Spaceman3

Regional edition at Office Max, Fry's and a few other stores.

I'm kind of late to this thread, having just switched to XPX last week, but let me throw in my two cents. I'm a real world pilot who has been playing with flight simulators since I was a kid, starting with the flight simulator for the Timex SInclair 1000 and Sub Logic on the Apple 2. I have never experienced the true sensation of flying more than I have with XPlane (except for the C-5 full motion sims I used in the military). FSX is a toy in comparison. Don't get me wrong it was fine when that was all we had, and I've spent thousands of hours and dollars on it. But I think what makes Orbix chafe, is that you can pickup a cheap copy of X-Plane X for 30 bucks, load up sceneries created with G2XPL for free and have an experience that visually blows FSX/P3D out of the water, even with their expensive scenery added. There is simply no need for a company like Orbix with X-Plane and that is why they made that statement. There is no future for THEM with XPX.

I've noticed a pattern that you seem to criticize anyone who has a negative opinion of your products without also saying something nice about them. Now I've purchased add-ons from you in the past. They're so-so in my opinion. But if someone doesn't like a product, they should be frank about it without a requirement to sugar coat anything. An honest flow of information here is the only thing that keeps many of us from wasting our money on inferior products. I think it would be helpful to try and refrain from trying to censoring simmers who are giving their honest opinions. If you put out a great product, plenty of people will sing your praises and the few negative opinions will be drowned out. You shouldn't have to worry about what people say if you are confident in your work. It will speak for itself, especially since there is a money back guarantee. Couldn't agree with you more. The pits need new models and higher quality textures to be sure. This has been the case for some time. Perhaps in version 3.

Fair enough. I don't frequent this forum very often. Usually just poke in to see if MS has announced that they are cancelling Flight due to lack of revenue. But what I usually end up seeing are several threads basically complaining about people who don't like Flight and how they really should or that they expect too much. Maybe I've just hit the forum on bad days or something, but it seems like a pattern to me.

Just because Flight isn't of interest to me doesn't mean I'm not interested in where Microsoft's current half-assed attempt is heading and whether they will ever return to making flight simulators. And you can quote all the goofy made up "laws" that you like. I used to the term ###### because it seems to accurately describe a lot of the posts I've observed here. By ###### I mean someone who is fanatically devoted to the product and just can't seem to understand why others don't share their passion. If that's inaccurate, then propose another term for that type of poster rather than just citing some baloney rule and unilaterally declaring victory in an argument that doesn't actually exist.

It wouldn't have changed a thing for me as I would've ignored the game in either case because it's not a proper flight simulator. I'm a real world pilot and flight is not useful to me in the least. It's a game, not a simulator. Even for a layman that was just interested in aviation you could actually learn quite a lot about many different aspects of flying in previous versions of flight simulator. I don't see that being the case in Flight. But again, why does anyone on this board care if the majority of the simulation community reject a little flying game? Why are there so many threads with ###### trying to convince people that Flight is something that it isn't? I really don't get it.

Is that FSX or Flight?

That may be so in the short term. But when Flight fails, that position may change if they are smart enough to recognize their blunder. What I'm curious about is why the situation has to be binary. Microsoft used to have an open simulator that allowed free thrid party development AND they relased their own add-ons. If they were really worried about not having the add-on market with the last several releases, why not just go back to the model that they've already used in the past?

Well I'm not sure what people hope to accomplish by constantly whining about flight. That would be like me constantly telling Microsoft that Word is a failure because there are no virtual cockpits. Word is not intended to be a serious flight simulator and neither is Flight. So people should just ignore the title as it's not in the category of what they are looking for, and move on as I have. Actually I haven't exactly "moved on" as I've never tried Flight in the first place as I could read from the description that is is of no interest to me.

Trying to buy FS2Crew for NGX today I keep getting error Message 3005 when trying to input credit card info. Just thought you should know.

I have no idea who you are and I'm not inclined to waste any of my time proving anything to you. I run FSX with several addons (PMDG NGX is my primary aircraft of choice) and it looks great and runs great. I built the system myself and followed the advice that is easily attainable on the forums and elsewhere on the web as far as software setup goes. Since people are reporting things like blurres with Flight, I'm not even sure there is a discussion to be had on the performance issues. Sounds like with either FSX or Flight it all comes down to your individual setup and config.

Really? You have all those problems with FSX? Wow. Check the forums and you can get that fixed.I see no point in trying flight. Waste of time and hard drive space IMHO.

Doctor Strangelove

I have been inside the real thing. And yes, some cockpits might be as filthy as the one depicted by PMDG, but there are also practically brand new spotless NG's flying the line. So it simply boils down to a matter of what the end user prefers here. It's childish to suggest that any thread that does not agree with your erroneous prejudices should be locked. People are expressing a desire (and from what I see it's fairly strong among the customer base) and I'm sure PMDG want to hear that kind of feedback. Scott Cooper

This definitely seems related to saving a panel state as that's when the problem started for me too. I used the same procedures prior to creating a saved state and did not experience the bug, but once i saved the state and used that save, boom.

I couldn't see where I could send the moderator a private message directly, but I'm curious as to why a civil discussion on the differences between two of the more popular flight sim add-ons was locked? I think flight simulator consumers need all the data they can get regarding purchasing decisions so they don't waste money. I was intrigued that someone said PMDG had better fps than iFly. That seemed counter to what I would expect and would like more information. Pretty disappointed in this forum.

I would be happy with this option, but I can't see them doing that. As someone who's only interested in the 700, I feel a little screwed by the current pricing plan. I'm in the same boat. It's clear now why they didn't talk about what models they were doing long ago, however if they had, there would be a lot less disappointed simmers right now.Scott Cooper

The Ariane product is also priced unrealistically IMHO. That's why hardly anyone has it. It just seems like the amount of effort to produce one add-on (from a development perspective) and the price are not in line with other software products. I'm certain that Microsoft Flight, a very complex product that has the potential to soon make FSX obsolete, will cost no where near 100 dollars. That's my point.Scott Cooper

Due to the fact I'm not interested in the 800 or 900, it would run I guess around 100 bucks for the add-on. What a great price!Not. Can I afford it? Yes. Is it worth it? Not in comparison to other software and other add-ons.Pretty disappointed right now.Scott Cooper

Yeah, that's possible. Although the sound was smooth. It really looked like it was just low frame rates with random hickups or lag which kind of scares me. I really hope this plane is a tad better performance wise than the J41 and MD11 that I own. Smoothness is probably the most important feature to me and I'd gladly trade off cabin temperature simulations for frame rates. I wonder if they could enable a simplified simulation mode. Probably too much work though. But disabling a lot of that minutia that you'll never notice would probably help performance.Scott Cooper

Really? It looked pretty laggy and low fps to me. Which has me rethinking if I even need to consider the NGX on my 2 year old system. As someone stated, all the other stuff doesn't matter if it's not smooth.Scott Cooper

Oops, forgot to sign my name.3fps? LOLScott Cooper

Perhaps because there's no money in it?I would actually have to agree with Sekstifire in that 3d modeling is relatively easy compared to the programming side of things (at least in video game development). Sure both can be time consuming, but modeling is nowhere near as complex and involved as writing code. It's more art than science for a comparison.

I'll bet it was his last flight and he didn't quite want to land it for his final time.

It might be more helpful to give us a frame of reference to other complex addons as even listing hardware specs can be useless as performance can vary widely.