14 minutes ago, SAS443 said:

Classy response. I hope you own up to it in the future. Quoted simply for posterity

I am highly impressed. Isn’t it time to simply move on?

1 hour ago, mSparks said:

Its grown by 600,000 since March 2018, and 50,000 in the last 9 months.

I’m sure that represents 600,000 new, real, distinct paying customers🤩

1 hour ago, mSparks said:

your method of pulling them from where the sun dont shine...... IMHO

What numbers have I pulled from anywhere, including my squeaky clean derrière, in this thread?

58 minutes ago, scotchegg said:

I’m sure that represents 600,000 new, real, distinct paying customers🤩

its only about 2% of those who installed X-Plane over the same period. Which is why we need the in sim store so desperately. 

Edited September 28, 20241 yr by mSparks

5 hours ago, Franz007 said:

Many of them are still mostly using their sim for entertaining reasons but it already shows that from this unique group the preferences for MSFS vs XP melts down to 3:1 - 1:4 when MSFS is supposed to have how much 10x, 20x, 30x more users in total? So what really would be a better indicator is to have these results filled out only by people making at least a PPL, having professional interests for aerodynamics or advanced aviation physics. That’s what I mean with having interests in core-aviation.

‘Melts down to 3:1 - 4:1’?! That’s a rather self-consoling expression for the idea that in XP’s core desktop market, people prefer MSFS by 3 to 4 times! 

It looks like you’re only interested in the opinions of people qualified to talk about aerodynamics and aviation physics. I’m not qualified, don’t compare sim performance with charts, and never make definitive claims about the physics. But fm quality is not irrelevant for me and I believe I have some feel for authenticity. It strongly influences what kind of flying I do. For example in Microsoft Flight, I did mostly bush flying in the Maule, in XP10/11 I did mostly short hand-flown hops in the default 172 (because there was always a 50-50 chance that when I input a flight plan in the not-very-good autopilot, XP’s atc would vector me into terrain), in MSFS for the last year it’s been mostly 2hr hops in the COWS DA42. But the one that really felt authentic for me was the default 109s in IL2. word not allowed, those things felt so real, especially the inertia and stall buffeting, but I just couldn’t really sustain my interest in a poorly-rendered 1930s Russia, and am not really into shooting stuff up.

I use the DA42 in MSFS because even though the world obviously looks much better, most of the default planes still struggle with inertia (although I haven’t tried most of them recently so maybe they’ve changed) so bush flying isn’t so satisfying. The DA42 gives a good IFR experience with the excellent (default!) avionics, and feels good enough on the tarmac, take off roll and landing to be satisfying in the parts of flight I’m not using AP. 

All of which is to say, I’m obviously not the kind of qualified aerodynamics professional to whom you like to defer to asses a simulator. You seem to want ‘core aviation’ to be defined by, and desktop commercial simulators to be assessed on, only the one element you believe XP to be superior in. But frankly, when I want to experience a truly authentic feel of aerodynamics only, I fire up IL2 again and not XP.

MSFS is still often disappointing in inertia and weather interaction, but the signs for 2024 are promising, and if they improve those I’ll probably start doing a lot more bush / hand flying. In the meantime, I’m sure XP will introduce another feature that MSFS doesn’t have (e.g. the recent weather radar with tilt), and when confronted with the probability that MSFS’ fm has closed most of the remaining gaps with XP’s, you’ll move on to that new feature as evidence that XP is still the superior core aviation experience.

But for most of us who want a good balance of solid fm, avionics, atc, weather, and world, it just isn’t currently. I like Austin a lot and who doesn’t want the underdog to win. If the other stuff in the core aviation experience (not just the aerodynamics!) gets better in XP I’ll come back.

Edited September 28, 20241 yr by scotchegg

I suspect your all politicians, pulling numbers out of the air that suit your argument,  are any of them seasonally adjusted.

4 hours ago, Franz007 said:

"plausible"

Don't forget neutrally employed and fully objective!

Are you guys talking about temp variations with the altimeter?

I still can't grease my landing in the 172 like I used to in the sim, the nose gear still wants to slam to the ground when the back wheels touch the runway. The friction feature Austin added to GA landing gear is unrealistic.

Really? I can hold it from slamming down. Though I do wonder if one of those 172 mods out there would help some. I vaguely recall someone fixing the weight/balance of the default model. And even if this wasn't a "skill issue", it's still the most realistic ground-effect/ground-handling physics out there. Thankfully there's a demo version available for anyone wanting to try it for themselves if they don't already own the sim. Can get plenty of touch and gos in within the 15 min window.

5 hours ago, scotchegg said:

Melts down to 3:1 - 4:1’?! That’s a rather self-consoling expression for the idea that in XP’s core desktop market, people prefer MSFS by 3 to 4 times! 

You seem to be very optimistic if this is your take for a sim supposed to have way more users in total. What is MSFS’s core desktop market then if not the frequent flyers (more likely to use navigraph)? Are there aiming at the single-use-users who plug&play and delete?

5 hours ago, scotchegg said:

It looks like you’re only interested in the opinions of people qualified to talk about aerodynamics and aviation physics

Yes because I want to underline that XP goes deeper into simulating core-aviation and that those groups of « professionals » are the ones that are the most interested in such things as for example modelling their own aircraft and test-fly it in the sim and/or notice things that doesn’t matter for the mass of users interested in entertainment. Again, the navigraph-users are full of users with mixed interests. Yes for the majority of them, MSFS is the first choice. But does that automatically mean that all of them have a deep interests in such things? Not at all, their choice is being influenced by many other factors like visuals, addon-prices, available addons etc.

5 hours ago, scotchegg said:

All of which is to say, I’m obviously not the kind of qualified aerodynamics professional to whom you like to defer to asses a simulator. You seem to want ‘core aviation’ to be defined by, and desktop commercial simulators to be assessed on, only the one element you believe XP to be superior in. But frankly, when I want to experience a truly authentic feel of aerodynamics only, I fire up IL2 again and not XP.

Exactly my point. Have you ever flown a real aircraft? So you are most likely not the person potentially interested in XP’s advantages. That’s perfectly fine and seems also to be the majority of users. But that doesn’t at all contradicts my point. If you build a group of frequent eaters (core-market for restaurants) and realize that McDo’s are way more visited than gourmet-restaurants, does that mean that the quality of food is better? I know some hate that analogy but you got my point.

The thing is that I have no problem at all with any other simulator, in fact I see it as a good thing that also helps XP to grow. But I have problems when people refuse to aknowledge any of other’s sims advantages, although we all know that all have pros and cons. If you don’t want to see that a sim like XP having been built as a physical-tool for aerodynamics used for the professional market doesn’t have any advantages over a sim made for the masses and adressing a different market (although they do overlap), then I really don’t know what to tell you more.

35 minutes ago, Franz007 said:

If you don’t want to see that a sim like XP having been built as a physical-tool for aerodynamics used for the professional market doesn’t have any advantages over a sim made for the masses and adressing a different market (although they do overlap), then I really don’t know what to tell you more.

It’s like you read every word I wrote and understood none of it.

Edited September 28, 20241 yr by scotchegg

2 hours ago, scotchegg said:

It’s like you read every word I wrote and understood none of it.

I sincerely apologise for that Mr. Scotch.

2 hours ago, scotchegg said:

It’s like you read every word I wrote and understood none of it.

19 minutes ago, Franz007 said:

I sincerely apologise for that Mr. Scotch.

Franz seems to understand you very well, what, imho, he appears to be trying to explain is this statement

9 hours ago, scotchegg said:

people prefer MSFS by 3 to 4 times! 

Is a deeply flawed conclusion. Because you went from "people use" to "people prefer", the world doesn't work like that, otherwise you are as good as claiming

"people prefer old ford Fiestas to a brand new Ferrari by several million times"

or

"people prefer X-Plane mobile to X-Plane desktop by several hundred times"

He already used the McDs vs plush restaurant example for the same purpose, maybe you don't know what McDs is?

The word you probably meant to use is "access" - X-Plane Desktop is nowhere near as accessible to MSFS Desktop, in the same way a Ferrari is less accessible than an old ford Fiesta, that absolutely does not mean one is preferred over the other.

It definitely doesn't mean MSFS can survive X-Plane Desktop becoming more accessible than MSFS Desktop - which is looking VERY much the future of flight sim, LR already owns all the other market segments.

 

 

I dont understand any of this and very little of it is worth reading. Still trying to  figure out what its about, I suspect just Egos. I think mods its gone far enough . Again...

26 minutes ago, mSparks said:

maybe you don't know what McDs is?

Oh shame on my; that was one of my many typos (reason why I very often have to edit my posts 🙈 But yeah I think people could still understand what big burger-chain I was meaning 😊)

2 hours ago, mjrhealth said:

Still trying to  figure out what its about

Sourcing and Interpreting flight sim data for xplane like that in the OP:

http://dashboard.x-plane.com/