This is why I'm using XPlane 90% of the time

[gpf3m 41]

I happily use both titles.  I look forward to any improvements of both as it will enhance and improve our flight sim experience.  I could never understand the bickering between the two.  Both benefit us all.

[Boomer 1,619]

4 hours ago, Henry Street said:

Thomas,

Your post is a great summation of the positives in the current state of XPlane. And, your experience with other sims, including Prepar3D, adds a great deal of credibility to your opinion. 

If I might, your bias is the same as any other flight simmer's....you are not using the sim(s) in the same flight profiles/addon combos/aircraft features as EVERYONE else. Your fear of starting a flame war is, unfortunately, a valid one because of this bias that EVERY simmer has, to some degree or another.

This is not a criticism of your post as much as it is a criticism of the community as a whole. 

I, for one, am a member of a very small flight sim community that prefers modern USNavy aircraft, scenery, and flight profiles. How would you assess the various sims for my usage? Do you even know of what I speak?

Again, thanks for what is a very good analysis of the current XPlane positives. 

Have fun and keep writing, you have a good perspective.

I too fly the vrs rhino in p3dv4 and thats the only viable option between p3d and xp,

[OzWhitey 3,353]

I’ve been P3D exclusive since v1 first came out, and like the OP have spent a very solid amout of money on addons.

I bought X-plane 9, 10,and 11 on release but never bonded with them. However, I gave x-plane 11 another go about a month ago, and haven’t been back to P3D since.

I miss the old girl, but x-plane is doing a better job of providing a smooth, modern simulation experience right now.

If P3D provide me with a better sim than x-plane in the future, i’ll be straight back. But for now. X-plane is my sim of choice.

ortho +zibo/aerobask + VR = brilliant flight experience

Edited April 13, 2018 by OzWhitey

[John_Cillis 2,406]

One can get an idea of my P3DV4.2 performance from my video just posted and recorded today in the videos forum, using my free GEForce video capture with the latest drivers installed.  I have made no Nvidia tweaks, just used the settings provided in P3D, max graphics except for AI and autogen which of course cannot overlay photoreal scenery.  The photoreal scenery I made with FSEarthtiles.

John

 

[avgaskoolaid 292]

5 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

If you are going to post how great Chevrolet is, posting on a Ford forum is probably not the best idea in the world. 

This isn't the P3D forum, this is the non-specific hangar chat forum. Posting about how great Chevrolets are in a forum about cars in general is perfectly acceptable. 

Edited April 13, 2018 by hmn434

[Bobsk8 12,533]

1 hour ago, hmn434 said:

This isn't the P3D forum, this is the non-specific hangar chat forum. Posting about how great Chevrolets are in a forum about cars in general is perfectly acceptable. 

This thread started in the P3D forum which is where I posted my comment to it. . Wake up. 

[avgaskoolaid 292]

1 hour ago, Bobsk8 said:

This thread started in the P3D forum which is where I posted my comment to it. . Wake up. 

No need to be rude. When I came here it was in the hangar chat forum and I had no way of knowing where it was before or even that it was moved in the first place. 

Edited April 14, 2018 by hmn434

[GSalden 4,655]

FSX

P3Dv4

P3Dv4

P3Dv4

P3Dv4 ( haze & raleigh scattering )

[carlito777 712]

Nice shots. But (stock) X-Plane with Ortho4XP still looks way better. 

And what did it cost you to get your P3D to look like that? 

Edited April 14, 2018 by carlito777

[anden145 2,283]

25 minutes ago, carlito777 said:

Nice shots. But (stock) X-Plane with Ortho4XP still looks way better. 

 

You forgot to add "... in my opinion.".

Edited April 14, 2018 by Anders Bermann

[GSalden 4,655]

1 hour ago, carlito777 said:

Nice shots. But (stock) X-Plane with Ortho4XP still looks way better. 

And what did it cost you to get your P3D to look like that? 

I don’t agree with you. When looking in the distance in reality you will see haze and raleigh scattering . The XP screenshot does not show that. All is clear and too saturated.

It does look very nice but not like in reality. My focus is on a real look, even when it makes it less nice to see..

However , what you like for your system is what counts ...

 

Edited April 14, 2018 by GSalden

[pete_auau 1,152]

3 hours ago, carlito777 said:

Nice shots. But (stock) X-Plane with Ortho4XP still looks way better. 

And what did it cost you to get your P3D to look like that? 

Does  it  really  matter  too  you  what  Gerard  has  spent  on his  hobby

[hs118 707]

Over 90% of my sim flying is done in Southern California. No matter what kind of aircraft you fly in this region, you deal with marine layer clouds. 

Can any XPlane users out there post a screenshot of marine layer from any version of XPlane?

[LRBS 943]

4 hours ago, GSalden said:

I don’t agree with you. When looking in the distance in reality you will see haze and raleigh scattering . 

My focus is on a real look, even when it makes it less nice to see..

 

My point of view as a real world piot based on what we see is that most of the time there is no "haze and raleigh scattering" unless it happens to be in China, (PVG, ZSG, HKG etc), India  or certain places in US like NY, SFO, LAX etc.

If you look carefully at the pictures during day time you will notice that except the first one, all suffer from blurries, short load visual radius (autogen draw distance) and transition from vegetation, buildings it's not blending smooth.

Night time pictures look wonderful because you don't see the ground detail.

The other problem is the scenery objects draw distance (load radius) which is somewhere limited to 13 to 15 NM, that creates this  ground textures blurries. Textures are not sharp and blending is not smooth towards the end of that distance. Even you play with the TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP values you get the same results.

A perfect example which I'm very familiar with and fly it a few times during a month is the IGN arrival into KJFK, after passing LENDY  abm TEB you start getting vectors (that's about 18 to 20 NM from JFK) at that point if is clear you can see JFK airport surroundings and rwys.

Not on P3D unfortunately due to the short load radius.

Of course a fog layer or a 20 NM visibility will hide that, but it's not always foggy or 20 NM vis.   

[sidfadc 1,340]

Thanks for the replies guys very interesting seeing others opinion.

In addition to my OP I just get a smoother more consistent flight experience with XP right now compared to P3D.  The only paid for add on content I have spent so far is the following....

FFA320

Aerobask Pipistrel Panthera

Flytampa LGKR

UK2000 EGCC and EGKK

Every other add on is free and like I say if you compare that to the thousands I’ve spent on FSX P3D it’s quite a stark contrast.

As mentioned before XP is seriously missing a decent weather engine and I am prepared to pay for that.  I also have my wallet open ready for ORBX TruEarth regions so the expense will increase further.