Sign in to follow this  
klamal

Too bad we can't have it all :)

Recommended Posts

So, just thinking out loud here and wishing upon a star...I bought X-Plane about 2 months ago now after being a long, long, long time user of MSFS and have really enjoyed what that sim has to offer too.  I've even said in a few posts here that I was thinking about selling all my FSX/P3D add ons and completely switching.  But, it turns out that I don't think I totally can.

 

As I sit hear on a gorgeous flight from CYYC-CYKA in the unbelievably awesome Majestic Q400 with the best weather engine in any flight sim(ASN), I can't help but wish I could meld together the areas of X-Plane that are better than the areas of FSX/P3D and vice versa into one sim.

 

The scenery in FSX/P3D is just ruined for me now since trying X-Plane.  I've seen it mentioned somewhere else before, FSX/P3D is like flying against a painting where X-Plane, that's like actually being there.  And, that couldn't be so true.  The view of the mountains and the water here over western Canada just would be so much better in XP.  It all seems so "flat" and painted on a canvas compared to the depth and realism of what XP can show you out the window.

 

However, at the same time, the weather in XP just sucks compared to what ASN is giving me.  Just gorgeous weather.  Along with REX and the skies are just awesome!!  And, of course, the Q400.  Nothing in XP yet that can compare to the level of add on A/C that we have in the MSFS world.  PMDG, A2A, RealAir, Majestic and even Aerosoft's Buses.

 

So, for in the cockpit and for out the window above the ground, I love P3D and can't stand not having it.  And, for what is on the ground and the feeling of actually being in the environment in XP, I can't stand not having it.  The child in me wants both!!!!  The adult in me knows that life doesn't work that way.  Too bad we can't have our cake and eat it too!  :)

 

Anyway, sorry for a mostly pointless post and something any of us that have used both sims don't already know.  Just had to say it.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Look here for some hope in the Flight Sim future: http://nexgenflightsim.com/

 

We have waited this long, and development is said to begin January 2016 for this project. Because it is going to 64bit, it should be able to have the best of all sim's and more.  

Share this post


Link to post

I've felt that way for a long time, so join the club. I think people are always satisfied with they have.... until they get a glimpse into the other garden. I haven't been able to use FSX for a while now. If you saw my Steam logon, you would see me on for a total of less than a half hour probably since SE was released. I keep logging in, sighing and logging right back out!

 

X-plane is definitely closer, most especially at night, but then........... I drifted away from that, too.

 

Now My hope is Outerra, or maybe whatever Dovetail comes up with.

 

Because if you know what computers are capable of now, compared with we have..... it's just....... eh.

Share this post


Link to post

I just wonder why people shy away from using outtera? It's a great base already, the entire would is modeled scenery design is easy ect just point and click while in sim. The performance even with addon planes and airports is great ect. I like XP at night but that's because of the awesome lighting and the fact I can't see the horrid ground textures that look like they came from the 90s. I just can't bring myself to buy payware for it because the sim it self lacks so much.

Share this post


Link to post

I just wonder why people shy away from using outtera? It's a great base already, the entire would is modeled scenery design is easy ect just point and click while in sim. The performance even with addon planes and airports is great ect. I like XP at night but that's because of the awesome lighting and the fact I can't see the horrid ground textures that look like they came from the 90s. I just can't bring myself to buy payware for it because the sim it self lacks so much.

 

The thing about XP at the moment is that a lot of times, at least for scenery (and sometimes for planes!) the difference between freeware and payware is pretty thin. Essentially, if you search for the good freeware, there is almost no need to buy Xp payware.

 

Just in the last week or so, I remember seeing some excitement about some sort of beautiful freeware airport for XP, but I've drifted so far that I didn't even bother reading up on it. Maybe later.

 

As for Outerra, I just posted a video on reddit (can't post vids here right now due to some sort of problem) of my flying over a city with shadows, AA, clouds, ambient occlusion etc at about 100fps. Outerra will find its day I think, eventually, but people right now are very invested into their favorites, and it will have to be the early adapters that will help take things to the next level.

 

Like the guy who has FSX driving Outerra visuals. (my new hero)

 

Come to think of it, I did buy a Carenado something or other on a whim for X-plane, but its pretty heavy on frames and I hardly ever load it.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm very back and forth, when it comes to mountain scenery. X-Plane mountains look great, but can also fizzle out, in some areas where Orbx scenery brings FSX to life. I believe I read the post about possible getting rid of FSX/P3D. At the time I was thinking...............don't do it. X-Plane is new to you, but sometimes you'll find that it's lacking compared to what you already had. I run both sims, and think it's the best way. My preferred aircraft, are still for FSX. Realair & A2A.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm very back and forth, when it comes to mountain scenery. X-Plane mountains look great, but can also fizzle out, in some areas where Orbx scenery brings FSX to life. I believe I read the post about possible getting rid of FSX/P3D. At the time I was thinking...............don't do it. X-Plane is new to you, but sometimes you'll find that it's lacking compared to what you already had. I run both sims, and think it's the best way. My preferred aircraft, are still for FSX. Realair & A2A.

Yep. I posted that two or three weeks ago now. I'm glad I didn't get rid of P3D and actually have flown that sim more than XP again over the past week...exactly why I posted this to begin with. At first, I was so in love with XP. But, now that the wow factor has passed, I see the pluses and minuses of both and as I originally stated, I can't live without either now. Just depends on the mood and what I want to get out of each flight. So, yeah, I can't believe it but I am officially in the multiple sim camp now. Somewhere I thought I'd never be.

Share this post


Link to post

Agree with everything you said. Its extremely disappointing why more people don't start using or developing for Outerra. Its rendering engine is leagues ahead of xplane or p3d. Outerra is the closest you can get to reality. The atmospheric effects are just too good. And all of this while getting extremely good frame rates. If and when Outerra starts development for a flight sim, it will completely sweep the market. People will flock over it once the see the true potential of outerra. I gave up on FSX/P3D. Everything in those sims looks too artificial and the night flying is horrendous. I do still use XP10 from time to time but i'll shelf it for sure once Outerra comes out with its own Flight Sim. I am also keeping an eye out for Next Gen Flight Sim. Looks pretty impressive so far.

Share this post


Link to post

Agree with everything you said. Its extremely disappointing why more people don't start using or developing for Outerra. Its rendering engine is leagues ahead of xplane or p3d. Outerra is the closest you can get to reality. The atmospheric effects are just too good. And all of this while getting extremely good frame rates. If and when Outerra starts development for a flight sim, it will completely sweep the market. People will flock over it once the see the true potential of outerra. I gave up on FSX/P3D. Everything in those sims looks too artificial and the night flying is horrendous. I do still use XP10 from time to time but i'll shelf it for sure once Outerra comes out with its own Flight Sim. I am also keeping an eye out for Next Gen Flight Sim. Looks pretty impressive so far.

 

Here is a short discussion as to why Outerra is not being used for new development projects:

 

http://nexgenflightsim.com/discussions/#/discussion/115/outerra

 

Share this post


Link to post

Here is a short discussion as to why Outerra is not being used for new development projects:

 

http://nexgenflightsim.com/discussions/#/discussion/115/outerra

 

 

In honest fact, if you look at the development of that initiative, Unigine was always pushed, from first to last, so I take some things with large, heaping helpings of salt. What other engines were looked at with any serious eye as far as detailed testing and feedback?

 

Many people there who were expecting an exhaustive round of examination, critique, and discussion of various options lost a bit of faith when it seemed that winds were only going to blow from one direction.

 

I wish them well, though.

Share this post


Link to post

In honest fact, if you look at the development of that initiative, Unigine was always pushed, from first to last, so I take some things with large, heaping helpings of salt. What other engines were looked at with any serious eye as far as detailed testing and feedback?

 

Many people there who were expecting an exhaustive round of examination, critique, and discussion of various options lost a bit of faith when it seemed that winds were only going to blow from one direction.

 

I wish them well, though.

 

I take things with a whole mine of salt, so you get a little perspective of my position.

 

There are very few choices for available engines to develop on that are; easily available w/o loops and pinholes to jump through (lawyers galore), which have the ability to render the whole round earth, affordable, and where the engine developer actually assists as part of the package speeding the development process. Another round (year) of exhaustive examination will only mean more time spent dealing with OOM's and/or reducing the sliders for us flight simmers, plus more of our money spent add-ons for ancient platforms - enough is enough.  

 

There is a history of discussions concerning other engines which turned sour leading to some leaving the project, and this in turn resulted in users and their related posts to be deleted. Its a shame we can't see those discussions, but there are a lot of 3D engine topics totally deleted, so the fact is, early on there was variable winds blowing in a few different directions. There had to come a time to settle on an engine so development can begin. Along with the 3D engine, several tool sets will be used to replicate the planet, and develop a new flight simulator.

 

I'm not saying that NGFS will even exist, I'm just saying that I currently have no reason to believe that it is a hoax. So, I will treat them like a great new flight simulation company and encourage the effort until I have a reason not to. I would encourage every simmer to just check the forums occasionally for development/status updates and just post a little note of encouragement or offer some constructive criticism.  

 

Share this post


Link to post

I'm not saying that NGFS will even exist, I'm just saying that I currently have no reason to believe that it is a hoax. So, I will treat them like a great new flight simulation company and encourage the effort until I have a reason not to. I would encourage every simmer to just check the forums occasionally for development/status updates and just post a little note of encouragement or offer some constructive criticism.  

 

 

I don't believe they are a hoax at all. I just a lost a measure of faith in the democracy of the decision making process of what was and is billed as a cooperative effort by the community.

 

Beyond that, I wish them all the best, and will look with interest at what they produce.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't believe they are a hoax at all. I just a lost a measure of faith in the democracy of the decision making process of what was and is billed as a cooperative effort by the community.

 

Beyond that, I wish them all the best, and will look with interest at what they produce.

 

I was not suggesting that you or anyone believed it was a hoax, I truly believe you wish them all the best, I was just communicating my position and the fact that I'm monitoring this project very closely.  

 

I'm sure the people at NGiS would have looked at anything that was brought to the table, but the coop effort they attempted was not really received well. I did not even know about this project until flightsim.com put an interview with Stephen B on 10/2/15! So while NGiS was looking for a democracy, the community leaders kept the attempt secret by saying nothing - no news - no recognition - zilch. After reading the interview I scoured the internet for any further info.Then I find a single forum post on Avsim about the project that I think got totally deleted afterward, talk about democracy. NGiS tried democracy and got the cold shoulder or I would have known about this back in April or maybe earlier.

 

I do understand that w/o a concrete project its hard to make a news item, but we are a tight community that gets nothing from nobody, and we must take care of each other in light of the common goal. All the flight sim news sites would do themselves no harm at all in just letting the community know about the existence of the NexGen Flight sim project....but no. So how does a new flight sim company even get off the ground....all alone with no cooperation.

 

I too wish them well and am enjoying the discussions in the NGiS forum related to the progress of the project.    

Share this post


Link to post

I don't believe they are a hoax at all. I just a lost a measure of faith in the democracy of the decision making process of what was and is billed as a cooperative effort by the community.

 

Beyond that, I wish them all the best, and will look with interest at what they produce.

It's their decision which engine they want to use. Not that Outerra is any better Unigine anyways. Have you tried their new demo ? I have been a long time user of Outerra and I can daresay that their engine(Unigine) is quite better than what Outerra has to offer currently. Don't get me wrong I really like Outerra and always thought of it as being the top dog as far as sim engines goes but I was pleasantly surprised after trying NGFS demo. There are quite a bit of things (I dont want to go into detail here) that I noticed which are present in Unigine that are absent in Outerra. The atmospheric effects looks better and the overall lighting specially global illumination looks better. The weather and rain effects are also top notch.

 

I'll be honest with you. I dont really care about Outerra anymore. We have waited. And we have waited long enough. I'd rather show my support for guys who are actually in the process of building a new advanced sim rather than hoping against hope for Outerra to become a flight sim one day. NGIS devs are super nice. They are actually willing to include the community requested features(https://trello.com/b/HPJrNcQM/features-voting-board). They are very dedicated and passionate about NGFS and I wish them all the very best.

 

 

P.S. IMO NGFS needs its dedicated thread here on AVSIM.

Share this post


Link to post

I know all about NGIS.... I was there at the beginning, when there were about ten guys on the forum, and was one of the people who tested the original demo. I also was talking with Mr Borick both publicly and privately.

 

I believe I'm probably the first person to ever mention it on this forum! http://www.avsim.com/topic/467836-bumped-into-this-on-the-web/?hl=+next%20+generation%20+flight%20+symposium

 

Which eventually moved to this: http://www.avsim.com/topic/468499-next-generation-flight-simulator-sim-posium-is-now-open/

Share this post


Link to post

I know all about NGIS.... I was there at the beginning, when there were about ten guys on the forum, and was one of the people who tested the original demo. I also was talking with Mr Borick both publicly and privately.

 

I believe I'm probably the first person to ever mention it on this forum! http://www.avsim.com/topic/467836-bumped-into-this-on-the-web/?hl=+next%20+generation%20+flight%20+symposium

 

Which eventually moved to this: http://www.avsim.com/topic/468499-next-generation-flight-simulator-sim-posium-is-now-open/

 

Thank you for the links. I was in error about the post being deleted. I knew that something annoyed me and it was because the topic was locked, not deleted.

 

It surly is a shame that the topic died and here we are months later and topics like "new version of KSFO released!" (what is that the 20th rendition of KSFO for FSX?) get so much attention and its all about ancient platforms that need to join the archives to reminisce occasionally.

Share this post


Link to post

Why was that topic locked? This is so upsetting. NGIS team needs the support of the community. More people need to know about this sim. 

Share this post


Link to post

And yet...when I browse the list of requested features I don't see any mention of icing, runway contamination, thermals or ridge lift. But I do see things like wanting to drive home from the airport.  :rolleyes:  With both X-plane and FSX/P3D, we already have sims in which the eye-candy surpasses what's available in professional simulators, yet the clamour is for more and more of it.  Most of the oohing and aahing over P3D seems to about the look of it rather than about what's going on under the bonnet compared to FSX ("hey, cool, cockpit shadows!").

 

When a new sim appears that really makes the simmer think about the things that pilots think about, and does so out of the box, then I'll feel like I'm looking at a big step forward...to what FLY! was offering 20 years ago...bah.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

When a new sim appears that really makes the simmer think about the things that pilots think about, and does so out of the box, then I'll feel like I'm looking at a big step forward...to what FLY! was offering 20 years ago...bah.

 

The problem is, that for a lot of reasons there'll likely never be such a sim, which explains why multiple companies are working off of the base of FSX/ESP instead, which leaves us pretty much cannibalizing microsoft's glorious past, into perpetuity.

 

Something completely new is needed to break the impasse, but the likelihood of that something new matching the depth of FSX "out of the box" after FSX has had ten years of development by multiple companies, is effectively nil.

 

Nor are there any likely White Knights to sink millions into such an effort to capture such a relatively tiny market. Even Dovetail would have to be insane not to go for a broader market, at least at first.

 

NGIS is a possibility to keep an eye on if only because......... what other options are there? So, for the same reason is Outerra (really sorry to hear you've given up Babar!) because they actually have working software out in the wild and are moving forward slowly but surely.

 

Then there is the great question mark. Dovetail.

 

And X-plane, of course.

 

For me, the operative word is..... patience.

Share this post


Link to post

For me, the operative word is..... patience.

 

Oh I agree about the patience part, what I mean is that I'm not about to get all excited about P3D or X-Plane because as far as I can see, they're not bringing a huge amount to the table that we're not getting already. I'm still with FSX and am not about to make a big switch to P3D, for example, when I really don't see what the benefit is apart from "cool visual stuff".  The only significant change that I can see there is the modelling of sea states, and if I remember correctly, that involves a big performance hit if enabled. Not worth having to buy a new, expensive sim license and lot of add-ons all over again in order to essentially have the same game.

 

As for modelling the depth of FSX, if a sim is only going as deep as FSX, then I don't see much reason to buy it. And I'm not convinced that the scope of FSX can't be matched. As I said, FLY! did it about 20 years ago, and without the weight of MS behind it.

Share this post


Link to post

As a previous long time real pilot & plane owner............I don't really care about computerized icing, and runway conditions. Actually, I don't care about maintenance either, because I did so much of that in real life. More ridge lift wouldn't hurt, but I can always appreciate more eye candy.

I didn't fly as a regular daily job. It was never for a paycheck, and just a means to get somewhere. It was for all that eye candy of the western mountain/desert regions of the USA.  The more improvement in looks, the more I like the sim.  Of course, the plane needs to also seem reasonably real, handling wise. If that's off, I won't use it. 

Share this post


Link to post

As a previous long time real pilot & plane owner............I don't really care about computerized icing, and runway conditions. Actually, I don't care about maintenance either, because I did so much of that in real life. More ridge lift wouldn't hurt, but I can always appreciate more eye candy.

I didn't fly as a regular daily job. It was never for a paycheck, and just a means to get somewhere. It was for all that eye candy of the western mountain/desert regions of the USA.  The more improvement in looks, the more I like the sim.  Of course, the plane needs to also seem reasonably real, handling wise. If that's off, I won't use it. 

I am in your boat, but I have never own a real aircraft nor am a real world pilot.  I have been on many planes and love the experience of flying.  I also don't want a job, so all my expensive PMDG stuffs are now shelved, now that I have the virtual experience of being the virtual pilot on these for a number of flights.  I have XP and P3D, but I am now on P3D exclusively.  Other life priorities prevent me from following up on more than one sim.  The planes I use now are RealAir and Flight1.  Hopped in, take off, short, enjoyable flight, land, shut down and go have a real beer ;-)  I have many airport add-ons, but I have not re-installed them lately.  All  I have now are the basics: core sim, UTX, Orbx Regions, ASN, Rex4.  It's basic, but then I don't have to swear at OOM, low frame rate and stutters either, just take off and as the flight attendant says: enjoy the flight.  Who knows, in the future, when the computer will be twice as fast as my current rig, I will then add more eye candies, as of right now, I would like to eat a small cake rather than just look at a beautiful big cake that I can't eat.

 

Cheers and thanks for the thread.

Share this post


Link to post

As for modelling the depth of FSX, if a sim is only going as deep as FSX, then I don't see much reason to buy it.

 

For me, the answer to that is that a lot has changed since FSX was new, and with today's hardware, almost inconceivably more can be done, even with less powerful hardware. As the title of this thread asks: Why can't we have both?

Share this post


Link to post

And yet...when I browse the list of requested features I don't see any mention of icing, runway contamination, thermals or ridge lift. But I do see things like wanting to drive home from the airport.  :rolleyes:  With both X-plane and FSX/P3D, we already have sims in which the eye-candy surpasses what's available in professional simulators, yet the clamour is for more and more of it.  Most of the oohing and aahing over P3D seems to about the look of it rather than about what's going on under the bonnet compared to FSX ("hey, cool, cockpit shadows!").

 

When a new sim appears that really makes the simmer think about the things that pilots think about, and does so out of the box, then I'll feel like I'm looking at a big step forward...to what FLY! was offering 20 years ago...bah.

 

I agree Paul, and this is why I'm fighting for those all important features under the hood. The NGiS features board ( https://trello.com/b/HPJrNcQM/features-voting-board ) has many things, and its being added to often. The intention of NGiS is to implement those features most requested (most votes) in version 1.0 and add additional features in subsequent versions. This is why it seems to me that now is a good time to be an active part of this project....NGiS needs us much more than we "need" them and they realize this. They have a vision but it is not so hard and fast that they ignore reasonable suggestions or kind critique. Realism is the vision and I think we all can agree on that.

 

Dovetail has the MS platform and a pretty solid history on which to build. They are asking for what we want, but there is no indication as to whether we are going to be faced with a DLC business model like MS Flight, or if they will exceed the features of FSX/P3D out of the box. All in all, they don't "need" us but the good thing is that they do seem to care very much about keeping flight simulation alive and well. FSX:SE has done well and has kept the dream alive.

 

AeroFly is on version 2 which is said to be released by the end of 2015, also be a full earth for the PC version but still with a limited flying area according to post #9 here:( http://www.ipacs.de/forum/showthread.php/7006-aerofly-FS-Development-Status ). I'm not interested in a planned limited flying area, because it will take way too long for the rest of the world to be developed and I already have the whole world in P3D V3.

 

XP is on version 10 and yes it has some very nice features, but lacks in so many as well. I think the problem with XP10 is it relies too much on 3rd party development and by doing so progresses too slowly.

 

FlightGear is another one developed, and yet the latest version (3.4) major enhancements involve still improving the basic platform, and fixing a slew of known bugs, so this is more like an ongoing beta test to me. I understand its free, but its been 18 years and while it has some nice features, it does not even come close to FSX in my opinion. We need something to exceed FSX by leaps and bounds.

 

I want to be clear that I'm not against 3rd party development, I have been very pleased with many add-ons. The thing I see is that our current simulator choices actually need add-ons to keep us interested. This need in turn results in lots of purchases, and in turn "stifles" (so to speak) a new flight simulator platform or even a new version, because many don't want to let go of what they invested in. I flew in my copy of FS4.0b with many add-ons just last week on an older PC system, so by me getting FS5.0 I still have not given up my FS4 and that's how its easy for me to long for a new version; I never have to give up what I currently have or had - none of us do!

 

I'm pushing the NGiS developers to get away from the "need" for add-ons like airport scenery or planes so that 3rd parties will have to go on to bigger and better things for the future. For example and/or hypothetically, if NGFS were to have an NGX quality plane as their 737 default, then PMDG would either improve on that or even better make a 787 with equal or likely greater realism. I want all NGFS airports to all have an interesting character about them, even the private farm strips ( similar to how the missions do in FSX e.g.. Midwest fly in - but much better), this way 3rd parties would have to improve on that, but the improvements would be far beyond what we have now, because NGFS default KSFO is better than anything we have now, and it does not cause the sim to crash OOM.

 

We have an opportunity to mold NGFS into a really great platform for 3rd parties to climb much higher than we ever thought possible. If we just settle for making NGFS a platform for 3rd parties to enhance by keeping things too basic with version 1.0 out of the box, then we will have stayed stagnant as we have been for many years. We must raise the bar. I'm doing just that on the NGiS forums and it would be great if I had lots of help because I cant think of everything, and many others have many much greater ideas then I have, and even have ideas as to how to implement features.     

 

Your ideas about the weather, I agree, are of the upmost importance. Eye candy is fine and dandy but without effect like { the actual weight of those passengers boarding the plane and the CG that constantly changes as they board that goes with the eye candy}, it is meaningless to have avatars boarding. So yes if the eye candy is there, we want the effect of that to matter. NGiS intends to make the effects optional for users who do not want to concern themselves with such details, so this can satisfy a broader audience. I, even this very moment, thought if cockpit shadows are there, then avionics cooling systems should be a part of that eye candy. As the sun beams down on instruments one can hear the cooling fans speed up ever so slightly and as needed....this is the detail that we can all have if we raise that bar. This way it remains a simulation more than a game, but it still can have the qualities (in the form of options)  of a game to attract many, a true win win situation.

 

I can see it now: NVidias home page with a very realistic flight simulator advertised, and a dedicated graphics driver specific to that flight simulator. A flight simulator can finally once again become king of all programs....<huge grin>   

Share this post


Link to post

I think in a couple of years time once VR settles in flightsimming is going to dramatically increase its profile.

 

I tried the NGIS demo and visually it's very nice (as expected) but comes in at a whopping 5GB install just for that small area. They're going to need some serious architectural changes if it's going to be a viable, all-world sim on people's hard drives.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this