X-Plane IS the future, with new rendering technology coming with XP11, it will only extend the gap between all sims out there. XP will only get better and better as time goes by, something I can't say about FSX or P3D, as their rendering engines are old and falling behind as technology moves on.

 

P3D going 64 bit (if it ever does) is not going to help, it will still show its wrinkles. 

But you have to realise something else:  You fly a matured sim

 

FSX was released 2006,  PMDG released the 737 in 2011 afaik?  and 2013 for the T7.  So it was 5 years / 7 years after release of FSX before you could fly those planes. Before that you did not have them.

 

X-Plane 10 was released in 2012  and now we have the 737 in 2016. So we are not so far off.

 

If you realize that FSX has (according to steam) about 10x the userbase of x-plane you only have 5 planes that are considered top notch  PMDG T7, 737, FSLA320, AEROA319/20, q400. (yes leaving GA out)  That is not a spectacular huge list considering you have a market share roughly 10 times bigger.

 

At the end of the day, it boils down to time. Spectacular add-ons come out maybe every 2-3 years on each plattform. If you have 6 years advantage, then you have 2-3 more planes. Quite simple

 

You are right.

And I am pretty sure I will switch in short term or a little longer term...

 

But not now. I guess the "weather problem" will be solved in the next weeks or months. And a high quality modern airliner will sure be available also soon.

 

Until then I am thinking about the A350 by FlightFactor. The videos are quite good I think.

 

And yes, you guys are right: P3D is not the future of private simming. For sure. But since LM took over the FSX engine they made some quite good improvements which I like.

 

 

Until then I am thinking about the A350 by FlightFactor. The videos are quite good I think.

 

No SID / STAR support right now, which is for a lot of users a no-go.There is a more complex version in the works, but FF did not yet state anything about when it should be released.

X-Plane IS the future, with new rendering technology coming with XP11, it will only extend the gap between all sims out there. XP will only get better and better as time goes by, something I can't say about FSX or P3D, as their rendering engines are old and falling behind as technology moves on.

 

I hope that is the case about XPlane.

 

But you are wrong about P3D/FSX. The differentiator at the moment - which continues to make P3D the generally preferred platform is the prolific development and support by the best developers in the market. XP will have to make some significant improvements to lure them over to full time support of the platform. That is the ONLY thing that will make XP the preferred platform - to the general user of sims.

... That is the ONLY thing that will make XP the preferred platform - to the general user.

 

I think I must dissagree with you here. 

The general user is the one that fires up the sim, flies a tour, maybe shoots an approach and quits.

 

What you are talking about is the sim enthusiast. They are not the same, and the expectations are very different.

 

Some time ago LR released statistics of the X-Plane usage, and if I remember correctly,

the majority was using the mouse for input, was flying one of the default aircrafts (I even think that the cessna was the most popular) and did not land the plane, but quit before.

 

Also in FSX / P3D there are 2 types of add ons: 

- scenery / depiction (weather/water/...)

- high fidelity airplanes (also called tubers)

I think they both appeal to the different group, the first (ORBx and REX come to mind) would appeal more to the casual flyer, the second targets the (high fidelity) sim enthusiast.

 

So as I see it, even in FSX / P3D there are 2 different audiences. There is no such thing as a general user.

 

 

There is no such thing as a general user.

 

Exactly this is what I'm trying to say since two days in this thread and in my other. And what I mean when I demand "context" from people when they say there are "no good addons".

 

Of course one could argue that users flying with the mouse default aircraft for an hour are not a relevant group for the type of discussion we are having here. They might be relevant for the simulator sellings, but not for the addon ecosystem around the simulator. My impression by now is that the people who are so active in this forum here and voice their opinions with a lot of good and different reasons are probably all sim enthusiasts, and in this context, these "sim enthusiasts" are the "general users" -- they are the people who pay lots of money for addons, and maybe that's where Erich is coming from when he refers to the general user.

 

 

... and did not land the plane, but quit before.

 

Hah, this reminds me of my first steps in flight simulation. I would load a 747, set flaps, thrust, take-off ... then 3 minutes later, I was like - ok, good - and exit the sim. 

 

Hah, this reminds me of my first steps in flight simulation. I would load a 747, set flaps ...

 

So you were a pro!   When I starting flight simming around 1992, I didn't even know that flaps are used for takeoff.

In Germany, people which aren't too much into aviation often call them "Landeklappen" ("landing flaps"), so I thought they are only used for landing. But of course landing wasn't part of my flights until I got a bit more serious with simming.

So as I see it, even in FSX / P3D there are 2 different audiences. There is no such thing as a general user.

You are correct, I agree with your point (and Mario's) on that basis.

 

But when I say 'general user', I'm not really referring to the 12 year old kid asking dad for the credit card so he can download a 'flight game' from Steam. They wouldn't in anycase know enough to make an informed decision. I'm referring to the likes of you and me - people who are really into fligthsims who lurk on these fora day in and day out, splitting hairs about the pro's and con's of flightsim platforms - and those who just come (day in and day out) to read all the drivel written.

 

To me, that is the general user of flightsims. There is of course a huge silent majority here too. But it is very clear, that for the most part - there is a strong preference for either one camp or the other based on user experience, quality and variety of addons.

I hope that is the case about XPlane.

 

But you are wrong about P3D/FSX. The differentiator at the moment - which continues to make P3D the generally preferred platform is the prolific development and support by the best developers in the market. XP will have to make some significant improvements to lure them over to full time support of the platform. That is the ONLY thing that will make XP the preferred platform - to the general user of sims.

 

 

XP doesn't really need FSX/P3D dev's (call me crazy if you want) there are quite a few extraordinary XP developers out there that are staring to produce extraordinary products some of which are freeware/donationware, so it is just a matter of time.

 

MS flight sims have been around for a long time,  it wasn't until FS2000 that outside development started, now we are seeing the same thing happening with XP.

 

Let time be the judge.

No SID / STAR support right now, which is for a lot of users a no-go.There is a more complex version in the works, but FF did not yet state anything about when it should be released.

 

Sorry for a little OT: Does the Jardesign A330 also have fundamental flaws like this? I would buy X Plane, the JarDesign A330 and this weather addon (Skymaxx? Can't remeber the name) for testing...

Sorry for a little OT: Does the Jardesign A330 also have fundamental flaws like this? I would buy X Plane, the JarDesign A330 and this weather addon (Skymaxx? Can't remeber the name) for testing...

 

The JAR Airbusses have SIDs and STARs, but their Fly-by-wire and their general systems are way inferior to the one in the A350 (for which, by the way, some workaround scripts exist which make SID/STAR usage easier). But if you really want to fly a detailed Airbus, you need to stick with FSX/P3D for now.

I would be happy with a modern airliner which can import a flightplan from PFPX and fly from A to B with standard procedures like SID/STARs without fiddling.

Just wathing this:

 

 

And maybe I will just try it?!

A350 or A330 or FF 767... this is the question. 

 

What else does he use in this video, because it looks quite good. Nice clouds... He talks about Real Terra haze?

 

 

And maybe I will just try it?!
A350 or A330 or FF 767... this is the question.

 

The 767 is the most complex rendition of these three, and I prefer Boeing anyway. Also, PFPX has a 767 profile and the FF 767 can read PFPX' export if you export it in "Airbus Extended" format and then copy the resulting file to the 767's flight plan folder. It can then simply be loaded as company router.

 

Just note that since the recent two updates (a few weeks ago) some users seem to have some problems with the 767. Others, on the other hand, say it works just fine. Maybe you want to check out this thread first.

 

 

But the 767 is not the most modern airliner -- so maybe even the IXEG 737 is an option?

Well in your case I would say the Boeing 767 or the IXEG 737. JARDesign planes work more or less ok, for many people, but sometimes you really find quirks that stay the same.

 

The Flight Factor A350 has the same problem as the QPAC A320 and the GW A330. They all depend in their Avionics on the same guy, an airbus engineer who writes them in his spare time.