FSW and XP11???

[Dillon 2,197]

This morning I decided to fire up FS9 after a time away from it.  My preferred sim is P3D.  FS9 after all this time still provides more locations to fly to/from by the shire volume of freeware payware available for it than any other option.  After takeoff on the way to cruise flying iFly's 737-700 I looked around at Rex clouds, the real world weather, Contrals Pro jetliner traffic in the distance, and the constant ATC traffic over the Chicago area.  I was like wow this sim still has an emersion factor after all these years.  Granted my setup is all tricked out.  

My question is if it was just scenery and the aircraft, how is that superior to even a flawed release like FSW?  FS9 today would beat FLIGHT (even if the whole world was covered) if all it had was scenery and well modeled airplanes.  FSW (if they back off the forceful Steam distribution so the open freeware/payware market can help push the sim) has the potential to be a great addition to our hobby.  If it retains FSX's default ATC, AI engine (for Ultimate Traffic 3 development), ability to incorporate products like ActiveSky for real world weather I can't see a sim like XPlane ever topping that until an active world around the user experience is addressed in XPlane.

When using XP11 what do you guys do on approach to a major international airport, imagine ATC is talking you into the pattern?  Do you imagine the weather is changing as you fly from one destination to another?  Do you not look down over under developed parts of the world as you go from one location to another (missing city/towns, wrong costal lines, etc)?  The real world (especially airline operations) is a live environment all around.  Aerofly and XPlane have yet to simulate this.  FSW is on it's way with a few things to sort out but it's still a full simulator like P3D.  I can't understand this condemnation of FSW from a segment of simmers if your alternative is a pretty face with no interaction.  A sim can have great scenery and awesome FDE modeling of aircraft but a true sim is so much more.  This is not meant as a put down to XP11 simmers I just feel they should be the last ones to criticize any full featured sim, especially one just released.  More so be in Laminar's forums expressing frustration after all these years XPlane 'still' doesn't have these basic functions.

[Bobsk8 12,679]

I agree with you, but if your post ever find's it's way to the XP forum, be prepared to be called every name in the book, starting with Troll.... LOL...Been there, seen that. They don't do well with any kind of constructive criticism. 

[Murmur 3,941]

I can't really understand this post. It seems to suggest that the criticisms to FSW come only from XP users, whereas the most criticisms I've read come from P3D or FSX users. So, why are you bringing XP in this topic?

Then, you repeat the usual fallacy that is very common here: the presumption that there is only a right way to use a flight simulator (of course the way in which the writer uses it), and the presumption that the immersion is an objective thing depending on a fixed set of features.

Not every person is interested in following SOP on a complex airliners, so not every person judges immersion by how realistic is ATC or some other specific features. Maybe some people may prefer VFR GA flying, or helicopters, or some other type of flying.

And even then, each of them may put different priorities on different features that a specific flight sim offers, so he may find more immersion in FSX, or in P3D, or in X-Plane, or in AeroflyFS.

Maybe ATC and realistic AI schedules are essential priorities for him, so he'll choose FSX or P3D. Maybe utter smoothness and VR integration is a priority for him, so he'll choose AeroflyFS 2. Maybe he has other priorities, and he'll choose X-Plane or another flight sim.

Mind you, my criticism also applies to those other people criticizing FSW just because it doesn't fit how they use a flight simulator.

[Murmur 3,941]

[hhbrbg 137]

16 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

I agree with you, but if your post ever find's it's way to the XP forum, be prepared to be called every name in the book, starting with Troll.... LOL...Been there, seen that. They don't do well with any kind of constructive criticism. 

Hi,

you wrote "They don't do well with any kind of constructive criticism."

Maybe THEY don't appreciate generalizations?

Tom

 

[Bobsk8 12,679]

5 minutes ago, hhbrbg said:

Hi,

you wrote "They don't do well with any kind of constructive criticism."

Maybe THEY don't appreciate generalizations?

Tom

 

Almost everything I say is very specific, like saying that your comment just now is absurd.  Is that clear enough for you? 

[Guest]

43 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

I agree with you, but if your post ever find's it's way to the XP forum, be prepared to be called every name in the book, starting with Troll.... LOL...Been there, seen that. They don't do well with any kind of constructive criticism. 

I swear, the day P3Dv4 releases I'll jump on every single P3D topic and tell everybody who doesn't want to hear it how much I dislike it after trying it for 10 hours. (And I am sure I'll find plenty of things to dislike in stock P3D...) And then I'll complain about the P3D "######" calling me a troll.

EDIT: the #####-word was boysfan in reverse, btw.

EDIT2: spelling...

 

1 hour ago, Dillon said:

When using XP11 what do you guys do on approach to a major international airport, imagine ATC is talking you into the pattern?

1. I concentrate on flying the airplane without having to fear OOMs like I always had to in FSX... ;-)

2. I concentrate on flying the approach assigned to me by 124thATC.

3. I concentrate on making minor corrections, which is actually possible for me in XP, because in FSX my FPS would always dip into the 15-20 range making detailed flying very difficult.

4. I concentrate on managing the airplane, which is possible thanks to the great EZDOK-style native view system in XP11.

5. I look forward to assessing my landing via the native replay systems, which actually works without crashing the sim.

6. I enjoy the view outside to houses which are actually placed along roads, not on top of them.

7. I enjoy the great lighting which guides me to the airport.

etc., etc.

Yes, XP could be more lively in certain regards and still lacks in addons in certain areas, but it has major advantages and is very enjoyable for me even in an airliner environment.

 

Edited May 21, 2017 by domae001

[Bobsk8 12,679]

2 minutes ago, domae001 said:

I swear, the day P3Dv4 releases I'll jump on every single P3D topic and tell everybody who doesn't want to here it how much I dislike it after trying it for 10 hours. (And I am sure I'll find plenty of things to dislike in stock P3D...) And then I'll complain about the P3D "######" calling me a troll.

 

 

 

Looking forward to that.. 

[Paraffin 2,197]

Okay, first, I don't believe in "sim wars," because it's not constructive.

I do think it's important to respect the fact that we don't all fly the same way, or want the same things in a flight simulation. You're also making some incorrect assumptions about features missing in XP. To answer your questions:

Quote

When using XP11 what do you guys do on approach to a major international airport, imagine ATC is talking you into the pattern?

I don't fly into many major international airports. Almost all my flying is in the FSEconomy game, which is not aimed at scheduled airline ops. It's more a charter operation with GA planes (and helicopters). I do occasionally fly into a major airport in FSE, but most of the juicy assignments are in smaller GA airports that are often uncontrolled, or just a grass strip somewhere. Where there is no ATC in the real world, it's kind of hard to miss it in the sim. 

Quote

Do you imagine the weather is changing as you fly from one destination to another?

X-Plane supports real weather injection in the base sim, and also in the two weather plugins I have. So I'm always seeing changing weather, depending on the update interval I have set for weather injection.

Quote

Do you not look down over under developed parts of the world as you go from one location to another (missing city/towns, wrong costal lines, etc)? 

The scenery in XP11 is based on real-world GIS data for terrain, and Open Street Map data for streets and buildings. The OSM data is constantly updated to reflect the real world. If a new street is built in my home town, it will eventually show up in an update.

So I'm not sure what you're talking about here, unless it's the old orthophoto vs. landclass + autogen argument, where I just prefer the latter method for "plausible" scenery that reflects changing lighting and day/night cycles better than orthophotos..

Quote

I can't understand this condemnation of FSW from a segment of simmers if your alternative is a pretty face with no interaction

Suggesting where a sim is lacking and needs improvement is not the same thing as condemnation. If that's the case, then I've been condemning X-Plane for years, because the weather system is too basic. It needs improving, that's all.

As far as a "pretty face with no interaction," well, I'm a bush pilot and helicopter pilot in the sim. I like flying in the mountains, so my need for interaction is satisfied by dealing with difficult weather and the challenges of mountain flying at low level.

I hope this helps in understanding why some of us flying XP are willing to be patient, and either wait for better built-in ATC, or just not care about it that much. Your other comments about changing weather and scenery accuracy simply aren't true.

Edited May 21, 2017 by Paraffin

[yidahoo 365]

There's some deeply insecure people in this hobby of ours

[188AHC 2,138]

This has descended into another battleground of opinions. We have enough topics that satisfy that category now.