1 hour ago, sd_flyer said:

I have been flying IRL for 20 years and I'm not getting bored yet 🙂 

When you  are referring to certified flight simulators that used for recurrent training or flight certificate they are not XP11 or MSFS. Also not all of us getting relatively high salary and many fly for a love of flying 😉

Sure, real life flying is a different thing, but in the simulator after some time of "normal" flying I get bored. "Even" with photgrammetry 🙃. That's why a bit more variety (like e.g. failures) enhances the picture.

2 hours ago, flying_carpet said:

While MSFS has only 5 (engine) failures simulated, X-Plane has around 400 as I found out (not only in the planes but even in the environment, e.g. navaids, localizer, ...)
 

You keep harping on the failures simulations of XP vs MSFS but I presume you're talking about the *default* aircraft in both.  And if so yes, MSFS's simulation depth of its default aircraft are nothing to write home about.  But failures simulations using properly implemented aircraft like the Fenix A320, Milviz C310, PMDG 737, etc in MSFS are a completely different story of course with hundreds of failures simulated. I realize that using the default aircraft in MSFS to speak to its general capabilities has been convenient for talking points for some, but reality is now very different 🙂

Edited June 7, 20224 yr by lwt1971

2 hours ago, Cpt_Piett said:

Fair enough. It seems as though there are also MSFS users that are either current or ex P3D users but have never used XP in any meaningful way, but still make it their mission to hammer away at how pathetic it is.

Well, you asked me in the other thread about that, before it got locked, and I didn’t really get a chance to reply, so I assume I’m at least one of the people you are referring to, and yes, I have made no bones about not liking XPlane, because I don’t.  And at some level, your point about “not using it in any meaningful way” is probably apt, but I have bought every version since xp8, and I even gave xp11 a good couple of days use a couple years back.  So yeah if you look at my steam stats, it shows less than 10 hours use, but that is more than enough time to decide that something is not for me.  I have, however, never called it pathetic, nor have I gone into detail about its many shortcomings, and I certainly have never gone over to the xplane forum and trolled them about anything.  They come here, different story.

I think more than a little bit of the issue is Austin himself.  XP is his baby, and it’s tied to him.  And he’s made the identity of his sim be the anti-ms.  So for decades now, the narrative is always that anything that XP does well is amped up and touted as the greatest thing ever, and anything that XP doesn’t do well is stupid and something that “real flight simmers” (read: people that agree with Austin) don’t need, until he actually finds a way to make it work.  And his fans mimic the behavior and the talking points.  And sure, there are f@nboi of every sim that act that way, but the devs of those sims don’t.  You ever hear Jorg or Lockheed Martin, or the old Aces team talking smack about XP?  Nope.  Even Randazzo, as much as he loves blowing his own trumpet, doesn’t talk smack about other aircraft developers.  Austin can’t help it seemingly.  And in my completely honest opinion,  it’s to the detriment of his own product.  100 percent love his stance against the patent trolls, tho.

Why are we fighting about which sim is better? This is the best time to be a flight simmer. We have 2 viable platforms and many current and future addons. Let's just keep flying and enjoying this hobby.

4 minutes ago, mrcultureshock said:

This is the best time to be a flight simmer. We have 2 viable platforms.

Actually 4.

Kind regards, Michael

I can’t wait for the a310. Didn’t buy it for XP but have watched the videos on YouTube. 
Fond memories of Air Transat and Iberworld using them when I worked at EGNT many moons ago!
Also craving a classic! Loving MSFS with the PMDG but will be tempted by XP12 especially if the IXEG 733 works.

Nothing wrong with multiple sims. We’re spoilt these days, not like the “olden days.”

Ian

31 minutes ago, flying_carpet said:

So ... do you think ...
"Well, you do understand this is the XP forums, right?  That we will be more critical of other simulators, while praising XP, right?
If you want to belittle XP while praising MSFS, you are free to go to the MSFS forums to create a thread to do that. Nobody is stopping you.  But if you think that you can use the same tone here in the XP forums, expect pushback from XP users."

is offensive and hence "they" are called "rabid dogs", is ok? But what is:

"Well, you do understand this is the MSFS forums, right?  That we will be more critical of other simulators, while praising MSFS, right?
If you want to belittle MSFS while praising XP, you are free to go to the XP forums to create a thread to do that. Nobody is stopping you.  But if you think that you can use the same tone here in the MSFS forums, expect pushback from MSFS users."

 

I just said earlier that if in the XP forums here at AVSIM, if you want to make up a thread to praise XP and belittle MSFS, go ahead, please do it.  And please stay in the XP forums if you can't be civil here in the MSFS forum - you are more than welcome to stay in the XP forum where you can belittle MSFS all you want, while praising XP.  And for the "rabid dog," I did not make that statement, so please don't try to connect that to me.

As for my earlier question that I asked you, here it is again: And you are saying the XP forums here at AVSIM is normal and the behavior is acceptable?

Edited June 7, 20224 yr by abrams_tank

4 hours ago, lwt1971 said:

His final comments on both start here: https://youtu.be/oq_X6I8DiDU?t=16257

Some excerpts:
- "i like both of them"
- "i was blown away by the pmdg, really surprised how well it handled"
- "flying the zibo, oh that's why i like this model and flying in xp11"
- "pmdg has more in-depth systems modelling"
- "zibo handling on take-off/landing and ground taxiing is better" <--- this is one known area of MSFS i.e. ground physics that will be seeing improvements >= SU10
- "would I recommend the pmdg 737, 100%... would I recommend the zibo, this is still my favorite"

Thanks for taking the time typing this out 🙂 And by the way - how do you link to a certain point in a YT video?

If I ruled the sim universe, people would only be allowed to comment on the pros and cons of Sim X vs Sim Y if they were actively flying both. 

46 minutes ago, Cpt_Piett said:

Thanks for taking the time typing this out 🙂 And by the way - how do you link to a certain point in a YT video?

Click over the video with right mouse button and among the various options you have something like "Copy video URL at current time"

Edited June 7, 20224 yr by jcomm

Deleted

Edited June 7, 20224 yr by Cpt_Piett

2 hours ago, TravelRunner404 said:

The flight model is a simulation just like MSFS.  It's littered with flaws, shortcuts, and short comings like any and all computer game flight models.   There are zero scientific studies being done to compare flight models.  If I ever see a double blind well controlled peer reviewed flight model experiment with statistical differences I'll start to take notice. And even then you need multiple studies and aggregate analysis to prove something.  Some guy named Steve, swears it feels more like a real plane and points to marketing material to back it up.  Okay.  I am not saying it's better or worse, I genuinely don't know.  But I can say with certainty that it's not proven to be better by any acceptable modern data and scientific standard.  I haven't even seen a good study that shows pilots think it "feels" better.  So in the end their 1,700 users like it better.  I might like it better.  It doesn't mean anything.

The question is how many of the people arguing about which flight model is better are actual pilots flying the same aircraft in the sim they fly IRL? I would assume a minority. And for that matter, even real pilots don't always seem to be able to make up their collective minds as to which flight model is better. I've seen some people who apparently are real pilots say the PMDG 737 in MSFS flies bad for several reasons and not better or even worse than in P3D, while a bunch of other real pilots of that type said it flies well and much better than in P3D. So what it is now?! The same goes for MSFS vs. XP vs. P3D vs. whatever in terms of flight models. This makes it kind of comical too when mere armchair pilots like myself argue about which flight model is better, which plane has more systems depth and how much, etc. and I'm not talking about obvious conclusions like the Fenix being more sophisticated than a CS aircraft.

1 hour ago, ShawnG said:

Well, you asked me in the other thread about that, before it got locked, and I didn’t really get a chance to reply, so I assume I’m at least one of the people you are referring to, and yes, I have made no bones about not liking XPlane, because I don’t.  And at some level, your point about “not using it in any meaningful way” is probably apt, but I have bought every version since xp8, and I even gave xp11 a good couple of days use a couple years back.  So yeah if you look at my steam stats, it shows less than 10 hours use, but that is more than enough time to decide that something is not for me.  I have, however, never called it pathetic, nor have I gone into detail about its many shortcomings, and I certainly have never gone over to the xplane forum and trolled them about anything.  They come here, different story.

I think more than a little bit of the issue is Austin himself.  XP is his baby, and it’s tied to him.  And he’s made the identity of his sim be the anti-ms.  So for decades now, the narrative is always that anything that XP does well is amped up and touted as the greatest thing ever, and anything that XP doesn’t do well is stupid and something that “real flight simmers” (read: people that agree with Austin) don’t need, until he actually finds a way to make it work.  And his fans mimic the behavior and the talking points.  And sure, there are f@nboi of every sim that act that way, but the devs of those sims don’t.  You ever hear Jorg or Lockheed Martin, or the old Aces team talking smack about XP?  Nope.  Even Randazzo, as much as he loves blowing his own trumpet, doesn’t talk smack about other aircraft developers.  Austin can’t help it seemingly.  And in my completely honest opinion,  it’s to the detriment of his own product.  100 percent love his stance against the patent trolls, tho.

Thanks for elaborating, much appreciated. I get your point of view. As for that other thread I just got in a reply to your post under the wire @Doering before it got locked. 

Edited June 7, 20224 yr by Cpt_Piett

1 hour ago, mrcultureshock said:

Why are we fighting about which sim is better?

...because we're on AVSIM?

1 hour ago, flying_carpet said:

Sure, real life flying is a different thing, but in the simulator after some time of "normal" flying I get bored. "Even" with photgrammetry 🙃. That's why a bit more variety (like e.g. failures) enhances the picture.

I guess not all simmer agree on something ! LOL So I'm 30+ years simmer (date back to sublogic),  flight instructor, owner of real airplanes and I'm still not bored ! I have absolute freedom of flying. I love to explore new places. I love to have access to airplane otherwise I can't fly IRL. I also love to learn new things. Photometry is big deal for me. I can fly places I used to fly IRL like Australia, Ukraine, Alaska and recognize landmarks. I can fly over landmarks I flew few hours ago and still enjoy it!