alulekk

I'm just busy with real life and simply want my PC gaming and simming add-ons left to the experts and I'm happy (and prefer) to pay for completed, accurate products. I'm glad you enjoy building the airports. 4500 accurate airports is pretty incredible - Are they all on the Org? Would love to see the list

I totally agree - Honestly, I'm just not interested in totally made up airport "detail" - Scenery autogen is one thing, Airport autogen is a no no for me. Well, I think in this case we are comparing "add-ons to add-ons". I certainly don't know of any free/paid P3D add-ons that purposely create incorrect airport scenery just for the sake of "putting stuff there" I think that best summarizes the fundamental reason X-Plane continues to be where it is. The large majority of people have no time, no interest and perhaps not the skill to do anything of this sort.

That's good to hear... Hopefully the 2nd effort is already underway (and is a more popular choice) or it won't be out until XP11 is 3/4 the way through its life cycle.

The DC-6.... Yay....I guess? Super odd choice to go all in on

The other key point that Austin just seems to gloss over is that 3rd parties can code in very accurate physics for individual aircraft in FSX/P3D just fine, thus making the blade element stuff really make no difference to the average sim user and their experience. Most of us aren't "testing out new airfoils" - an area where X-Plane would obviously excel. Additionally, a whole ton of people simming, like IFR in real life, are simply on auto pilot doing procedural stuff most of the time. A computer flight simulation experience is not where one goes for "feeling like flying" - Even with control loading yokes and the best physics/aerodynamics engines, so many visual and tactile clues are missing that it's always going to completely trail behind a real flight experience. What *does* make a difference for flight simulators is a vibrant 3rd party development landscape.

Welcome to "procedurally generated" unfortunately :unsure:

That part bothered me as well. The optimistic part of me is hoping that weather modeling is a focus in XP11 and they just don't yet want to openly talk about it. XP11 must be in the pipeline at some state of development you'd think. XP9 to XP10 was about a 4 year window and that's how old XP10 is this year....so fingers crossed

Agree. I don't get the hesitation to ever let us know "what they are thinking about for XP11" in more detail. Sure would help with excitement for the platform, but maybe they just never want to be on the hook for anything. It was disappointing to not hear any agreement about WX modeling needing work from Austin in that video.

My goodness... In 2015 Austin is *still* explaining the blade element theory stuff? Disappointed to not hear anything about the future really... Lighting was good to hear mentioned at least.. Excited to see what they show us for XP11 (in who knows what year I guess....2017?) Did I miss any insinuations in there any of you guys caught?

MisterX6: Totally agree about him. Let's hear some of the others...

"easily" might be a stretch, but, that said... Would love to see some of the ones you think are the best. Which are they?

Sensational!!

Do we know what's slated to change or be improved for P3D version? I've been very successfully using the existing version with P3D

@Vr: Thanks for the response. Wish this was more exciting to me. I guess it's better than "nothing" at an airport, but I'm not sure it's that great either. I suppose it depends what you're trying to simulate. If it's just the flying without regard for accuracy in where you're flying to/from it's nice to have "something" at that airport, albeit just made up stuff that's totally incorrect. Hopefully the list of good paid and free airports continues to grow and the existing ones continue to get updated (the latter point being nearly as important as the former)

What does that mean exactly? How is it determining where to put what? From airport charts (for those that have them)? Just putting in x amount and size of buildings given the size and/or class airspace of a given airport?

After reading up on it, I'm still confused on one point... Are the airport building, structure, tarmac and taxiway locations accurate for each airport or is this download an effort to populate all airports with plausible "detail" so they are more than just runways in the middle of nothingness?

Not much positive to say about the water, but I do agree that it's nice they look "inland" I suppose.

Wish they could do something to make the water reflections more correct (looking at those altitude shots above) The water sticks out like a sore thumb and in the one with the orange sky, I'm not sure where the coloration of the water is coming from. Just looks off to me and sticks out way too much (relative to what I see when up flying anyways)

issue fixed - deleted

What's the largest G-Sync screen anyone has heard about? (coming later or out now, no matter)

@757: Do you might sharing your settings screens? I'm on a single 980 Ti now and having very good 4k results, but definitely getting down to the low 20's around Seattle in OrbX PNW and I'd love to see what you have all your settings at so I could try that out. Cheers

The comment about "no fog changes" was interesting. What were the fog changes people have been wanting?

I want to, but now I can't find any! :-( Wondering if they got pulled. Was a few days ago.

Ahh the PMDG for XP story... I can't wait to see it when it's finally out (been waiting since early 2012 it looks like on their Facebook page). More planes still doesn't solve the issues of "regions" and bringing more life to whole areas. As far as I know, nobody is even working on that for X-Plane. :-(

Is there an OrbX style region for X-Plane? No Will there ever be? Probably not. They can't make money on X-Plane because many of their users apparently desire everything for free (Austin lauds the fact that things are free for it). Third party development is what makes a sim platform vibrant and XPX has an awful paid 3rd party market due to small market size and the wrong mindset from many of the users. Does that make sense? Remember these guys? http://beti-x.com Did one great project (CZST Stewart) - Never heard from again (that was well over a year ago).