I bought version 9 and tried the version 10 demo but I just couldn't get used to the flight dynamics whether on the included or payware aircraft. They just didn't feel as realistic as FSX/P3D.

 

Maybe it is a matter of taste. B)

I personally perceive XP-10 much more like the real thing. Taxiing, take off roll, flare, landing and roll out. Everything reminds me of what I have witnessed during my active PPL time and in Level-D simulators of Lufthansa's B737-300/500...

Regarding the OP. Below a screenshot of what you get out of the box when using XP-10 (EDDL, Duesseldorf Germany).

 

Night lighting has always been the main area where XPX wins in my opinion.

 

That said the lighting is way too uniform and consistent along highways and in general.

I like XPX's night lighting way more than FSX/P3D's, even with Orbx FTX Global and Night Environment. Other than that, I feel like all the aircraft in XPX have this really plastic-y look to them.

Again, this is personal opinion.

Night lighting has always been the main area where XPX wins in my opinion.

 

That said the lighting is way too uniform and consistent along highways and in general.

I've never tried any version of XP but from 2 hat I've seen, I would have to agree that the night lighting in XP looks better than anything available for FSX or P3D. However, that's the only thing that intrigues me about XP. I still have not seen a set of clouds in XP that I liked the look of.

 

Sean Campbell

 

 

But it became clear that "Titans" were needed to handle the "eye candy stuff", which BTW is a matter of taste.

 

Now how did this turn into an XP10 vs P3D thread ... or maybe I should say of course this would turn into an XP10 vs. P3D thread.

 

But if you would be so kind as to start a thread in XP10 on how to get a Titan X (as I'm almost certain that comment was aimed at me) to work at reasonable (30 fps) frame rates with even modest AA settings, please do start a thread over on XPlane forum so I can take a look.  As of right now my Titan X gets horrible frame rates and stutters in 4K res in XP10.35 and that's with A LOT of "eye candy" turned down ... it's as if nVidia forgot that OpenGL still exists for Windows platforms.

 

Back on topic:

 

 

In fact, the lighting becomes active when it's getting way too dark and remains off during mild dusk/dawn times.
 
It is just me or it's normal for P3D?

 

Not exactly sure what you mean here are some shots from NE's sweden ...

 

Dusk 21:13 pm

 

 

Dusk + 1 hour 22:13pm

 

 

Midnight 12:13AM

 

Rob, you seem to have the same issue I do with NE add-ons in P3D.  Have you noticed that with tessellation off the distinct orange colouring on major roads at night is a much softer yellow?  It looks clearly to me that tessellation is the direct cause of the colour change.  I find the deep orange unrealistic, and it seems that the ground splash image opacity is also somehow affected.

 

It's been raised by a few people on the LM forum including myself, but with little feedback really.  Saul made a suggestion that it might not be fixed til v3, which is of course LM's prerogative, but from the language used it seemed just an educated opinion, it wasn't LM official feedback?  It just would be nice to get a bit of certainty that it's known, accepted or not, and something that can be addressed or not, with or without a timescale

 

Cheers K

My SweetFX night flying profile vorrects the deep orange.

Tesselation causes colors to get a little darker and more saturated.

 

Indeed tesselation will be fixed in v3.

Now how did this turn into an XP10 vs P3D thread ... or maybe I should say of course this would turn into an XP10 vs. P3D thread.

 

But if you would be so kind as to start a thread in XP10 on how to get a Titan X (as I'm almost certain that comment was aimed at me) to work at reasonable (30 fps) frame rates with even modest AA settings, please do start a thread over on XPlane forum so I can take a look.  As of right now my Titan X gets horrible frame rates and stutters in 4K res in XP10.35 and that's with A LOT of "eye candy" turned down ... it's as if nVidia forgot that OpenGL still exists for Windows platforms.

 

 

 

 

That's really odd indeed.

I was just poking around in XPX yesterday again on the install I keep for it and I'm able to usually get 25-30fps in 4k (4096x2160) w/ HDR and 2x AA (any AF settings work too) in most areas I like to fly.

 

The exception is around Seattle as I have scenery dialed up a lot (overgrown, chicago suburbs, tons of objects, etc).

 

Surprised you're having an issue with that Titan!

 

Maybe a fresh install or something?  Very odd

Maybe it is a matter of taste. B)

I personally perceive XP-10 much more like the real thing. Taxiing, take off roll, flare, landing and roll out. Everything reminds me of what I have witnessed during my active PPL time and in Level-D simulators of Lufthansa's B737-300/500...

Regarding the OP. Below a screenshot of what you get out of the box when using XP-10 (EDDL, Duesseldorf Germany).

 

 

The screenshots has always looked great.  Where's the AI/ATC on the level of FS9/FSX/P3D???  That's the killer for me.  Flying around in lonely skies albeit great looking is akin to MS Flight.  Flying involves so much more than taking off flying around looking at scenery.  There's an interactive world the X-Plane totally misses.  Until that's realized I for one see no value in it.

As I moved to P3D right from Fs2004, I noticed that night lighting has slightl different mechanism that it was in FS2004. In fact, the lighting becomes active when it's getting way too dark and remains off during mild dusk/dawn times.

 

It is just me or it's normal for P3D?

 

Thanks

Dmitriy

 

 

P3D is still under development.  Let LM know in their forums and I'm sure they'll take a look. They've been very good with addressing user input plus all of us agree with you on this point so you'll have no problem getting support from the community to get this addressed.

Flying involves so much more than taking off flying around looking at scenery.  There's an interactive world the X-Plane totally misses.  Until that's realized I for one see no value in it.

 

 

The interesting part is the scenery element to me.  XPX is a reasonable way to just brush up on procedures, etc and it performs a bit better on my system (more consistently slightly higher FPS), but the autogen is just anemic in XPX.  Trees look terrible and every part of the world looks identical from a building/scenery perspective.

 

I've done all I can w/ XPX as I have literally every good add-on for PNW region and have coated it in my own G2XPL ZL17 Ortho Gmaps scenery -- And it looks mostly "fine", but just doesn't pop and the regions don't vary in look enough like they should.  Just leaves me empty ultimately.  (and the free scenery thing is a double edged sword of "no updates" since it was free)

 

If all I did was fly at night, I guess I could use XPX and be mostly happy.

to be fair;

XP made allot of progress in the past few years and it is very much recognized today as one of the top 3 platforms;

note that this progress was made on the engines merits; and not 3rd party eye candy development that made it shine;

 

not many dev's inclined to develop for a smaller platform which; only recently been getting the recognition it deserves,

 

Have you noticed that with tessellation off the distinct orange colouring on major roads at night is a much softer yellow?

 

I have noticed but what I see is a brightness level change and IMHO it looks more accurate WITH tessellation (but perhaps not as dramatic) ... this is at 20,000 feet (ish).

 

Orbx lights Sweden with Tess

 

 

Orbx lights Sweden without Tess

 

 

Anyway, not really here to debate which looks better, to each his or her own.  But I'm guessing this can be adjusted via the shader code -- anyone want to try their hand at it?

 

But I had long ago asked if LM would consider opening up shader adjustments to end user via an easy to use interface element ... this way you let people decide what looks best to them and avoid the entire debate about "what is more accurate".  I think LM's only resistance to do this is that it could be very easy for an end user to really mess up their visuals.

 

 

 

Surprised you're having an issue with that Titan!

 

From everything I've read on the XP10 forums, people seem to use very old drivers to get XP10 performing better ... sadly with my Titan X that's not an option as older drivers simply don't recognize my GPU.

 

 

 

I keep for it and I'm able to usually get 25-30fps in 4k (4096x2160) w/ HDR and 2x AA

 

Right 2X AA .. this results in very poor AA on my Titan X.  If I try 4X AA then frames rates drop about 35% ... this is far far short of the 8X MSAA I get in P3D with double or triple the FPS (even with just one GPU).  I've tried single monitor, multi-monitor, and a hoist of other suggestions to get better FPS in 4K under XP10.35 and sadly I've failed.  Also disabled many of the SkyMaxx features to see if I can get back some performance with only marginal success.

 

XP10 has come a long way recently, but it still has a long way to go ... the distance issues with XP10 are probably the most distracting to me, that and so much missing when I do an A to B flight.

 

But I will agree XP10 night lighting is a notch better than anything P3D and XP10 is OOM free.  When I use XP10 it's usually procedure stuff confined to a small area.  But I just don't see how LR (with their very limited resources) are going to ever catch-up and/or keep up with P3D or whatever Dovetail come out with so long as they keep on with OpenGL and supporting 3 (or more) OS platforms.

 

I'll keep on using XP10 (I have many add-ons for XP10 also) and wait for updates and hope performance improves, it would be nice if LR could approach nVidia and get a profile going and SLI support.

 

Cheers, Rob.

@Rob:

 

I basically don't use XPX much anymore - Just a lifeless environment which gets old to me.

 

Assuming P3D goes 64bit at some point, to me it will be sort of "game over" as that will effectively get us to a "modern FSX" basically (which is what most of us want I think)

 

XPX has had sooooooooooooooo long to address things we all have complained about forever.  All I ever hear is "it's a small team"...

 

...and then I see most of the resources going into new multi-million dollar planes for Austin. 

 

(all good - he made the money, do what you want...but it speaks volumes about his feelings on progress - it could be going faster if he wanted or cared more about the things the rest of us care about, in my opinion anyways)

Rob, pls try that exercise with NE region

i beleive you will see a different result without tess

Rob, sorry I invoked 'what looks better to me', I should know better! Objectively, the developer of NE, Chris Bell (above), confirmed that NE is supposed to look as it does without tesselation. Regardless of my own or anyone else's personal view on the matter, P3D therefore does not seem to be rendering NE material as intended, when tesselation is turned on. There, that's what I should have said in the first place! Cheers K