Has anyone moved from FSX to Xplane?

[MarioDonick 752]

 

 

Good to me is a well rounded and complete package, take example PMDG, Aerosoft or FSLabs. Those are good examples on what I'm basing my opinions on or when comparing between XPX and FSX/P3D.

 

Okay, I see. So when you say "good aircraft are lacking", you basically mean "good modern glass cockpit airliners are lacking", but your statement is not meant to be read as an overall judgement about all aircraft available for X-Plane? Or are you assuming that because you don't find good modern airliners that the situation must be the same for other types of aircraft?

 

 

It's by the way also interesting that you always mention the Aerosoft (Airbus, I guess) with PMDG and FSLabs, esp. since the Aerosoft Airbus received a lot of criticism over the years (and now even more, since the FSLabs one is available). A very nice discussion about this (German language) is here: http://www.simflight.de/2016/08/24/flightsimlabs-a320-shop-nun-dauerhaft-geoeffnet/#comment-37012

 

Some of the statements in this discussion say (I translate freely): "The AS Airbus was a nice placeholder (...) but people who feel at home in the NGX, the Q400 or the LHS Maddog had no equivalent in terms of Airbus" (link) or "For a flight from A to B in Airbus look the AS Bus is totally okay. The sound, the feeling etc are great and if you don't click wildly in the FMGS, nothing bad will happen. But the FSL is a much deeper simulation." (link)

 

I can't judge if these statements are correct, but such statements give me the impression that even in your "good" category there seems to be a difference. (That's why I asked you if you make a difference between "good" and "very good", but apparently your three examples are on one level?)

 

 

Please note that my questions are not rhetoric. I'm seriously interested to understand how people think in this regard.

[ErichB 3,651]

Please note that my questions are not rhetoric. I'm seriously interested to understand how people think in this regard.

You are making this far more complicated than it needs to be. It is not complicated at all.

 

The bottom line is that XPlane is not as user friendly or sim pilot friendly as the FSX/P3D based platform.

 

As a general commentary it's much more hit and miss and inconsistant. On the FSX/P3D platforms you can choose a variety of flight scenarios and for each of those scenarios, you have a solid aircraft of choice which can deliver a great simulated experience consistantly and effortlessly. You cannot do that with XP at this stage - and have never been able to. It's becoming better, but it is still very niche.

 

With all due respect, it is not a difficult thought process at all.

[GoranM 3,799]

You are making this far more complicated than it needs to be. It is not complicated at all.

 

The bottom line is that XPlane is not as user friendly or sim pilot friendly as the FSX/P3D based platform.

 

As a general commentary it's much more hit and miss and inconsistant. On the FSX/P3D platforms you can choose a variery of flight scenarios and for each of those scnarios have a solid aircraft platform which can deliver a great simulated experience consistantly and effortlessly. You cannot do that with XP at this stage and have never been able to. It's becoming better, but it is still very niche.

 

With all due respect, it is not a difficult thought process at all.

Funny you should mention this.  I was a die hard FSX user pre 2009.  Went to X-Plane and never went back to FSX...until as recently as 2-3 days ago.  When I fired it up, I was completely and utterly lost.  Didn't know how to zoom, until I saw I had to press a combination of 3 buttons to zoom in and zoom out (in X-Plane, I use the scroll wheel).  

So, in this regard, I found X-Plane to be far, far more user friendly.

 

Look, it's obvious you, as well as many others LOOOOVE FSX.  And that's ok.  No one is telling you NOT to love it.  But coupling that with statements like "There are no good aircraft for X-Plane and that's why I won't buy it" is kinda silly.  Are you saying PMDG's DC6 isn't "good"?  I think you'll find a lot of people will disagree with you.  And it might actually be the very first time someone has said they didn't like something PMDG have made.

[MarioDonick 752]

 

 

You are making this far more complicated than it needs to be. It is not complicated at all.

 

Oh, but you need to consider my multiple perspectives on this topic. I wrote my PhD thesis about user experience (and X-Plane was one of my examples), and for a big part of the working week I write reviews, co-develop X-Plane aircraft, write user manuals and do X-Plane customer support, it can be very helpful to understand in detail how people think about these questions, excatly because of

 

 

 

sim pilot friendly as the FSX/P3D based platform.

 

and

 

 

 

solid aircraft platform which can deliver a great simulated experience consistantly and effortlessly

 

What is solid? What factors exactly make a great simulated experience for the majority of users? I know the people in forums are mostly on the "serious" side of the spectrum, but I also know from customer support and user feedback that a LOT of people play FSX and X-Plane as a simple game, and are happy for years with simple freeware aircraft. It's just important for me to know for whom I write reviews (for FS MAGAZIN, I know that partly, but when I continue with my blog, that's maybe a different population), or how much to take these people into account when creating avionics, etc.

 

(I know I could simply do a questionnaire for hopefully getting a high-enough number of participants for significant results, but qualitative statements are a good start for any further investigations.)

[ErichB 3,651]

But coupling that with statements like "There are no good aircraft for X-Plane and that's why I won't buy it" is kinda silly. Are you saying PMDG's DC6 isn't "good"? I think you'll find a lot of people will disagree with you

No that is not what I said at all.

 

The point I was making is that whether you want to fly a relatively large variety of good GA, (Large/Small), a relatively large variety of airliners (Large/Small) in almost any part of the world, the P3D platform offers both a solid aircraft choice and a great selection of scenery to do just that.

 

In XP, you have a choice of a fantastic DC-6 or a equally fantastic classic 737. That's really it, Everything I've seen has had anomalies, issues or bugs. XP also has a poorly developed weather environment (the very environment in which flying takes place) Additionally XP offers great scenery - but confined to limited and small areas. It's not exactly an amazing summary

 

Which ever way you slice the cake, P3D is a much more complete, predictable and enjoyable experience and caters for almost any destination you'd like to fly to. The take-up from the development community has just not been that great for XP - and the development community is what makes or breaks a sim platform ultimately.

 

It really all comes down to the subjective experience of the user, and as far as numbers go the XP platform hasn't yet managed to capture the undivided attention of the general sim user.

 

I hope that changes

[GoranM 3,799]

No that is not what I said at all.

 

The point I was making is that whether you want to fly a relatively large variety of good GA, (Large/Small), a relatively large variety of airliners (Large/Small) in almost any part of the world, the P3D platform offers both a solid aircraft choice and a great selection of scenery to do just that.

 

In XP, you have a choice of a fantastic DC-6 or a equally fantastic classic 737. That's really it, Everything I've seen has had anomalies, issues or bugs. XP also has a poorly developed weather environment (the very environment in which flying takes place) Additionally XP offers great scenery - but confined to limited and small areas. It's not exactly an amazing summary

 

Which ever way you slice the cake, P3D is a much more complete, predictable and enjoyable experience and caters for almost any destination you'd like to fly to. The take-up from the developement community has just not been that great for XP - and the developemnt community is what makes or breaks a sim platform ultimately.

 

It really all comes down to the subjective experience of the user, and as far as numbers go the XP platform hasn't yet managed to capture the undevided attention of the general sim user.

 

I hope that changes

 

So, as far as you're concerned, X Plane only has 2 aircraft that are worthy.  The DC-6 and the IXEG 737.  Everything else is, forgive me for putting words in your mouth, mediocre.  

Thanks for your input. 

[Bidartarra 39]

I comes down to user preferences at the end of the day.

P3d doesn't offer the ability to inject real weather out of the box, you have to throw another $40 if you want it. To me it's a big shortcoming that Xplane doesn't have.

I work at an airport, the runways are quite sloped, I see it every day, the same runways are hopelessly flat in p3d, it kills the immersion for me. They are not in Xplane and I love it.

That being said I share my time between both sims mainly because I love the Majestic Q400 so much.

[CFIJose 5,485]

am I right in thinking that if you are flying at a high altitude you become aware of the clouds not extending to the horizon but only a short distance around the aircraft?

With SMP/RWC & FSGRW, I've seen overcast clouds extend to the horizon. The freeware Ventura plugin reduces visibility for better performance, but if you want AS16 with soft clouds results, only FSX/P3D is your only option.

[Colonel X 1,435]

Which ever way you slice the cake, P3D is a much more complete, predictable and enjoyable experience and caters for almost any destination you'd like to fly to.

 

I think the big point is predictability. In P3D, you get what you expect. It is consistent on many levels. X-Plane however, lacks this predictability. At one moment, it lets P3D look like a very old toy, in another moment though, it shows its rough edges. It is sort of a mixed bag, and even during a single flight, you may experience its highs and lows. X-Plane needs to improve here.

 

In terms of economics, I predict a huge shift of market share in favor of X-Plane within the next two years. 10.50 really is what 10 should have been, all of it's shortcomings seem to get addressed this year either by Laminar or the community. 11 will be out in this timeframe, and really I don't see how the old sim can hold up. Developers will take note, and I think better payware AC are only a matter of time.

[ErichB 3,651]

I know I could simply do a questionnaire for hopefully getting a high-enough number of participants for significant results, but qualitative statements are a good start for any further investigations.

That would be very interesting.

Everything else is, forgive me for putting words in your mouth, mediocre.

I couldn't say, as I haven't invested in anything else. But in general, the flightsim community (across all platforms) becomes pretty gushy when they find an aircraft worth having. Any 'worthy' aircraft tends to get written about, blogged about, showcased on Youtube, spoken about on Avsim and generally becomes a benchmark. I haven't really come across XP aircraft which have made it to that level other than the DC6 and the 737. I have watched YT videos and commentaries on various XP examples however.

 

I also cannot afford to run two sims. I'm heavily invested in P3D so I probably have built-in bias anyway.

 

It really doesn't matter what I think. These are my opinions after 20 years of simming and (at least) trying to become best buddies with XP. The experience just doesn't do it for me. So in the context of the OP's question, 'Has anyone moved from FSX to XP', I can honestly say that I have tried and failed.

[MarioDonick 752]

In terms of economics, I predict a huge shift of market share in favor of X-Plane within the next two years. 10.50 really is what 10 should have been, all of it's shortcomings seem to get addressed this year either by Laminar or the community. 11 will be out in this timeframe, and really I don't see how the old sim can hold up. Developers will take note

 

Don't write off Dovetail's FSX successor so fast. There's a lot of negative comments about it, but maybe it will not be as bad as people think. (I don't know. I just don't judge about anything before I did not use it for at least a couple of days.)

 

And if the X-Plane 11 release is similar to how it was with X-Plane 9 and X-Plane 10, it will again be a product that will feel unfinished to the majority of potential new users. As a X-Plane user, I know what to expect, and I can live with that; I got used to the constant "never finished" development style. But my assumption is that many current FSX/P3D users will have a look at X-Plane 11 and put it away as soon as they stumble upon shortcomings X-Plane 11 will probably still have compared to their existing FSX/P3D setups. (It would be great if it hadn't shortcomings in the basic areas anymore... if better AI, better ATC, regional autogen, visible seasons, better weather were implemented... but I doubt that all of that will find its way in it right from the start... Looking forward to that big announcement, though...)

[GoranM 3,799]

 

I couldn't say, as I haven't invested in anything else. But in general, the flightsim community (across all platforms) becomes pretty gushy when they find an aircraft worth having. Any 'worthy' aircraft tends to get written about, blogged about, showcased on Youtube, spoken about on Avsim and generally becomes a benchmark. I haven't really come across XP aircraft which have made it to that level other than the DC6 and the 737. I have watched YT videos and commentaries on various XP examples however.

 

I also cannot afford to run two sims. I'm heavily invested in P3D so I probably have built-in bias anyway.

 

It really doesn't matter what I think. These are my opinions after 20 years of simming and (at least) trying to become best buddies with XP. The experience just doesn't do it for me. So in the context or the OP's question, 'Has anyone moved from FSX to XP', I can honestly say that I have tried and failed.

Just a couple of things I'll reply to.  I can tell you there is at least 1 X-Plane add on that is being used by 2 airlines in the US for their flight training.  And it hasn't been mentioned in this thread.  I would have thought you would have come across it in your travels through simdom.

I can definitely agree with you on your bias.  It's human nature.  You've invested too much time and money, and had too much fun with MSFS to couple it with a new platform.  Kind of like taking on a second wife after being married for 20 years.

When you say it really doesn't matter what you think.  You're grossly mistaken.  The flight sim community as a whole matters!  That includes you, and every other person who has ever bought payware.  Developers are trying to get your business and your interest.  And they want to know what you think and how you feel.  What will attract YOU to X-Plane?  What, in YOUR opinion, is missing?  What add ons do YOU want to see?  Not just you, but every person out there.  Some developers make simple add ons.  Others take years and make procedure level aircraft.  If X-Plane doesn't do it for you, hey, stick with FSX.  Whatever floats your boat, my friend.  But, don't do other people a disservice by saying things like, "I've looked around, and haven't seen anything good except the DC6 and the IXEG 737.  If there was anything good, it would have been blogged about, reviewed, on youtube, etc..."

Good in your eyes might mean impossible to learn in someone else's eyes.  

Again, thanks for your input.

[ErichB 3,651]

n terms of economics, I predict a huge shift of market share in favor of X-Plane within the next two years. 10.50 really is what 10 should have been, all of it's shortcomings seem to get addressed this year either by Laminar or the community. 11 will be out in this timeframe, and really I don't see how the old sim can hold up. Developers will take note, and I think better payware AC are only a matter of time.

I agree. And I personally think that a the user interface change being made much more user friendly encoutrage more to try it out

[Humpty 751]

Nice bashing the sims , having fun

[ErichB 3,651]

But, don't do other people a disservice by saying things like, "I've looked around, and haven't seen anything good except the DC6 and the IXEG 737. If there was anything good, it would have been blogged about, reviewed, on youtube, etc..."

But that is still by definition my opinion. People will still choose to investigate further. With a few movements of an index finger they can easily see what I see on YT, blogs, reviews and the like. No disservice done.

When you say it really doesn't matter what you think. You're grossly mistaken. The flight sim community as a whole matters! That includes you, and every other person who has ever bought payware.

Yes of course, but this XP/FSX thing has been going on for as long as I've been flightsimming. Everyone gets to choose what they prefer. My thoughts on XP truly doesn't matter to another user. Your choice, your fun. You fly your IXEG 737 on VATSIM and I'll be behind you with my PMDG 777. We can still have a laugh.

 

Nice bashing the sims , having fun

Simply comparing passionate user opinion. No sim was harmed in the making of these posts.

 

 

I will also be attending the Laminar Research seminar at Cosford Flightsim 2016. Looking forward to the updates.