Prepar3d v2.5 vs X-plane 10.35

[TommyK154 0]

I haven't been following sim news for the past few months but I'm really getting tired of dealing with FSX, but I'm not sure which route I want to go with. Most comparison videos and articles are many months if not years old, and I'd like to know how the most recent versions of P3D and X-Plane compare against each other. Since this topic includes both P3D and XP, I didn't know where to place this thread, but please move this to a more appropriate setting if need be (talking to mods).

 

I see that both have come a very long way since FSX. The cockpit shadows add for a much more immerse experience and it seems both have much better FPS and stability over FSX. I know XP is praised for having sloped runways, bird strikes, and great night lighting, but I always hear varying opinions on the flight models. From what I understand, P3D is still FSX, just a much improved version. I believe there still aren't sloped runways by default, is that correct? One of my main concerns about switching from FSX is the real-time weather. Do either of the two offer any free real weather support? Or is something like Active Sky a must? Also have there been any significant updates to either games over the past year that make the old comparisons obsolete? Like I said, every comparison I find is almost a year old at this point. I'd love to hear what you guys think about these 2 in their current state and which you prefer.

[ripajack 0]

I prefered xplane10 ,i have all three and without dute xplane winner with difference

[tonywob 4,768]

Disclaimer: I'm trying to be unbiased since I'm the X-Plane forum moderator and I also develop scenery and airports for X-Plane.

 

Well, I'd suggest you just try both, only you can judge which suits you better. You can try the demo of X-Plane for free (But to be honest, it doesn't really show the full capabilities of the simulator, especially with all the free addons and the demo limit is too short). You can also get a 1 month developer license for P3D to try that out and cancel it if you don't like it.

 

If I'm honest (and this is my opinion only), I found P3D was too similar to FSX, and apart from improved visuals (i.e. Shadows, etc) there wasn't a big difference. The scenery is the same, it has the same physics engine, and for me at least, it wasn't worth the cost of repurchasing some of my payware products for double the price. However, if you have a lot invested in FSX (such as a large library of ORBX products), then it's a good option. Performance wise, I found P3D ran worse and suffered the same problems as FSX, so as of yet, it isn't a massive upgrade. I'm hoping v3 will be, and also bring 64-bit to the table.

 

X-Plane is a very different beast than FSX/P3D. It has different flight dynamics for a start, but it also 64-bit and IMO gives more bang for the buck at present. However, X-Plane is like marmite, you either love it or hate it. You need to spend the time getting used to it, building up your scenery library, learning the new interface, getting frustrated, having wow moments. X-Plane has a large community of passionate developers, and there is a large amount of high quality freeware available, you just need to learn what is available and where it is.

 

One important thing though is to not judge a book by it's cover. Both FSX/P3D and X-Plane are all pretty boring and ugly without third-party addons. 

[Guest Mik75]

For me it's XPX 10.35 AND P3D 2.5. Good times for us flight sim fanatics! ;-)

[LAdamson 240]

I do not yet own P3D. I'm sure I will. I've been into this flight simming hobby since the beginning. I do own FSX with Orbx sceneries, as well as X-Plane 8,9,10.  I now own a fast computer than runs both FSX and X-Plane 10 amazing well. I also use 3rd party aircraft for both simulations.  As to the flight dynamics question? I've never truly figured this out. There are many who claim they notice this difference when jumping over to X-Plane. IMO................and I really mean this.............I think it's just the more fluid depiction of the X-Plane movement of scenery passing by the simulated airplane's window. Of course, now that I have a better machine, FSX has also become very fluid and smooth.

 

Why do I say this?  Because I flew and built full size airplanes for many years. They were in the higher performance single engine class.  The baloney that I read on some forums about FSX not being capable of realistic flight dynamics is just that.................pure baloney!  It was some of the RealAirs for FSX, such as the Marchetti SF260 that much reminded me of my full size RV6, flight dynamics wise. I've also flown the real life Marchetti for reference. These days, I enjoy some Carenados for X-Plane, and the RealAir Lancair Legacy for FSX.  It's a fact, that with either sim, some planes can be real let downs. Blanket and general statements as to flight dynamics...........have little meaning to me.

 

As to sloped runways. They look real good in some situations, so so in others, and some are just terrible and unusable. These sims just don't have enough elevation data points, let alone the fact, that many runways are filled in between high and low areas with fill.  Since I was a beta tester back with Microsoft, when the idea of sloped runways was discussed, it was known that with 25,000+ airports at the time, that managing so many runways could be a real problem. So they were left flattened.

 

At this point, I highly recommend both simulation platforms, and for those who shift to P3D from FSX, then it's just fine with me. But to totally shift from FSX/P3D to just X-Plane, or visa versa, just means you'll miss out on some fantastic addons.

 

P.S.--- I have some other X-Plane aircraft addons waiting. Just haven't re-downloaded yet.

[mrchrsrider 66]

And to add my 2 cents.... So both Sims are wonderful, I have P3d 2.5 and Xplane 10.35 what Tony said about X-Plane is 100% correct without adding 3rd Party/Freeware (because most of it is) X-plane and P3d can be pretty dull. What I love about X-Plane however is if you take the time to get Photoscenery/3rd Party planes and freeware airports Xplane can look and feel just like the real thing (current CFI). I would say if you have the money try both and see which one suits your needs more.

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

I have all three platforms (or four if you consider FSX Steam Edition) and I absolutely do not recommend getting both P3d and XP10. I obviously bought them over time and eventually realized only one of them was going to be a viable long-term solution. You will quickly regret trying to maintain multiple flight sim installations and all their add-ons. You will spend more time in tinkering than you will flying. Buy one and stick with it. 

[LAdamson 240]

I have all three platforms (or four if you consider FSX Steam Edition) and I absolutely do not recommend getting both P3d and XP10. I obviously bought them over time and eventually realized only one of them was going to be a viable long-term solution. You will quickly regret trying to maintain multiple flight sim installations and all their add-ons. You will spend more time in tinkering than you will flying. Buy one and stick with it. 

I stopped simming for a year and a half. I waited for a computer upgrade. As far as I'm concerned, it wasn't worth upgrading unless I planned to use both FSX & X-Plane. I also purchased quite a few Orbx airports during their December sale, when I got ready for simming again.  Now, it's very rewarding to use both. One just seems to pick up, where the other leaves off, for them "Wow" moments.  I've already made a few postings, where aircraft and scenery can make such a difference between the two platforms. You'll always be missing some great stuff, if you limit yourself. So...............I totally disagree with this one.  Actually, I'm not spending much time tinkering. The computer system is doing rather well, itself.  

[Poppet 703]

I started with X-Plane and loved it,   spent maybe 300 Euro or so on Airports and Planes and so on.  5 months ago i got P3D and i have spent 3 times that much,  so depending on your personality,  PD3 can be a little more expensive due to more Ad On's and luscious goodies to fill your brain with.  

 

So what do you like to fly?    My suggestion is to do your homework and find out what each Platform can do for you,  Planes,  Scenery, Ad On's? 

 

There is a couple of things that keep me firmly in the grip of PD3,  for now anyway.

 

(1) Day time lighting.  Personally speaking i find  X-Plane can look very dull in daytime compared to PD3,  to be honest and this is my opinion only,  X-Plane's day lighting actually annoys me something terrible.

 

(2)  A2A Simulations,  i could not be without my A2A 

 

(3) Active Sky Next,  simple, effective and maintenance free.

 

 

You will spend more time in tinkering than you will flying. Buy one and stick with it. 

That's so true

[Wobbie 937]

Windows vs Linux kind of thing.. Different strokes for different folks.

Personal choice, one is not better than the other. lol (chicken or beef?)

[Humpty 751]

I will put my weight more on x plane 10 because I do not own P3d and have stopped using Fsx only rarely use FS9 just to play it on the 40" Sony. 

 

The best thing is to try both. In X plane you will be limited to Seattle and I think P3d has a money back policy. 

 

X plane lacks certain important features but with the free ware stuff like HD / UHD / W2XP / FlywithLua it makes it up with the stunning visuals. It has correct road / rail network because it uses openstreetmap data. 

 

X plane is multi platform and 64 bit.  

 

About the Flight Dynamics I can't say. People do complain about that in X plane. But to me it feels that is because X plane is also designed to be used as an engineering tool for aircraft development and that could be the reason for some not getting the flight dynamics correct but this is MO. 

 

X plane weather engine is debatable.

 

You can't beat the night lightning / dusk / dawn.

 

The best part X plane is stable. 

 

BEST TO CHECK OUT BOTH THE SIMS AND YOU DECIDE.

[Matt Webb 171]

P3D has been rock solid for me flying with Orbx, A2A, PMDG, Majestic and ActiveSky as my primary add-ons.  Great performance, great visuals and never crashed.

 

I am giving X-Plane a go on my new system - but 64 bit and the flight dynamics method used has little relevance for me.  I want the aircraft to feel and behave like the real thing (yes I fly them).  I have that with A2A aircraft (can't say the same about PMDG and Majestic only because I've never piloted a 737 or Q400 LOL).

 

Cheers.

[Flying Penguin 44]

Honestly, they are both good sims that are both under active development, P3D is behind on some of the structural aspects (64 bit etc), X-Plane lacks some of the higher end payware (PMDG, A2A).  Both of those limitations will be/are being addressed.  The Linux/Windows analogy is pretty accurate here.

 

Personally I never got on with X-Plane, I don't get why people rave about the flight model, I have a fair old whack of real world light GA experience and it just never felt right, different for sure, but it never seemed any more convincing than the FSX/P3D models, at least when you look at the high end (RealAir type level).

 

For me the decider (that pushed me to P3D) was the availability of good quality addon scenery for my local area (UK2000/Orbx), the routes I want to fly (UK2000/Aerosoft) and the planes I want to use (RealAir/PMDG/Majestic).

 

I don't think you can go wrong with either, providing the addons available allow you to do the flying you want to do.

[tonywob 4,768]

 

 

don't think you can go wrong with either, providing the addons available allow you to do the flying you want to do.

 

Very true statement. All 3 sims straight out of the box aren't much without the addons.

[Wobbie 937]

So true, the add-ons, when added to the sim engines, make our hobby so interesting.