2 hours ago, Bjoern said:

To anybody threatening to "leave for FS20 unless Laminar [yadda, yadda]": I'll help you packing. Can I have your payware?

lol  I'd say me too, but I doubt my simming potato/PC could run most of the payware folks would give away.  

The way I see it, if Laminar Research could survive the 1-2-3 punch that was FS2002, FS2004 and FSX, then they'll almost certainly survive FS2020. As I said recently in another forum, FS2002's autogen and improvements in scenery alone likely killed off Fly! and Flight Unlimited, yet Laminar Research's X-Plane soldiered on. That leads me to believe they have a good business model, whereas Terminal Reality's and Looking Glass Studios' were lacking.

Given that so many flight simulation fans own multiple simulations, I don't see the point in the argument that FS2020 is going to be an X-Plane killer, so don't click that X-Plane 11 purchase button. As I said before in this thread; I've seen too many fumbles and promises-in-the-pipe that didn't pan out for Microsoft's digital entertainment, to hold my breath. It'll be great if FS2020 lives up to all that Microsoft is hyping, but I'll believe it when I see the finished product. As well, with both Lockheed Martin and Laminar Research having sales in the professional simulation market, I expect both will continue to fly on once FS2020 is in the air.

 

Edited October 14, 20196 yr by Kronovan

14 hours ago, Kronovan said:

lol  I'd say me too, but I doubt my simming potato/PC could run most of the payware folks would give away.  

The way I see it, if Laminar Research could survive the 1-2-3 punch that was FS2002, FS2004 and FSX, then they'll almost certainly survive FS2020. As I said recently in another forum, FS2002's autogen and improvements in scenery alone likely killed off Fly! and Flight Unlimited, yet Laminar Research's X-Plane soldiered on. That leads me to believe they have a good business model, whereas Terminal Reality's and Looking Glass Studios' were lacking.

Given that so many flight simulation fans own multiple simulations, I don't see the point in the argument that FS2020 is going to be an X-Plane killer, so don't click that X-Plane 11 purchase button. As I said before in this thread; I've seen too many fumbles and promises-in-the-pipe that didn't pan out for Microsoft's digital entertainment, to hold my breath. It'll be great if FS2020 lives up to all that Microsoft is hyping, but I'll believe it when I see the finished product. As well, with both Lockheed Martin and Laminar Research having sales in the professional simulation market, I expect both will continue to fly on once FS2020 is in the air.

 

Terminal Reality's stopped with Fly! because it's founder died, Looking Glass Studios had financial problems and stopped in 2000. They had several high ranking games at the time, but apparently it was not enough to stay afloat. 

I know only one thing, this is the time of the over hyping. When the product comes actually on the market and can not run satisfactory on highest settings on pc's from 2 years ago, or older, the flaming will start (especially as they appear to be streaming the scenery, I suspect you will need a very fast connection to get similar results as in the previews). 

We have seen this before with FSX! remember the nice screenshot of the mountain they promised with directX 11? It turned out to be a marketing slide to show what directX 11 was capable off.

MSFS 2020 will show off Azurs cloud and AI capacities, that is why there is so much money spend. It is a showcase for other cloud related products. And I do believe the developers are genuinely doing their best to please the flightsim crowd, but we are only a niche. In the end, decisions are made way higher.

Previews are all marketing and therefore lies!

1 hour ago, soaring_penguin said:

Terminal Reality's stopped with Fly! because it's founder died

I think the producer, GoD, (or I think Take2Interactive who bought GoD) decided to stop the franchise. I don't think Richard's illness played a role in this.

20 hours ago, Paraffin said:

All I've seen so far is pretty scattered cumulus that looks "volumetric," which is good, but we can get that in XP11 too. One reason those clouds look so good is that the scenes in the screen shots and videos are very carefully selected for good lighting angles. We've seen a very impressive rendering of a towering CB in the initial reveal video, but we have no idea if that's a moving, discrete 3D object with internal convection, or a static 2D image.

My point is that we don't know how dynamic the weather is yet. We won't know until people are able to fly the sim and evaluate the weather, including all the extremes.

From what I have seen and heard from reviewers thus far, MSFS weather is far superior to X-Plane. One reviewer talked about seeing storm clouds building off to the horizon and flying into them...

We all know that X-plane can't even draw clouds to the horizon...

There is much more info out there about what MSFS brings to the table...and it is much more than scattered clouds.

21 hours ago, HumptyDumpty said:

fair enough , i have seen those. and also viewed that small interview where a bearded developer or some gave the insights to the weather and stuff. It's cool really.

But my thinking is just one , why is everyone comparing a highly financed and man powered product to a tiny less resourced product ! that's all. to me personally it makes no sense. 

But the roadmap recently put by LR is something i am looking forward to although they never complete what they say, and this what might hit them if they continue on the same path. 

 

 

 

I agree that X-plane has a small team. As I said in another thread...LR has a few good men and MSFS has 100+.

But even with that small team, LR diverted resources to their mobile app. At FlighCom 2017, Austin made comments that made me realize that he wasn't too interested in immediately responding to the request of the community, and he stated that he doesn't do any market research.

Prior to XP11, Austin said in a video that "everybody" complains about the user interface, but "he" thinks its fine. In a recent YT video where he reviewed X-Enviro, he referred to XP clouds as "wonk, wonk...they are not that great".....he obviously knows that his clouds are lacking. 

So with that said, with Austin, it really isn't just a matter of resources as it is his "philosophy and approach" to how he advances X-Plane.

Be it a small team or a large team, LR don't charge any less for their flight sim. They sat on the same stage with LM, and DTG in 2017 to talk about their flight sim. So it is only natural to compare what is available when looking to spend your money for the best flight sim experience possible.

6 hours ago, soaring_penguin said:

...Looking Glass Studios had financial problems and stopped in 2000. They had several high ranking games at the time, but apparently it was not enough to stay afloat. 

While all true, the Flight Unlimited IP was acquired by Electronic Arts when Looking Glass Studios shut down. With increasingly better competition from Microsoft, those assets have since just sat in some digital vault on a EA server. Why they never chose to do anything with the IP when releases of GA flight sims slackened - well...they're EA, so I don't think I need to say any more than that.

4 hours ago, Pascal_LSGC said:

I think the producer, GoD, (or I think Take2Interactive who bought GoD) decided to stop the franchise. I don't think Richard's illness played a role in this.

Yes that's what I recall too. IIRC Take 2 Interactive did do an assessment for a new Fly! release, but it the end it didn't survive the deep-6ing of the GoD label in 2004.

1 hour ago, FlyBaby said:

I agree that X-plane has a small team. As I said in another thread...LR has a few good men and MSFS has 100+.

But even with that small team, LR diverted resources to their mobile app. At FlighCom 2017, Austin made comments that made me realize that he wasn't too interested in immediately responding to the request of the community, and he stated that he doesn't do any market research.

Prior to XP11, Austin said in a video that "everybody" complains about the user interface, but "he" thinks its fine. In a recent YT video where he reviewed X-Enviro, he referred to XP clouds as "wonk, wonk...they are not that great".....he obviously knows that his clouds are lacking. 

So with that said, with Austin, it really isn't just a matter of resources as it is his "philosophy and approach" to how he advances X-Plane.

Be it a small team or a large team, LR don't charge any less for their flight sim. They sat on the same stage with LM, and DTG in 2017 to talk about their flight sim. So it is only natural to compare what is available when looking to spend your money for the best flight sim experience possible.

That's always been his approach, it was always his toy. 

About the UI that was during XP10 so you are talking of the past i think. 

The mobile app was the one that got more users into XP.   Being a small company they need to keep giving users something new every version , hence hold something back and it's fair todo as everyone does that. 

I think they charge much less than the other flight sim and don't categorise the license under Pro or Academic.  About MFS it's still blank  _______ 

At least they didn't abandon the users like MS did with a buggy FSX , so even when MS had the resources they abandoned the community, but you have to notice that even slowly they are listening to the community even if not completely.  I have send them emails many times it's only 20-30% of the time they respond , that's ok. 

"So it is only natural to compare what is available when looking to spend your money for the best flight sim experience possible."  I really don't understand this point , MFS has not even been released.

Look at the bright side , what they did with the Flight Model in 11.40, what they did with the lighting from XP10 to 11 etc.. a lot has changed and lot will change. 

But you are entitled to your opinion as to which is the best flight sim and i am to mine. 

Cheers.

15 minutes ago, HumptyDumpty said:

"So it is only natural to compare what is available when looking to spend your money for the best flight sim experience possible."  I really don't understand this point , MFS has not even been released.

 

Let;s not split hairs...

One can compare sims based on videos and interviews alone as to the features.

Earlier I said that MSFS has better "air, land and sea" based on what I have seen thus far. This is no different than how consumers compare and get more info on upcoming car releases as compared to older models.

This thread is about getting X-Plane or waiting for MSFS. That question alone invites a comparison of MSFS to XP11.

I really can't engage your other comments as they don't change my opinion...

I would advise someone to wait for MSFS as opposed to spend money on XP and addons...because MSFS as a stock sim has "core" features at a level that XP is years from achieving, and can't come close to in its current state with the best of addons.

 

3 minutes ago, FlyBaby said:

Let;s not split hairs...

One can compare sims based on videos and interviews alone as to the features.

Earlier I said that MSFS has better "air, land and sea" based on what I have seen thus far. This is no different than how consumers compare and get more info on upcoming car releases as compared to older models.

This thread is about getting X-Plane or waiting for MSFS. That question alone invites a comparison of MSFS to XP11.

I really can't engage your other comments as they don't change my opinion...

I would advise someone to wait for MSFS as opposed to spend money on XP and addons...because MSFS as a stock sim has "core" features at a level that XP is years from achieving, and can't come close to in its current state with the best of addons.

 

As i said you are entitled to your opinion. 

But the thing about advising someone not to buy addons for a simulator because the upcoming one looks fantastic and  that is still a year away from release and it might even still get delayed who knows is not something that is advisable.   This advice kills 3pd enthusiam tbh. 

no one wants to change your opinion but you are talking as if you have MFS sitting on your system.

3 minutes ago, FlyBaby said:

I would advise someone to wait for MSFS as opposed to spend money on XP and addons...because MSFS as a stock sim has "core" features at a level that XP is years from achieving, and can't come close to in its current state with the best of addons.

We don't know if MFS will have VR at release. Probably it won't have ATC. Almost surely won't have complex airliners, nor helicopters. We don't know its pricing model. So the preference between either could depend on _many_ subjective modes of use.

So I would give someone the same advice as yours but coming from an opposite angle: wait, because XP is in a phase of transition, going to Vulkan and then (as stated by Ben) the next priorities will be revising and improving the lighting, atmosphere, visuals, etc. Moreover, we don't know if the increased competition will have positive effects on XP. Maybe yes, maybe not. So yes, wait and see what XP will bring in a year or so from now.

Regarding XP being Austin toy etc. etc., my hunch is that nowadays Ben has probably a lot more voice than Austin in XP development priorities, especially in the visual arena. I think today XP is more of a Ben's creature than Austin, and certainly its development is more dependant on him than on Austin.

 

22 hours ago, Kronovan said:

The way I see it, if Laminar Research could survive the 1-2-3 punch that was FS2002, FS2004 and FSX, then they'll almost certainly survive FS2020.

No punches delivered there. Back in those days, MSFS and XP were aimed at totally different markets. MSFS for average people and X-Plane for aerodynamics nerds. Only after the abandonment of the Flight Simulator brand by Microsoft and some visual touch ups, it managed to grab some market share. I bet that XP11 is the best revenue builder that LR ever had. And if they manage to keep cross-plattform develoment overhead low with their release for mobile platforms, reaching out to average people might just be one of the, if not the best business decision they ever made.

 

24 minutes ago, FlyBaby said:

I would advise someone to wait for MSFS as opposed to spend money on XP and addons...because MSFS as a stock sim has "core" features at a level that XP is years from achieving, and can't come close to in its current state with the best of addons.

and you know this how? Do you have the simulator installed? Have you tried it? This is such a sweeping statement to make telling everyone to not support X-Plane or buy any addons from now on as if you already have the new "god simulator" installed and it already does everything X-Plane, P3D and hundreds of addons already do. My advice to you then is to never buy anything again since something better maybe on the horizon and it would be a waste of your money and you can't possibly enjoy it 😉

1 hour ago, HumptyDumpty said:

The mobile app was the one that got more users into XP.   Being a small company they need to keep giving users something new every version , hence hold something back and it's fair todo as everyone does that. 

It's what funds their development for the desktop app, as they're not Microsoft and have unlimited supplies of resources and money. The mobile development is necessary to fund the desktop version.

15 minutes ago, tonywob said:

 

It's what funds their development for the desktop app, as they're not Microsoft and have unlimited supplies of resources and money. The mobile development is necessary to fund the desktop version.

Agree

2 hours ago, FlyBaby said:

Let;s not split hairs...

One can compare sims based on videos and interviews alone as to the features.

No, you can't, because a promotional video is not hands-on flying. I can launch XP11 on my current computer system (specs listed below), and fly without any stutters or pop-in artifacts. Nice and smooth at a minimum of 30 fps and often into the 45 fps range. I can't tell if MSFS will equal that performance without hands-on experience. And with respect, neither can you.
 

Quote

Earlier I said that MSFS has better "air, land and sea" based on what I have seen thus far. This is no different than how consumers compare and get more info on upcoming car releases as compared to older models.

Nobody makes a serious decision about a car purchase, or posts an informed opinion on an online forum about a car, without actually test-driving it. 

3 hours ago, tonywob said:

and you know this how? Do you have the simulator installed? Have you tried it? This is such a sweeping statement to make telling everyone to not support X-Plane or buy any addons from now on as if you already have the new "god simulator" installed and it already does everything X-Plane, P3D and hundreds of addons already do. My advice to you then is to never buy anything again since something better maybe on the horizon and it would be a waste of your money and you can't possibly enjoy it 😉

 

It is a statement based on my experience with XP (and P3D) wasting money on addons when MSFS now has many features stock.

There have been several reviews from folk who have flown MSFS reported on the features. and to that end...

X-Plane doesn't even have clouds going to the horizon...you get a circle of clouds around your plane...and you need X_nvri to see clouds to the horizon, and that is still in the development.

A reviewer talked about seeing storm clouds in MSFS off to the horizon and flying to them...and we can clearly see that MSFS has clouds to the horizon in the vids.

That's how I know...based on simple facts and observations. My advice remains the same.