alulekk

Is it possible we are getting a bit overexcited for 3.0 simply because it "seems" like it will be a big change due to the use of "3.0"? I'm trying to wrap my head around what might actually change (besides 64 bit)

XP11

Couple things: 1. It's www.CodeLegend.com (no "s" after legend) 2. I'm sort of in agreement with louisdecoolste - The original post just "feels" a touch spammy. Maybe clean it up a touch also? A bit painful to read through with the formatting on there right now.

After dabbling in SLI, I also have decided I'm single card kind of guy. It also helps me to not get so hammered in $ pain when I want to always grab the latest and greatest card all the time.

Awesome!!!! I gotta do something like this.

Correct me if I'm wrong on this, but I think sitting really close is the whole point (and enabled by 4k resolutions) so that the cockpit and gauges can get even closer to "real life size & feel", yeah?

AWESOME! Post some pics of that setup, please!!!

Nice pics Mitch. They definitely highlight how much XPX needs some way (or 3rd parties) to make regions look much much more specialized to where they are. That unfortunately looks basically nothing like the South Pacific (the water, the islands, the foliage, on and on)

I mostly agree with all that enjoy the occasional excited/positive post. I was mainly saying (as others above seem to have echoed a bit) that it could be toned down a hair and still be every bit as effective without inducing the "eye rolls" that I tend to get upon first glance. (...and others who have PM'ed me the same thought) I think my years and years....and years of waiting on things from Laminar has just made me less excited than some about XPX, which is 100% on me of course (fully admit that).... The progress of late has definitely been great to see though. No question about that!

Sorry about that - you're right. I read through your post in my email client which jumbled all the quotations up... (edited above post)

For my post at least, It was not meant as "personal attack" at all... Honestly, it was simply feedback for Mitch as I've been reading variations of the "over the top" posts for a long long time now. There is no way to say what I said in any more of a gentle fashion and I think it's OK to say things that are feedback oriented. Those won't always be all positive! Edited

It does look superb! ...but you do realize your comparison to OrbX is flawed right? Even Andreas I'm sure would chime in and point out that OrbX products are doing more for a region than just mesh.

Honestly Mitch, your posts do tend to come across as indescribably over the top "positive, amazing, blow me away, best thing since oxygen" at times. ...Which is fun for excitement value I guess, but it doesn't lead a reader to believe that the post will be particularly objective. I don't know this Roland (Sparkie) user personally, but maybe that's what he/she meant?

Good link. Just backed

Yep - Allllll that waiting and speculation and the Fury X is dead on arrival if you ask me. Needs to cost less than the 980 Ti otherwise there is very little reason to buy it, especially if you factor in driver support.

Agree with others. Keep the platform moving forward and charge me baby! The old versions and old Add ons will keep working just fine for those who choose to stay put.

I think we're talking about two different things here. For my personal preferences I'd rather not have buildings tarmacs and taxiways added in the wrong places as that actually just goes against real world data for the airport. If you're going to places you're not familiar this is the opposite of what you want since you can't reference actual data you might be looking at since the airports are inaccurate now.

Fair enough. To each their own and if you're flying to airports you're not familiar with it make sense that you would not find it important. It does of course mean that using real world data to orient yourself will be pointless at and around those airports. Perhaps it fits in nicely with Austin's "plausible world" concept I guess

+1 on that - NOTHING beats XPX right now for the look of mountains, although the Extended DSF fix didn't make Mt. Rainier at KBFI RWY 13 come to life like it should, sadly.

Well, those structures are actually still "where they are not", but it's good you're enjoying them. Buildings and tarmacs, etc, nowhere resembling being where or what they are supposed to be "made the big difference for you"? That's the "simulation" you're going for? I guess I must be the only person that actually flies an airplane in places where I'm very familiar with what's out there, and would like it to resemble real world airport data I'm flying with (like the diagrams and sat views) I'm happy everyone got, basically, airport auto-gen for X-Plane I guess. From a realism perspective it's a huge turn off to me, which of course is why I'm not using it.

I'm frustrated - I've been in the XP eco system waiting game for over a decade and it just kills me they move so slowly is all

I don't think Laminar is going anywhere either. I'm not sure I've ever seen much "predicting demise" the last 10 years -- More of disappointment that they haven't taken the simming world by the horns and become *THE* platform

Please do! Could you upload it to any of the free services and just link it here so we can all check it out?

Where was that stated in here? (I missed it)

Thank YOU! Nice to hear someone else say this. The customer isn't the problem here, Laminar is. Great add-on idea for Laminar (since they're whoring out to mobile for cash) would be to use the data available from FAA airport diagrams to create accurate taxiways/tarmacs and basic buildings at least for the USA airports where there is data - maybe in XP11.... Here's KRNT (Renton in Seattle area): http://aeronav.faa.gov/d-tpp/1506/05396ad.pdf