rate every single time. Of course it also helps I'm not interested  in AI (one of the first things I turn off when tweaking FS-X).

 

Just last week I discovered a website that has free X-Plane photo sceneries for practically the whole of Europe. (see http://simheaven.com/?page_id=1335 ) . I tried some of my preferred flying area's and was blown away by the effect. We are talking hires photos, no blurries and the autogen is aligned (due to x-planes OSM roads match the photo scenery and the autogen is aligned via the roads). This is what a 64 bit modern program can do for you and it doesn't cost 1 Euro to explore it.

 

I can understand that if you love your boxed AI and ATC you hate X-Plane. But writing this program off because you don't like the UI? How about the FS-X UI, you can't even set the all important HIGHMEMFIX using the UI.

 

It takes a while before 'you get'  X-Plane but at the moment there are exciting developments. The new GPS in the BETA is so much beter and most airplanes are easy to update. To me as 'oldtimer'  this feels like the time I upgraded my FS by getting RealityXP's Garmin add-on but even beter because its in the default program, there to be used by all the add-ons. 

 

If you have X-Plane 10. Leave it on your HDD and play with it from time to time. It might grow on you an who knows maybe one day you will be like me and leave 100's of Euros behind... (getting a bit depressed now).

Re the gps.  It would be nice if they can take their code and put it on the iPad as an xplane add-on. 

 

    They seem to be able to move their code to the iOS platform reasonably easily.   That along with adding the data exports would be a really nice addition.

Once OSM and plausibility get better PD3 and FSX won't be go to vfr sim.

You have to be honest with yourself, and ask this question; "am I using FSX or XPX to brush up on my procedures or am I just playing a game for fun", until you can really answer that question honestly, then ALL sim platform will not live up to expectations.

 

For me; I have made a personal decision to walk away from FSX, I was beginning to feel like that TV commercial advertising breaks, where the guy drives his truck off the cliff and applies the brakes and stop in mid air (OOM) What good is a sim when you can't complete/"practice" procedures. Again; what am I using the respective sim(s) to accomplish.

 

Not all; but to some extent some of the negative XPX talks are "parroting", without actually trying the sim.

That's it. People rather support an old legacy 32bit engine with OOM errors than moving to x-plane 10. That should tell you a lot of about the state the application.

 

Well, you can't lay all of that on the shoulders of "the application" itself. In some respects yes, people are waiting on better ATC and things like seasonal terrain textures. But it's also the reluctance of some FSX owners to abandon a huge investment in 3rd party add-ons, when there isn't yet an equivalent number of add-ons to replace them in XPX. That's a Catch 22 situation because some of those developers (notably Orbx) won't see the light until the market is larger, and the market won't be larger until enough FSX owners abandon ship. Or at least make XPX their secondary flight sim. Maybe getting PMDG in the game is what it will take, and they do have a project in the works for XPX.

 

There is also simple inertia, when anyone has a longstanding relationship with a software platform. Remember how long it took DOS WordPerfect users to move -- in some cases, kicking and screaming -- over to MS Word as a corporate standard? Many of them also felt that Word had missing features compared to what they wanted, or were used to. 

 

This may be stretching the analogy, but unless they make some major progress with the FSX code, then Prepar3D may end up like the later Corel version of WordPerfect -- still alive, but it never regained the market share of the DOS glory days with a stronger competitor in the market.*

 

*Not that I think Word is wonderful. 

As I (and others) wrote several times in the past, this type of discussion comes again and again, in cyclic waves. Funny to observe that that claim is confirmed again.

 

I also sometimes compared the discussions to "Linux on the desktop", which means waiting for the break-through of Linux for the average PC user who is used to Windows. "Finally Linux has arrived on the desktop", you can hear -- again and again. "If Linux developers would just focus more on the important tasks", it is answered -- again and again. In the end, Linux is still just used by a minority, despite the advantages it has to offer.

 

In both cases, Linux and X-Plane, we have potential users with different expectations than developer's expectations. Assumptions on the importance of features, and expectations on the speed and priorities of development. Many users won't accept (and sometimes I have to include myself here) that in the end developers are the ones who decide what their product will be like.

 

After all, if Laminar does not want to compete with other products, but just focus on their vision of a good simulations, people won't change it. In my experience, Laminar will listen to users in specific topics, esp. bug reports sent via the official bug report form. But the main focus is their decision, and it is not based on commercial success for the "masses".

 

You can call that a missed opportunity, but in the end you have to accept it.