I agree, both platforms have their strengths and weaknesses when it comes to the flight model and ground physics. To oversimplify things, I would say that in X-Plane it's harder to make a heavy plane feel realistically heavy, and in FSX/P3D it's harder to make a light plane feel realistically light.

9 minutes ago, EGLD said:

That wasn't the point I was making though, it was posed that XP would be "toast" now thanks to FS2020

My point is, unless MS address the reasons people went to XPlane, it won't be toast

True, at least for some people.

Personally, I went to XP for the ortho scenery and ability to fly RNAV approaches with the default GPS. I hate taking off and landing in it though.

Edited June 14, 20196 yr by bonchie

I always thought Dovetail's cancellation of FSW was "bizarre". If indeed Microsoft wanted them to give it back, then that makes sense they would have had to cancel it...

Edited June 14, 20196 yr by raymond66

I'm glad others are mentioning XP's ground physics.

They are abysmal IMO

8 minutes ago, irrics said:

I'm glad others are mentioning XP's ground physics.

They are abysmal IMO

You get used to them with good rudder pedals and tweaking the axis and sensitivities.  Worth it for the "in air" experience to me. I remember the only time FS ever felt like somewhat like an airplane was when the turbulence was dialed up.  In real life GA aircraft, seems there is always some random pitch and yaw without turbulence per se.  I just think XP does this better, even in the CRJ-200 which is my favorite.  I love the LE Saab 340 also, but I don't enjoy starting it up manually every time.

4 minutes ago, CarlHill said:

In real life GA aircraft, seems there is always some random pitch and yaw without turbulence per se.

What planes do you fly in real life that do that?

That's not been my experience over my 25 year GA flying career so far.

 

I like X-Plane and I do think it does a good job of making things somewhat "feel" like flying, especially when trimming out a plane, but I do question the accuracy of that feel.  The planes move around more, no question, but whether any of it is real world accurate or to what degree is up for some subjective debate, per aircraft model, for sure.

 

Replicating real world feel, especially with turbulence, is honestly something I don't personally value too much.  It's never going to "feel like flying" to your body/senses if you aren't in a motion sim anyways.

Edited June 14, 20196 yr by irrics

Sometimes, the plane never stops moving. Other times, it's smooth as glass.

Just depends on the weather and time of day. I personally prefer the days when it's like flying on rails in real life 🙂

2 minutes ago, CarlHill said:

In real life GA aircraft, seems there is always some random pitch and yaw without turbulence per se.

I am not a pilot, but I have been flying Cessnas and Pipers Pa 28 several time. Basically, the pilot did the take offs and landings, I flew the rest in-between. Once Piper PA 28 in England on a very windy day (23 September 2007; for those who want to check the weather that day!). About 5 flight in Cessnas and Piper over the Alps in Switzerland.

"Random pitch" is easily taken care of with attention of the pilot, ie trimming. Actually, I find real life GA aircraft stable, but I do enjoy the balancing in the air.

53 minutes ago, EGLD said:

That wasn't the point I was making though, it was posed that XP would be "toast" now thanks to FS2020

My point is, unless MS address the reasons people went to XPlane, it won't be toast

I don't know about that?

I fly both P3D and Xplane, the reasons I also bought Xplane were that it performed better than P3d, has better out of the box visuals, the flight model wasn't really that bigger deal for me, so the main reason really was that the old engine isn't really up to modern demands. The new MFS seems to address this in so many ways.

3 minutes ago, raymond66 said:

I am not a pilot, but I have been flying Cessnas and Pipers Pa 28 several time. Basically, the pilot did the take offs and landings, I flew the rest in-between. Once Piper PA 28 in England on a very windy day (23 September 2007; for those who want to check the weather that day!). About 5 flight in Cessnas and Piper over the Alps in Switzerland.

"Random pitch" is easily taken care of with attention of the pilot, ie trimming. Actually, I find real life GA aircraft stable, but I do enjoy the balancing in the air.

And that was over the Alps no less.

I get the sense that some people have a false impression that GA aircraft are always some bumpy, unstable, "wild ride"...  I think some might be surprised how smooth and solid it can actually be, especially in certain planes (design choices of airframes/manufacturers matter a lot here)

Has it been mentioned that Dovetail Games are behind this new MSFS??  This article says they are, which is a dud right out of the gate. 

Tech Advisor

Quote

Dovetail Studios, who are behind the upcoming release, took over development of the series for its 2014 porting of FSX to Steam. ACES Studios, responsible for the original games, was shut down by Microsoft in 2009.

 

Edited June 14, 20196 yr by Orlaam

3 minutes ago, Orlaam said:

Has it been mentioned that Dovetail Games are behind this new MSFS??  This article says they are, which is a dud right out of the gate. 

Tech Advisor

 

Are we sure that "techadvisor.co.uk" doesn't have its facts wrong?

We've seen that literally nowhere else - Seems unlikely.

Edited June 14, 20196 yr by irrics

4 minutes ago, Orlaam said:

Has it been mentioned that Dovetail Games are behind this new MSFS??  This article says they are, which is a dud right out of the gate. 

Tech Advisor

I cannot see this being true, why would it be?

They look like two totally different simulators both in performance and graphically. 

 

4 minutes ago, Orlaam said:

Has it been mentioned that Dovetail Games are behind this new MSFS??  This article says they are, which is a dud right out of the gate. 

Tech Advisor

 

True or not, DTG did a lot with FSW (from the base platform) before things came to an end. 

At the end of the day, somebody got the message..and we are now seeing some of things that we have been requesting for years. 

 

2 hours ago, DaWu said:

not better but without 3rd parties we will get maybe 2-3 airpots a year. but we need hundreds

Don't you think perhaps this could be done instead by using similar techniques to the satellite mapping, but just using video from drones instead? Seems a better use of technology than hand crafting files using a scenery SDK. If not right now - I'd be very surprised if that (or something similar) is not the way it will be done ere long