Seems, just overnight---the XP franchise...has blossomed, yep.

[FlyBaby 659]

I bought X-Plane 10 when it was first released and what a huge disappointment....huge!!!

 

I shelved it for years while I focused on FSX and then P3D.

 

Today, X-Plane is all I use; it has come a long way and half, if not more, of the credit goes to the freeware and 3rd party devs who helped bring out the best in XP. I do mostly Ga flying and helos (under 6000 feet), the night and 3D ground environment leave the competition far behind.

[Comanche 417]

I bought X-Plane 10 when it was first released and what a huge disappointment....huge!!!

 

I shelved it for years while I focused on FSX and then P3D.

 

Today, X-Plane is all I use; it has come a long way and half, if not more, of the credit goes to the freeware and 3rd party devs who helped bring out the best in XP. I do mostly Ga flying and helos (under 6000 feet), the night and 3D ground environment leave the competition far behind.

 

Same here,  I also bought it when it first came out and ended up selling my copy on ebay after about 2 weeks. I hated everything about it.  Then after about 2 months, I ended up buying it again becasue I felt guilty that I didnt give it a fair shot. Slowly, I got hooked on it and for the last few years, its all I use now.

 

Rob

[tonywob 4,768]

I'm joining the bought it, hated it club. When I got XP10 the day it came out, I was disappointed and ended up trying out FSX, which had me hooked. Now XP10 is what I use 99% of the time.

 

It really is amazing when you think what we've had for free as part of the XP10 cycle (i.e. We haven't been expected to pay for a new version, even though some are major features)

 

• 64-Bit transition. (This is the big one and a game changer I think for XP10)
• GNS 430/530. (I really missed the RXP units from FSX and this was an amazing thing to get for free, and it's almost as good).
• Extended DSFs (Another nice feature, but not something I use personally, but great for jetfliers)
• The airport gateway (Hundreds of airports now have buildings and more and more are getting them).
• Improvements and upgrades to the autogen, scenery textures, etc.

Add into this mix since XP10 has been released:

 

• AlpilotX's amazing HD mesh sceneries, now on its 3rd version. You can navigate Alaska with a sectional chart :-)
• RealTerraHaze, transforms the once dull daytime lighting of the sim
• Skymaxx Pro which produces some fantastic skies
• G2XPL and Ortho4XP (the latter which produces photoscenery, meshes and water masking to rival most commercial sceneries)
• Simheaven's OSM/W2XP scenery, which looks great when combined with the imagery layers above
• PMDGs first product coming out soon
• IXEG 737 (Whenever that will come out, but it looks incredible)
• Airfoil's C172, which is close to the A2A C172 and filled another gap I missed from FSX

It will be interesting where we will be by the time XP11 is out.

[CFIJose 5,485]

I bought the DVDs and held short for months before trying it. I did what I feared and conquered it! :smile:

 

The latest updated version really impressed me. It has come a long way.

 

BTW, you can't judge X-Plane 10 by the demo. You need the full version and the willingness to learn a new sim.

[Old_As_Dirt 160]

With XP-10, I am exactly opposite from most - I thought it was great.

 

I had used FSX (and all, I think, of its predecessors), and Flight and, although Flight showed great promise, it was a game and became more and more a game, and ultimately died.  I tried P3D, and though it improved on many of the rough spots found in FSX.  I had grown tired of the sameness and rarely flew.

 

I had tried XP-7, XP-8, XP-9, and found the experience to be not worth learning the interface, which I thought was awful. I was, therefore, reluctant to go for XP-10, but the advertisements looked intriguing.  So, I brought it and have never regretted the day I did.

 

Now, I have flown flight simulators since they were nothing more than lines with numbers at the bottom, but there was something about the concept that lured me.  When Microsoft got into the fray (which wasn't much of a fray back then), they made great improvements every couple of years.  Another flash in the pan was one named "Fly" which was good, but very limited in the area it covered.

 

Now comes XP-10 and while it must be a giant moving target for developers, it is on the move and much more realistic in most every area than any of the others have been.  Torque, slip stream, etc.?  Maybe, but they are there and adjustable, which is something I never saw in FSX.  I could fly any plane I installed just as soon as I installed it.  On a rail? - maybe..

 

I find something new in XP almost every day and have only recently started flying "heavies" as I limited myself to GA as that was all I had flown in (in the right hand seat) and couldn't see sitting in a "bus".  Boy was I missing stuff!

 

Enough said - I guess you know where I'm heading so I leave it for someone else.  Thanks for starting this Mitch.

 

John

[morganbass 10]

This thread was posted to me this morning and I thought having read it how good it is. I have been using xplane 10 since 2012. I knew from the first flight that it was going to be the best simulation platform on the market. I like countless others had spent a small fortune on FSX, but found myself spending more time fixing, fiddling, tweaking than flying. It was time for it to go, I have never looked back. I had managed to make a name for myself in the flight sim community just by being a good egg, controlling on VATSIM and helping peopple with what little knowledge i had about FSX that I could.

 

I have since converting to xplane become a scenery developer, a well respected beta tester in the xplane world, I have met with some of the most respected developers in the xplane world and created Xplane Dedicated. A facebook group, a youtube channel, a live broadcast channel on twitch TV and a scenery development group called XPDDG. All i ask of anyone that joins is that they follow the simple rules. I have built a community that will never call anyone stupid, will not shout at anyone and only has family friendly language. I have only banned 8 members for breaking these rules, I think that is a good record.

 

I have done all this just to promote xplane. I recieve no monies for anything I do. It's really quite simple.

 

The releases pending in the next couple of months will blow everything that is available on the other platform clean out of the water, but that said, as I always say if your happy with your sim of choice an it works for you then just keep flying. I dont really care what others fly, I'm just happy that I saw sense and now can fly trouble free.

 

All the best

 

Wycliffe Barrett

 

www.facebook.com/groups/xpdedicated

www.youtube.com/wycliffeb

www.twitch.tv/the_xpd

[Humpty 751]

Comparing FSX - FSX SE with XP10 is not right , because FSX - FSX SE is no more an actively developed software.

 

Compare it with P3d and Xplane 10 wins hands down in the visuals / terrain / scenery, don't know about the dynamics but it feels great. specially going fast low over the trees.

[charlie130 196]

ATC isn't the real problem, as with FS the ATC can be handled by 3rd party developers, as demonstrated with FS++ plugin for RC4. The real problem and limitations come from the AI traffic system. That like with FS, is much harder for a 3rd party developer to deal with, as it's built into the core of the sim. What makes it worse for XP is their choice to use random AI and limit it to 20 aircraft, (Mainly because they use the same complex flight model system for AI as they do the user aircraft.) rather then the more versatile flight plan based system like FS has. To fix that would require a rewrite of the AI system, something that is unlikely to happen during the remaining XP10 life cycle. It will first and foremost require a change in culture at Laminar if it will change for XP11. As Austin stated in an early on AVSIM interview, he thinks the current AI system "Rocks".

Agree Tom.

 

I disable all the XP AI, the reason being, I find they throw errors in the log and slow the sim down fps wise. I have not tried the World Traffic option, which seems the only option. The default airports (some , not all) are very good, EDDM is nice, but its barren, devoid of anything moving, no ground traffic, no aircraft, nothing. The current AI system is non existent! If that is a definition of "rocks" I beg to differ.

 

But the XP flight physics are superior to the FSX/P3d engine and offers pilots the feel of flight, that some of us miss.

 

Regards

 

David

[LAdamson 240]

 

But the XP flight physics are superior to the FSX/P3d engine and offers pilots the feel of flight, that some of us miss.

 

 

From this pilot.......................they feel more or less the same. At least with good payware models, that is.  My CPU runs both sims with a high fluid rate (most of the time). 

[gizmosellsbunnys 106]

use both xpx and fsx with g2xplane been flying fsx less and less because g2xplane can add my own local orthroimagery in Minnesota and build my landmarks now it exceeds fsx in visuals.

[Bobsk8 12,522]

Just curious, I see a few posts where people have both X plane and P3D or FSX on their systems. How do the FPS compare between these two, in other words, if I can get a reasonable 30 FPS average with P3D, what should I expect to get in X plane with the same basic settings? 

[saed45 38]

From this pilot.......................they feel more or less the same. At least with good payware models, that is.  My CPU runs both sims with a high fluid rate (most of the time). 

 

Right on que LAdamson

Just curious, I see a few posts where people have both X plane and P3D or FSX on their systems. How do the FPS compare between these two, in other words, if I can get a reasonable 30 FPS average with P3D, what should I expect to get in X plane with the same basic settings? 

 

I think it depends system to system but you should try out the demo and some of the free add ons. 

[Bobsk8 12,522]

Right on que LAdamson

 

I think it depends system to system but you should try out the demo and some of the free add ons. 

 

 I tried out the demo about 6 months ago, but honestly couldn't make any evaluation in 15 minutes, that the demo works. 

[FlyBaby 659]

Just curious, I see a few posts where people have both X plane and P3D or FSX on their systems. How do the FPS compare between these two, in other words, if I can get a reasonable 30 FPS average with P3D, what should I expect to get in X plane with the same basic settings? 

 

I had all three, but mainly used P3D and XP. I have a modest system (i5 @3.7 - 4GHz, GTX 670 4GB, 16GB RAM and SSD) 

 

With P3D, I could run the highest autogen / scenery settings (without all the shadow options) using FTXG, Rex etc @ 30fps with both default and less demanding aircraft. The buck stopped with Carenado's Sr22 glass cockpit and I could barely maintain 20 fps,

 

With XP, I have really high settings (objects, roads, textures, HDR, extended dsf, etc) and can get 20 - 30 fps, The only thing I don't really push in XP are clouds (I just force a cirrus layer through SMP v2). I can get XP to really look good by turning off HDR in the day time and forcing Anti Aliasing through NI. The biggest plus for me is that I can fly GA glass cockpit planes in X-plane and not see a performance hit (especially my SR20 and SR22 planes)

 

IMO, if you can run P3D fairly well, then you should be able to get similar, if not better, performance in XP. Of course, there will be setting compromises on both ends. For my visual taste, I get more bang for the buck with XP on my machine than I do with P3D.

 I tried out the demo about 6 months ago, but honestly couldn't make any evaluation in 15 minutes, that the demo works. 

Can't you get the full version via steam (adhering to their return policy), try it out for an hour or so and return it if you don't like it?

[Jimmy RFR 406]

Just curious, I see a few posts where people have both X plane and P3D or FSX on their systems. How do the FPS compare between these two, in other words, if I can get a reasonable 30 FPS average with P3D, what should I expect to get in X plane with the same basic settings? 

 

In my opinion, there's no perfect comparison of the two platforms when it comes to performance.  Each sim has different demands in different areas, and the settings aren't very comparable.

 

For an example, I can run any sort of weather I want in FSX, with max range on cloud distance giving me weather pretty much to the horizon, with barely any impact, whereas on XP, clouds come with a very significant performance hit (for me).

 

However, a good rule of thumb is that if you can get acceptable performance in FSX with reasonable settings, you should be able to get acceptable performance in XP, with reasonable settings. I have my frames locked in both sims (via different methods) at 30 fps, and see no issues with either.