tonywob

Now the cat is out of the bag!

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, GoranM said:

ATC

https://www.pilotedge.net/

Flight Planners.  There are several.

Yes, but I said built-in stuff, i.e. in the program, as a part of the cost (which is a not inconsiderable 60 quid, that is to say about the same as a p3d academic licence and three times the cost of FSX-SE, both of which offer all that functionality by default). So, not payware or subscription functions, not least because I am not intersted in a subscription service. Even FS2002 has ATC and IFR flight planning built in for chrissakes and that was nearly 20 years ago.

With regard to payware flight planners and such for X-Plane, most of them are not that great, I know, I've tried them and bought a couple which I thought might do the job. Goodway is about the best of the bunch but one still has to try to get it to gel with the ATC, which ain't that great and frequently vectors you into terrain. JARDesign's functions for ATC and flight planning are severely limited and often won't let you create or file a plan to an airport which isn't on a very limited list of ones approved for it, for example, it will not let me file plans to LEAM, and that is one of the major tourist destination airports in Andalusia, so we are not talking somewhere obscure here, numerous major European airlines operate from there.

Crank up even an old version of FS and simply type in departure and destination airports, choose IFR low or high altitude routing and click 'find route' and bob's yer uncle, it is done and ATC will direct that flight, all built in, takes maybe ten seconds. Now it's not perfect, but it is at least in there and works, easily. What is so difficult about sticking something like that in X-Plane so i can operate my (amazingly impressive, in fact probably my favourite flight sim aircraft of all time) Flight Factor's A350 properly?

Developers such as Flight Factors knock the ball right out of the park and are every bit as good as anything FSL or PMDG have ever done, yet they are stuck in a sim which lets them down massively in terms of supporting functionality. I wouldn't be saying that if it were not true and everybody knows it, for if it were not true, heavy metal simmers would be moving to X-Plane in droves, because it has so many good features too, such as proper terrain following runways etc, which make the FS ones look like a joke.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Come on, Alan.  Are you seriously going to tell me that default ATC in FS2002 was...good?  You've got to give me a little more credit than that.  Even default FSX ATC was garbage.  The couple of times I tried it, I was getting vectored into all kinds of zig zag patterns and I still have nightmares about Orbit Airlines.  

Ever since I discovered Vatsim, I never even thought about permanently going back to default ATC for ANY sim.  Now with Pilot Edge, ATC is extremely realistic.  I've even heard some of the guys on Pilot Edge are real world ATC controllers who do Pilot Edge to practise keeping their vectoring sharp.

 

 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recently stated that XP and FSW would be the front runners in the flight sim race, but now I see that P3Dv4 has autogen out to the horizon.

For me, (GA and Heli Flying), the ground aspect is very important. XP's 3D world has been unmatched (IMO) until now.

In an instant, XP (to me) is now seriously falling way behind in the LOD spectrum.

XP does not have autogen out to the horizon, nor do they have clouds out to the horizon, P3Dv4 now has both!

I still only fly XP10 (waiting for a more stable XP11 release) and I have very simple needs (SR22 and helis are all that I fly). I may have to switch back to P3Dv4 before committing to XP11. I think that XP is far ahead in many aspects (3D world, lighting, water etc), but autogen and clouds to the horizon (with smooth performance) is something that can't be overlooked!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not saying it is perfect by any stretch, and personally I use Pro ATC X, EFB etc for all that malarkey in FS, but what I am saying is that it is there, and if one doesn't want to use it, then there are a plethora of payware choices which are excellent alternatives. Not so with X-Plane, either built in or payware, the stuff just isn't there, believe I've tried to find it. If there was some stuff like that for X-Plane, then all those many FS users who have spent years asking the likes of PMDG to make a 757 and a 767 would be over to X-Plane in seconds, because it has a superb 757 and a superb 767, 777, A320, 737, 727, CRJ etc all good to go right now, and most of those blow anything FS or P3D has out of the water.

All it takes is LR to either collar a TPD to make some ATC and planning stuff like that for XP, or do it themselves and they've cracked it, that's why I said it was a no brainer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me it would be better generic visuals in terms of having high end regional ground textures supported by a good variety of regional buildings, houses, vegitation and other autogen structures. Orbx would have provided this, but unfortunately for the XP consumer base, Austin had to be a total jerk to John Venema at Orbx and publicly scold him on some prior comments that John had made, to which John promptly ended his plans to work on the much needed enhancements to XP. I feel many people lost out on that, but at least Austin got to proclaim how great XP11 was.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Making some very bold statements there, Alan.  Let's just keep it safe and agree to disagree.  I've been making add ons for X Plane, full time, since 2009.  I've seen a LOT on this side of the fence when it comes to choices developers make.  Things that would make you cringe.  But i won't get into that here.  

The market is there for FSX, P3D and X Plane.  You mentioned PMDG.  PMDG are FSX developers.  They're good at it.  I won't say they're not good at developing for X Plane.  They're just not AS good at developing for X Plane as they are for FSX.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, MikeT707 said:

For me it would be better generic visuals in terms of having high end regional ground textures supported by a good variety of regional buildings, houses, vegitation and other autogen structures. Orbx would have provided this, but unfortunately for the XP consumer base, Austin had to be a total jerk to John Venema at Orbx and publicly scold him on some prior comments that John had made, to which John promptly ended his plans to work on the much needed enhancements to XP. I feel many people lost out on that, but at least Austin got to proclaim how great XP11 was.

Austin was a jerk???  You do know John said X Plane had no future.  Austin had no idea that John said that until it resurfaced not long ago.  And even after he found out, he said he didn't understand why John would say that, and he went on to say that ANY developer was welcome to develop for X Plane. 

Austin is one of the kindest, most generous  and welcoming people you could ever meet.  For John to make those statements about Austin's life's work was way out of line.  I'd re-evaluate who the jerk is in this situation.

  • Upvote 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Boomer said:

so that the commercial airliner environment is simulated.

Do you have a shortcut on your keyboard which you can just press whenever you need this phrase? ;)

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, GoranM said:

Austin was a jerk???  You do know John said X Plane had no future.  Austin had no idea that John said that until it resurfaced not long ago.  And even after he found out, he said he didn't understand why John would say that, and he went on to say that ANY developer was welcome to develop for X Plane. 

Austin is one of the kindest, most generous  and welcoming people you could ever meet.  For John to make those statements about Austin's life's work was way out of line.  I'd re-evaluate who the jerk is in this situation.

Yes, Austin was a jerk about that specific situation and from a business perspective as the steward of X-Plane made a bad decision to rant like he did. John should have been better behaved as well during his evaluation of xp10, but when he decided to support xp11, Austin should have been grateful to receive support from such a significant player in the third party community. Let's be honest, XP needs help on the visuals and Orbx would have done a great job. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, MikeT707 said:

For me it would be better generic visuals in terms of having high end regional ground textures supported by a good variety of regional buildings, houses, vegitation and other autogen structures. Orbx would have provided this, but unfortunately for the XP consumer base, Austin had to be a total jerk to John Venema at Orbx and publicly scold him on some prior comments that John had made, to which John promptly ended his plans to work on the much needed enhancements to XP. I feel many people lost out on that, but at least Austin got to proclaim how great XP11 was.

Much needed? are you kidding me? have you loaded in well done ortho tiles? they destroy FTX global and that's a fact. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, MikeT707 said:

Austin had to be a total jerk to John Venema at Orbx and publicly scold him on some prior comments that John had made, to which John promptly ended his plans to work on the much needed enhancements to XP

There is no evidence that Austin's comment was the reason for ORBX to withdraw from XP development. And even if it was, it certainly wouldn't shine a favourable light on JV and ORBX as well. My guess is, the reason might have more to do with DRM, but that is just a guess as well.

Apart from that, ORBX's "big R&D commitment" seems to have been the porting of one airport to XP so I certainly wouldn't have expected much from them anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, wiler said:

Much needed? are you kidding me? have you loaded in well done ortho tiles? they destroy FTX global and that's a fact. 

The unfortunate thing about Ortho is the amount of space it consumes, but I am glad this is something that can be done. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trust me, Mike.  Austin does not "need" OrbX.  He does not need to be grateful to OrbX for considering to make scenery for X Plane.  That whole episode was over before it began for Austin.  I promise you, Austin is the type of guy who would have gone out for a burger 5 minutes after he finished talking to JV.  

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, domae001 said:

There is no evidence that Austin's comment was the reason for ORBX to withdraw from XP development. And even if it was, it certainly wouldn't shine a favourable light on JV and ORBX as well. My guess is, the reason might have more to do with DRM, but that is just a guess as well.

Apart from that, ORBX's "big R&D commitment" seems to have been the porting of one airport to XP so I certainly wouldn't have expected much from them anyway.

It is pretty reasonable to believe that Austin's comments got under John's skin to the point where John decided to not move forward with XP, although I am sure he would say otherwise, but from a spectators point of view it sure seemed that way. By the way, if this is the case, I agree with you that it would not shine a favorable light on John and he should have moved forward with Orbx in XP11. I would have loved to have seen what the team could have done to bring high end regional textures, trees, buildings, houses, and other great content. Would have blown FSX/P3D away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, tonywob said:

It's not hard to see that the X-Plane community has grown a lot over the past year, but where do people think X-Plane could go now in order to attract more users and grab some of the market, attract new developers and stay relevant?

Nice post Tony! X-Plane never enjoyed such a market share before, and at the same time never faced such a competition before.

For me the priorities (all equally important IMO) should be:

. Performance improvements. It's a good thing LR is already focusing on this. This will become ever more important in the next years with the expected improvements in VR and a larger adoption rate.

. ATC + AI improvements, in order to have a more lively world adding to the immersion and giving 3rd parties the chance to produce realistic AI traffic in terms of density and routes.

. Environmental effects improvements. Notice I didn't say just "weather effects", but more broadly "environmental effects". X-Plane is still poor in its representation of many environmental effects, not only clouds. Some examples: rain depiction is very poor, snow depiction is very poor, wet pavement (runway, apron) depiction is non-existent, snowy/icy runway depiction is very poor, PBR (e.g. sunlight reflection) is non existent on runways/aprons, water depiction is still poor (e.g. clouds shadows do not influence the sunglare on water). These effects are already present in the competitors (some of them for more than a decade ago) and they add significant immersion in some specific conditions. This is one area where X-Plane lagged behind, and I would be happy to see it improved for the future.

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, tonywob said:

I use other sims for fun and actual flying, but spend a lot of time in X-Plane as a developer.

I think the "curse", if you're working for a platform, is that suspension of disbelief does not work anymore.

For example, I'm implementing a SID/STAR support in the vFlyteAir SR20 at the moment, but I won't be able to enjoy just flying this SR20 for a long time now, because when I see it on my screen, I don't see an aircraft, I just "see" a lot of source code affecting some computer output.

I think if I'd work for P3D development, I'd use X-Plane for re-creation. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MarioDonick said:

I think the "curse", if you're working for a platform, is that suspension of disbelief does not work anymore.

For example, I'm implementing a SID/STAR support in the vFlyteAir SR20 at the moment, but I won't be able to enjoy just flying this SR20 for a long time now, because when I see it on my screen, I don't see an aircraft, I just "see" a lot of source code affecting some computer output.

I think if I'd work for P3D development, I'd use X-Plane for re-creation. :D

If you can use any sim for recreation, my hats off to you.  I haven't flown, for fun, in a flight sim since I started making aircraft.  8 years.  I can say I find it fun when i test aircraft.  But I've never actually sat down and planned a flight since I started doing this for a living.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, GoranM said:

Trust me, Mike.  Austin does not "need" OrbX.  He does not need to be grateful to OrbX for considering to make scenery for X Plane.  That whole episode was over before it began for Austin.  I promise you, Austin is the type of guy who would have gone out for a burger 5 minutes after he finished talking to JV.  

The point is not if Austin needs Orbx. The point is Austin is the steward of XP for the user community and that carries some accountability to those who use it. There are many people who hold flight simming as an important part of their life and it can matter greatly to them. Maybe for some people XP helps them get through a difficult time in their life, maybe it helps keep them away from drinking, maybe it gives them some purpose in later years, etc. As the steward of this experience for many, many people, it would be good of him to treat it in a manner that he is doing something for a greater common good rather than just something that he does for himself and does not care if people like it or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's 1AM here, Mike.  So forgive me if I misunderstand you.  But Austin doesn't care if a developer or simmer doesn't like his product.  If a developer, states in an interview, in a public forum, such as a magazine, that X Plane has no future, then he'd better be prepared for backlash.  Austin didn't say a word because, frankly, he didn't even know what was said.  I'm not sure what more you would have wanted him to say, other than what he said   "All developers are welcome to X Plane."

He wasn't angry.  He was more surprised at John and what was said.  A reputable figure in the community, saying something so stupid.  But he certainly wasn't going to beg him to make scenery for X plane.  And to clarify something...from what I saw, it was the X Plane community that was laughing at how John NOW wants to make scenery for X Plane.  They were relentless!  And they made sure JV remembered what he said 3 years ago.  That, I think, is why JV quit X Plane.  

As far as the general simming public, and Austin's attitude...I think you're going deeper than is necessary here.  Austin made a flight sim.  He's not responsible for the reasons people choose to use his product.  If they like it, great.  He'll offer support.  He'll improve it.  He'll even communicate with people sometimes.  He's done it before.  But he won't lose sleep over people not liking it.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i use Xplane since v10 come out

i build cockpits either for myself or friends that ask to make one for them; GA type 

Xplane since v 10 has become along with p3d the sim i always load into the systems.  It is fantastic when flew on cockpits; even without addons. It is updated constantly and is Laminar hard work  there to be seen in V 11.

What i would really like to see in V 11 is the possibility to drag windows out of main monitor  -  this way we can make the touch screen usable with clickable instruments such the Gtn 750.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GoranM said:

If you can use any sim for recreation, my hats off to you.  I haven't flown, for fun, in a flight sim since I started making aircraft.  8 years.  I can say I find it fun when i test aircraft.  But I've never actually sat down and planned a flight since I started doing this for a living.

That's one of the unfortunate pitfalls of turning a hobby or interest into a job. I've known plenty of people who've ended up finding that one out to their dismay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lots of interesting reading in this thread; love the topic.

There's plenty I would like to see in X-Plane, some of that is stuff I currently see in FSX/P3D. But the other way around applies too - there's plenty that I see in X-Plane that I would like to see in FSX/P3D. Neither sim is 100% perfect for me personally.

Ideally, I would like to see a more 'alive' world in terms of airports & aircraft. If I think back on some of my most stand-out flight simulation experiences, one of the highlights was quite a few years ago in FS9: I was on a serious AI kick, having downloaded, tweaked and compiled hundreds of AI flight plans for tons of small Canadian carriers. But the icing on the cake was when I installed a really nice version of CFB Moose Jaw, and setup military AI to fly touch and goes in CT-155 Hawks, and then flew with them in the pattern, interacting with ATC and listening to the other aircraft doing the same. I spent a lot of hours doing just that - flying patterns and touch and goes at CFB Moose Jaw, all the while with a big silly grin on my face.

The point I'm making is that you can have hyper realistic scenery, as well as a perfectly replicated aircraft, but it still can feel a bit empty without a living world to exist in.

To make a bit more of a point form list however:

- I'd like VFR capable ATC.

- I'd like AI that can be setup to fly schedules, flight plans, touch and goes, patterns.

- Better pilot tracking & activities, but without gamification. This is a tricky one, I think. I love the idea of the sim keeping track of your pilot activity, showing flight history, hours flown, various stats, etc. The problem is that it's far too tempting for developers to turn that into a 'game', as in, earn these XP points, don't get these penalties, etc. The same goes for stuff to do in the sim. I really enjoyed some of the ideas behind Flight's missions and aerocaches - giving me stuff to do in the sim is great - but I don't like when it's gamified too far. I think a random flight generator as a part of the sim could easily be within reach, and done in a way that could simply provide something interesting to do, without being part of a game.

- More default resources. This means more AI aircraft paints & types to allow for a wider variety, maybe even regional specific. And more scenery objects! I'm a big believer in the Gateway airport project, having spent a lot of time contributing. However, I have quit for the time being. I'm simply getting too tired of trying to shoehorn in the same various buildings and objects, often things that aren't intended to be airport buildings, into creative arrangements to LOOK like airport buildings. LR has this extensive facade system in place, yet it remains underutilized. Three or four hangar facades that could work for small, individual aircraft hangars would absolutely revolutionize the Gateway airport scene.

1 hour ago, MarioDonick said:

I think if I'd work for P3D development, I'd use X-Plane for re-creation. :D

Indeed - I have the same issues in reverse! I do enough 'work' stuff in the FSX/P3D world that I turn to X-Plane for my actual fun.

 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess to be competitive XP needs a new weather engine, and better cloud rendering.  (Especially a way to adjust cloud puffs/volume like in XP10 - no clouds I can get 60 fps...  clouds = half that or less).  And also there are a lot of tube liner pilots on P3D  - XP needs more developers doing those.  They're pretty boring to me (GA here!) but I'd love some bizjets (DDENN where's your Global ha?).  And we've said it many times... seasons...  one way or another...seasons!

Honestly I'm going to get P3D v4 - so I can enjoy my orbx stuff I bought for v2/3 that I couldn't really enjoy because of OOM's.  However I will still be flying XP11 - for the majority of my sim time.  Nothing beats Ortho4xp for enjoying scenery!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll also be picking up P3D v4 (Probably a week or so after release) because I can use all my ORBX stuff in it for free, otherwise I probably would have given it a miss. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

VR support. But we know this is coming soon

So long as its there when the VR hardware can deliver 1080p and under 700USD I agree.

Quote

Better weather depiction. I'd like to see more complex weather supported.

Yep - moving weather depictions. Hopefully some NGO/Academic Research/Philanthropic Industry Giant will develop an open-access cloud-based global real-time weather modelling engine in a few years (seems inevitable at some stage) that software including X-Plane can leverage to depict it.

Quote

Better addon scenery.

Yes but I'd qualify that by saying not at the expense of the home brew scenery culture X-Plane has now. For example, X-Plane had some amazing talents pushing the envelope in plane development back in the late noughties who are now all but forgotten (XB-70 Valkyrie anyone). A wave of emigres from the "other" sim came along and the spirit changed, despite the clear legacy owed to those originally pushing the envelope. It would be unfortunate to see the same thing happen with scenery creation. Turn scenery creation into a market and it'll be driven by marketers... just saying.

Quote

Ability to customise the mesh locally per airport.

Agree here too. Even given the 1˚ tile restriction, it should be possible at some level as you say, to patch modified data into the tile generation process so localised areas of landform can be of higher fidelity.

Quote

 

Multi-platform. I'm happy it works on Mac OS X and Windows. It also runs on Linux, but many devs don't release Linux addons

 

The reason it runs on OSX is the only reason I started using it in the first place (many years ago). Apple's hardware decisions in the last decade or so and the increasing demands of the sim have made that a difficult proposition but there are signs of this changing (more customisable Pro line machines). 

Quote

The freeware community. Just look at the tools and scenery available for the sim, for free. The airport gateway is a huge success, and it's great to see people adding their own airports for inclusion into the base sim.

True

Quote

Laminar Research. This one might seem strange, but I like their enthusiasm (especially Austin's). The developer blog is always interesting to read, and it's great that users can interact with the developers and get their feedback heard. LR are pretty open on what they are working on

And true...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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