MSFS thread for X-Plane users.

[mSparks 2,086]

3 hours ago, flyingpauls said:

The damage model of X-Plane is not good. That has been demonstrated many times with ridiculous results. However, I don't care. I can very well tell when I'd have destroyed my plane.

I dont agree with this at all.

I think about the worst you can say is that it doesn't graphically draw passengers getting mutilated and burnt all over the runway carmageddon style.

And default planes have historically had issues like the S76 hydro system being bound to the engine shaft rather than rotor shaft (10 minutes to fix after identifying it).

But under the hood the failure system and the extensibility of the failure model is absolutely best in class for realism and flexibility, with even freeware authors going as deep as the effects of popping circuit breakers.

NOT crashing and dying in a failure situation is probably 85% of flight training, maybe more.

Edited July 21, 2020 by mSparks

[sanh 823]

I don't particularly care how accurate the plane handles when landed at 340kts and 2500fpm. I dont fly to simulate flight tolerances and won't ever try to land like that.

The vast majority of the flight sim community are hobbyists. They want to simulate flight which means the visuals matter a lot along with a decent enough flight model. I think those are the bases msfs will try to meet. 

For x-plane it's the visuals only that need a serious bump up and its good that the devs know that based on their responses about better lighting, weather and autogen.

My concern for x-plane is the addons. Austin doesn't seem too interested in 3PD while MSFS are very interested in them. Its the addons that give a sim its longevity.

[mSparks 2,086]

15 minutes ago, sanh said:

he vast majority of the flight sim community are hobbyists. They want to simulate flight which means the visuals matter a lot along with a decent enough flight model. I think those are the bases msfs will try to meet

MS target audience definitely seems to be those who want game first simulation second and think the XP "you exceeded Vfe" message is a bug.

Personally I really hope Laminar don't try and compete for that market.

[Pastaiolo 1,688]

You keep going on and on about it, we got it.

The point is that a good graphical representation is something everybody can take advantage of. And while XP11 indeed is doing well on the simulation point of view, there are things now in which it is lagging behind and we all hope (gamers, simmers, professional pilots in their basement etc etc) can fix in XP12.

For me that means lighting, weather system (with good performance and noise generated clouds) and water. In these three sectors of the graphical compartment i think we are looooong overdue for an improvement. 

[mSparks 2,086]

6 minutes ago, Pastaiolo said:

The point is that a good graphical representation is something everybody can take advantage of.

Nahhh, DX11 is an obsolete niche market only microsofties still care about, and a load of them just lost their jobs.

[philmurfin 73]

Although dramitc, I cannot remember ever seeing a sky that looked antything like what this new "toy sim " proposes

[GoranM 3,762]

6 hours ago, sanh said:

My concern for x-plane is the addons. Austin doesn't seem too interested in 3PD while MSFS are very interested in them. Its the addons that give a sim its longevity.

Nothing could be further from the truth.  A dedicated Slack group was created by Laminar for 3rd party developers, quite a while ago, to go into and throw ideas at Laminar for features and requests we want from them.  We interact with them on a daily basis, and we can DM them at any time.  We also have meetings and discuss what's wrong, what's right, what could be improved, what would make our lives easier, and they're noting everything.  

 

[mp15 138]

in real life, is all about the flight harmony, the instruments, the functions, the navigazioni and following a tower control indications. XP can replicate all this. 

Scenery is secondary.

XP needs to have out of the box:

volumetric clouds, better lighting, better original terrain mesh with well defined generic geometries for buildings on a random allocation with lights for the night. water displacement linked to sim/wind/ and a friendly smart and clickable ATC window.

high fps, dynamics and airports are all already there !

[GoranM 3,762]

40 minutes ago, mp15 said:

and a friendly smart and clickable ATC window.

I rarely, if ever, get involved with XP vs MSFS discussions, but I keep seeing this comment crop up in many places.  Many people are wanting better ATC in X-Plane.  They also keep going on about the ATC "will" be better in FS2020, and I'm only assuming they are pinning their hopes on this, instead of getting hard and fast data on this due to NDA's.  Anyway, my question.  Who, seriously, uses default ATC in ANY sim??  I certainly don't.  The people that I know, either don't use ATC at all, use Vatsim or Pilot Edge.   Not a single person I know in flight simming uses default ATC in ANY sim.  MSFS or X-Plane.  So when people say X-Plane's ATC "sucks" or is prehistoric, etc... I wonder "Do they really use, or WANT to use, the default ATC...even if it was up to the standard they're asking for??"

If I had more time to fly for fun, I sure as hell would love to use Pilot Edge.  I already have used Vatsim, and loved it back in my FS9 days.  After using that, I wouldn't even dream of using default ATC.  

Edited July 22, 2020 by GoranM

[mp15 138]

i have no idea what is vatsim nor pilotedge, i want XP to do it for me, so i want a nice A.i Atc with humanized voices for me with clickable buttons, so i have intuition in what to do or respond to ATC.

[GoranM 3,762]

You're into flight simming and you don't know what vatsim (been around for 15+ years) or pilotedge is?  Not calling you a liar, but I find that incredibly hard to believe.  For one thing, there are ACTUAL humans behind the mic's.  

Google them.  Otherwise, if X-Plane's ATC isn't good enough for you, you had better hope FS2020 has what you are looking for.

Edited July 22, 2020 by GoranM

[mp15 138]

i'm not a simmer nor a gamer, i only have XP demo since mid 2019. i specialize in dynamics and I only like to make planes. I'm currently working on my latest design and development of my M-944 a long range aircraft capable of very high speeds and take off in only 1,500 metres of distance. I dont have time to learn ATC, i want an embeded window for me to perfom with easyness and intuition. I also love to do volumetric clouds.

[Pastaiolo 1,688]

4 hours ago, GoranM said:

Nothing could be further from the truth.  A dedicated Slack group was created by Laminar for 3rd party developers, quite a while ago, to go into and throw ideas at Laminar for features and requests we want from them.  We interact with them on a daily basis, and we can DM them at any time.  We also have meetings and discuss what's wrong, what's right, what could be improved, what would make our lives easier, and they're noting everything.  

 

That is great, however, how many of that feedback came from users and not just third parties? How long have we asked for better water? Not glowing trees? A better atc (and yes, i used the default FSX atc: while not super realistic it gave a good representation of being in a busy airport and that was enough for me when i was flying around with my PMDG aircrafts)?
The feeling i get with Austin and company, every time, is that users talk about nice features and Austin goes like "oh yes, that would be great to do it like that, but i want to do it better" except it never reaches a point in which something is actually developed. Could be a matter of resources, could be a matter of Austin being Austin and XP being its baby, so he only cares about certain specific things and ignores the others. Point is, it's a product they are selling to other people, not to Austin alone 🙂

10 hours ago, mSparks said:

Nahhh, DX11 is an obsolete niche market only microsofties still care about, and a load of them just lost their jobs.

k. It isn't like that however. And i played the Flight simulator series since the 98 version. I grew up with it. I went from not knowing anything about planes to doing the right procedures in a PMDG aircraft right on that same simulator. Addons makes the difference, and most here started as a "microsofties". You are beyond reason so i'll leave it at that.

[mp15 138]

34 minutes ago, GoranM said:

MFS2020 has what you are looking for.

I saw some video leaks and the ATC there is wonderful the way it is resolved indeed.

 

[Janov 2,383]

24 minutes ago, mp15 said:

Non me ne frega niente il XP mobile e non capisco come hanno dedicato tanto a quello, che ovbiamente non lo utilizza nessuno, io però sì accetto che il  Plane Maker mi stupisce e tutto l'ecosistema che secondo me a livello dinamiche è stra figo allora ma come mai non sistemano le cose basiche suddette? veramente io non capisco, le grafiche sono importanti ci siamo nel 2020 e Unreal Engine 5 ha persino la luce dinamica che reagisce in relazione alle geometrie e le sue forme.

couldn´t have said it better. I would like extra cheese on mine, though.