10.50b is out!

[bkeith2 1]

Maybe a stupid question but why is there the notion in the upper right corner "Internet output disabled"? I am not aware that I saw this before. 

 

Not sure why it was turned on for the beta, but you can turn it off by deselecting the items you don't want to see on your screen by going up to the top menu  >  Settings > Data Input and Output.  You will see they have been turned on in this menu.

 

Cheers,

 

Brendan

[FloB 34]

Excuse me? Do it yourself. I'm not advocating for P3D or FSX in here.

 

Then let's take this to a more unbiased place, unlike some obscure X-Plane thread where people pander to you because it's in their interest. Can sit here, in your safe space, pat each other on the back when a nasty stranger comes along and says bad things about your game.

 

Do you want to tell us that X-Plane does not look like reality itself? Certainly not. So stop throwing verdicts without a vaild point of reference.

[hhbrbg 139]

 

And a real photo of Norway for comparison. I'll let the viewers decide if X-Plane depiction is underwhelming/woeful:

 

 

 

Very, very nice looking pictures...

Tom

[Poppet 709]

Yeah, another set of generic shots with no weather influence, taken hiiiiigh above, where you can still see the weird gap in the reflection, the ugly shorelines it tends to make, also how it seemingly blends colours into a weird monotone mush. X-Plane's rendering is so incredibly inconsistent and unappealing. Especially its lighting engine.

 

And obviously you removed all clouds, because we know what that does to an X-Plane screenshot. 

 

Not sure what the comparison shot is for, they look absolutely nothing alike. Makes your own screenshots seem even more underwhelming. 

 

 

 

What exactly are you trying to achieve here? I have the game, I've played the game. Same as most people in this thread. Are you expecting some sort of epiphany from me, that somehow your screenshots will make me throw my keyboard across the room and say "Yes, the weird urine filter, the 2D trees, the odd looking reflection and the horrendous looking cloud with no features or depth, that is my burning bush moment!" ? You are absolutely confirming what I've been saying; X-Plane, visually, looks incredibly flat and inconsistent. Horrible colours and poor weather depiction. 

 

 

Why are you been so angry in your comments,  No need for unprovoked anger  

[hjsmuc 393]

out of curiosity would you mind sharing a picture of FSX/ P3D of the same place. I would really love to see it

 

I don't think here would be the right place to discuss comparisons. But why don't we move comparison shots to another thread, with exact coordinates and weather conditions for each shot?

[Colonel X 1,430]

You got the memo guys, back to 10.50b discussions here.

[rjack1282 316]

I had to roll back....just getting too many crashes and not interested in sorting them out.  I'll be patient and at least wait for the release candidate.

[jcomm 5,930]

Seithos1988,

 

I believe each simmer has it's own focus of attention. I am focused in the plausibility of flight dynamics, and the visuals can be as basic as those in Aerowinx PSX which I use because there simply is, among any of the sims and add-ons you can name, anything that comes even close to it in modelling a B747-400.

 

The "price" I pay for that level of detail and realism are the basic out-of-windshield graphics, if I do not use an external visuals generator, something I avoid because I have a somehow limited PC with an old i5 2500.

 

But when it comes to external visuals generator, X-Plane is my choice because it gives me at least two marked advantages over FSX or P3D - the 3d terrain, which PSX also uses but can read from the external sim, and a very very inexpensive synced database of runways, all over the World, that I would have a PITA to get properly rendered and so smoothly aligned with PSX in FSX or P3D, not to mention the $$$ I would have to spend in add-on airports of the similar quality...

 

Yet another reason for me to chose X-Plane 10 over MSFS-derived sims are the rotary wing flight dynamics - again my main focus are the flight dynamics... and again, each user, depending on it's main focus, will have his own preferences.

 

For sure X-Plane isn't perfect, and for instance, I do by far prefer the weather rendering in FSX and derivates, specially when rendered with ASN or the latest products I've been able to beta test from HiFiTech. There simply isn't presently a similar rendering for X-Plane 10 - on that I agree with you....  But then and again, if we focus on the physical effects of weather, the way they're modelled in X-Plane 10 is IMO ahead of any similar effect modelled in FSX and derivates...

 

We could go on making comparisons, and selecting items better done in one sim for some of them, and the way around for others...

[tonywob 4,769]

Couple more of Norway here (Using only freeware)

 

http://www.avsim.com/topic/487563-ixeg-737-to-norway

Well it's evident that there is no pleasing some people. I would certainly like to see some side-by-side shots of mountainous areas in various sims, but I think you could post real-life photographs and say they were from Simulator X and people would still find fault in them.  

[GoranM 3,764]

Definitely underwhelming... :Talking Ear Off:

[tonywob 4,769]

This topic now seems to have derailed a bit (and yes I'm guilty as well). I encourage anyone to post more screenshots in the screenshots area so people who don't frequent these forums can see them, most people in this topic already know how nice X-Plane can be  :wink:

 

Feel free to start a new topic about further betas