X-Plane 10 has come a long way, but it can certainly improve and I believe that it will.

 

I'd like to see:

 

1) Payware GA airplanes with the "Realair" or "Milviz" touch. The payware planes I've bought so far, do not cut it for me.

 

2) An ATC system that allows communication while in VFR ops.

 

3) Some working AI traffic at all airports.

 

4) A good weather engine. FS Global could be the one.

 

5) Seasons.

 

6) More cities like SFO by MisterX. :wub:

 

7) A user friendly GNS 430/530 unit or F1 GTN 750. The gns units are good, but not as user friendly as my rxp units.

 

IMO, X-Plane 10 is an excellent simulator with a great community that is passionate about simming. I'm glad that I'm a part of it.

 

+1

I fully second that ... i'd just add A2A at the first point as well for GA planes.

:wink:

X-Plane 10 has come a long way, but it can certainly improve and I believe that it will.

 

I'd like to see:

 

1) Payware GA airplanes with the "Realair" or "Milviz" touch. The payware planes I've bought so far, do not cut it for me.

 

2) An ATC system that allows communication while in VFR ops.

 

3) Some working AI traffic at all airports.

 

4) A good weather engine. FS Global could be the one.

 

5) Seasons.

 

6) More cities like SFO by MisterX. :wub:

 

7) A user friendly GNS 430/530 unit or F1 GTN 750. The gns units are good, but not as user friendly as my rxp units.

 

IMO, X-Plane 10 is an excellent simulator with a great community that is passionate about simming. I'm glad that I'm a part of it.

 

That pretty much sums it up for me.  It's a great simulator, structurally at least, but there are a few areas (numbers 5 and 4 particularly) that probably need fundamental changes to sections of the underlying sim for it to compete.

 

Other than that, it's content, content, content.  I've really struggled to find planes and scenery that equal those that I use in P3D.  Carenado does't do it for me, and the only plane that seems to near equal A2A is a C172, one payware C172 is quite enough for me thanks!  On the airliners, it's the lack of a good FS2Crew-like solution that puts me off (and I'm aware of MCE) as well as the general low number of aircraft with custom FMS (I have an aversion to X-FMS....).  I've finally found something in X-Plane that I really like, the Saab 340A, and have been beating around SoCal on PilotEdge in it, but it took a while, and several other aircraft, and I very nearly uninstalled the whole shebang and chalked it up as an expensive mistake.

 

And whilst the PilotEdge coverage area is well served with scenery (Mr X KSFO v2.... *droool*), my home area (UK) is poorly served in X-Plane, but extraordinarily well served in P3D/FSX by UK2000.

 

In short, great some lovely features, but a bit short on top level content (though this is improving slowly), and at the end of the day, content is king.

 

Think I'll stick with it a while, though it's probably 20% X-Plane, 80% P3D at the moment.

X-Plane is ahead of it's time in very few categories.   In most of the other areas it is behind.   It has one of the worst ATC systems and it's AI control system is non-existent.   Many US airports are baron wastelands, even with the free community add-ons.   I shall stick by my previous statement that X-Plane is amazing for General Aviation fliers that like flying in Europe.   For heavy tin movers that work in the USA X-Plane is greatly lacking.    The one thing that X-Plane does do better than anyone else, even with PAYWARE add-ons is night lighting.   That X-Plane night environment makes a pilot shed tears with it's beauty.   There are a few cosmetic features I wish the other platforms had like heat exhaust shimmer but alas...   I reload X-Plane on my system every year or so to see if it's come up to the standards I need it to be for how I fly and it's still not there.

Those 7 points are deficiencies, but compared to FSX and it's woes, they are all tolerable in the interim. World Traffic can "fix" the AI aircraft issue if one likes to tinker (I do, but only to a point).

 

I am surprised that someone hasn't produced a GTN 750 based on the the freeware Garmin Trainer Light. It would be a big seller in XP.

+1 Jay. I am also surprised given that basically you only need to make an interface to the trainer.

 

Maybe some talented person reads this thread and starts working on it.

Those 7 points are deficiencies, but compared to FSX and it's woes, they are all tolerable in the interim. World Traffic can "fix" the AI aircraft issue if one likes to tinker (I do, but only to a point).

 

I am surprised that someone hasn't produced a GTN 750 based on the the freeware Garmin Trainer Light. It would be a big seller in XP.

 

Oh I don't know, 1 (as it's wider than just GA), 2 and 4 are fairly major....

 

If you are comparing top end and properly configured XP vs top end and properly configured FSX/P3D, the areas that XP actually clearly leads in are pretty limited (memory handling aside), whilst the content deficiencies are hard to ignore.

For me the interaction with VC I mean knobs panel etc. are really difficult to interact; Fsx have sum the interaction with few key and have more precision IMHO.

One thing that I don't really appreciate is this washout images were the tendency of gray is predominant and I didn't find any add-on aircraft or scenery that rise the level obtained with FSX-P3D-AeroFly in all aspect from VC panel to the texture on scenery , this part is more like eye candy preference.

I am waiting the IXEG 737-300 project that seams to bring an incredible simulation and of course DC6.

The positive side of Xplane are 3D runway that can be important as part of simulation and dynamic, flight dynamics give better feeling and this is a huge point.

I didn't try ice effect or the new weather tool maybe someone can tell me if it works and is well simulated. 

X-Plane 10 has come a long way, but it can certainly improve and I believe that it will.

 

I'd like to see:

 

1) Payware GA airplanes with the "Realair" or "Milviz" touch. The payware planes I've bought so far, do not cut it for me.

 

While there is definitely less 'high end' 3rd party payware aircraft content available for XP than FSX/P3D, there are still some very, very excellent and in-depth aircraft available.  Just not quite as widespread, nor across all areas of aviation.  As XP gains in popularity, I think this is going to change rapidly.

 

The SMS DHC-2 Beaver is absolutely top level.  Excellent to look at, with very near complete systems modelling as well.  Absolutely wonderful to fly, and for now, has no equal in FSX.

 

The Reality Expansion Pack from SimCoders brings A2A level stuff to the Carenado C210.  I've heard it's excellent, but I'm more interested in the fact that SimCoders are about to do the same for the Carenado F33A.  That's going to keep me occupied for quite some time!

 

You said 'airplanes', but is you expand the GA scope outwards to include helicopters, I actually feel the opposite is true - there's no helicopters in FSX/P3D that have the "Dreamfoil" touch.  The 407 from MV comes close (as well it should since they're more than a bit related), but not quite.

 

It's also worth noting that I often lament to myself that there's not more aircraft in FSX/P3D that have the "Marcel Felde" touch.  His DA20 is still, in my opinion, the best GA simulation that exists in any platform, bar none. A2A came very close to replicating his achievements, but again, not quite.

 

I do think that when you start to raise the bar high enough, that you're never going to be able to limit yourself to just one platform.  I know that if I want to fly a perfect R22, I'm going to go to XP.  A perfect DA20 is going to be FSX.  A perfect Beaver is going to be XP. A perfect Piper Cub is going to be FSX. Yes, there might be more 'perfects' in FSX/P3D than in XP, but that's merely a reason to keep both sims installed. :smile:

Yes, there might be more 'perfects' in FSX/P3D than in XP, but that's merely a reason to keep both sims installed. :smile:

 

QFT 

For me the interaction with VC I mean knobs panel etc. are really difficult to interact; Fsx have sum the interaction with few key and have more precision IMHO.

One thing that I don't really appreciate is this washout images were the tendency of gray is predominant and I didn't find any add-on aircraft or scenery that rise the level obtained with FSX-P3D-AeroFly in all aspect from VC panel to the texture on scenery , this part is more like eye candy preference.

I am waiting the IXEG 737-300 project that seams to bring an incredible simulation and of course DC6.

The positive side of Xplane are 3D runway that can be important as part of simulation and dynamic, flight dynamics give better feeling and this is a huge point.

I didn't try ice effect or the new weather tool maybe someone can tell me if it works and is well simulated. 

I hear this all the time. Maybe I'm missing something, because over all these years, I've never felt the better feeling.  Not a cut to X-Plane here, because most of the time, the X-Planes and my preferred FSX planes feel pretty much the same (on a fluid high fps machine). 

All I can figure, is that X-Plane might be running smoother and more fluid on some systems. I just never, never said to myself.............Wow, this is what real flight's like (over all others)!  Actually, I've said that numerous times. But for X-Plane, FSX, FS9, Fly, & Pro-Pilot.  Pro-Pilot was the first WOW.  I remember Geoff Applegate, who owned a few Beeches during his flying years, thinking the same about Pro-Pilot. 

 

And for those that don't know me, I flew many varieties of real life planes, as well as owning one, which I kept in a hangar just down the street from our house. It was quite convenient for travel throughout the mountain west.

I hear this all the time. Maybe I'm missing something, because over all these years, I've never felt the better feeling.  Not a cut to X-Plane here, because most of the time, the X-Planes and my preferred FSX planes feel pretty much the same (on a fluid high fps machine). 

All I can figure, is that X-Plane might be running smoother and more fluid on some systems. I just never, never said to myself.............Wow, this is what real flight's like (over all others)!  Actually, I've said that numerous times. But for X-Plane, FSX, FS9, Fly, & Pro-Pilot.  Pro-Pilot was the first WOW.  I remember Geoff Applegate, who owned a few Beeches during his flying years, thinking the same about Pro-Pilot. 

 

And for those that don't know me, I flew many varieties of real life planes, as well as owning one, which I kept in a hangar just down the street from our house. It was quite convenient for travel throughout the mountain west.

 

I'm not a pilot, and the closest thing I've ever been is the few lucky times I've gotten to sit in the right hand seat of smaller aircraft.  That said, no monitor I've ever sat in front of comes close to replicating the feel of being in a small plane.

 

I also don't know that XP is any better at replicating the 'feel' of flight than FSX when it comes down to the intricacies of flight modelling.  I've heard people claim it, yet to be honest, I've had more experiences in FSX that felt more genuinely authentic than I have yet had in XP.  (Granted, I've flown FSX for many years, and XP for a few months).

 

But I do think that fluidity goes a long ways, and XP can be far more fluid, or smooth, at equal frames rates, than FSX is capable of.  And for many people, that smooth experience is very convincing.

X-Plane has its own way of calculation and showing the performance of its models....read here:

 

http://www.x-plane.com/desktop/how-x-plane-works/

 

On a personal basis...in other sims, at rotate time you pull on the yoke and the view pans in the vertical axis...fluid and fixed. in X-Plane, you need to maintain a constant motion of the elevator to achieve and maintain the rotation....or you sink back to mother earth....I personally quite like this.

 

Every sim has its pluses and minuses, but some of the dynamic bits of programming in X-Plane are truly marvellous.

X-Plane has its own way of calculation and showing the performance of its models....read here:

 

http://www.x-plane.com/desktop/how-x-plane-works/

 

On a personal basis...in other sims, at rotate time you pull on the yoke and the view pans in the vertical axis...fluid and fixed. in X-Plane, you need to maintain a constant motion of the elevator to achieve and maintain the rotation....or you sink back to mother earth....I personally quite like this.

 

Every sim has its pluses and minuses, but some of the dynamic bits of programming in X-Plane are truly marvellous.

Ah................no. That would be back about the time of FS98.  I was never thrilled about that, either.

 

I also know how X-Plane works. Some positives, some negatives, some problems that have gone on for years. X-Plane flight dynamics are a ball park rendition of flight. They need tweaking by masters, just as FSX's table method does. 

Agree with most of the points mentioned above. One very important thing that I would like to point out is that XPX definitely needs real time surface reflection like FSX/P3D. Almost every aircraft in XPX looks like its made up of plastic or something and for me that just kills the experience. A dev did manage to mimic the reflection by using a plugin http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?showtopic=87680