finkelstein

Always interesting to see/hear what converts end up liking or disliking. Most of these seem to be usability factors like the camera system or framerates. Surprisingly, I don't read about a lot of people having issues with the UI after they have used X-Plane for a little while (not saying it doesn't need improvement).

Vaughan, I'm not sure you realize how many millions of people use Steam on a daily basis. The outages a *very* few and far between. If you are having trouble to connect this often, that's definitely an issue with your internet connection. If it's stable/good enough to download an app as big as X-Plane 10, I wonder how it's possible to lose connection as much as you seem to do. If you haven't had it for more than two weeks and used it for less than a total of two hours, Steam does offer refunds.

FOV can be adjusted in the rendering settings (lower middle area of the window). Most people seem pretty happy with a setting of 85. As for the stock aircraft, they are stock aircraft after all. If the controls are too touchy, you can adjust them in the respective settings menu and see which setting is to your liking. In general, aircraft will feel less on rails than what you may be used to. As for the educated attempt/decision, you will only know once you've actively used it for a good while. If you are trying to replicate the exact same experience that you have in P3D, you will not be able to. A different sim is, after all, different. Is there something about P3D that drove you to give X-Plane a try? Or are you just curious?

Thanks for the info. Sounds good, but it takes the overall price for the aircraft to 70 bucks. A little steep, me thinks.

Have you tried disabling all plugins? (Just move them to a different folder)

A slight note on this for those less familiar with X-Plane/W2XP: the non "_osm" versions of W2XP will in my experience come with a significantly higher performance cost due to the exclusions.

Quite the review and love letter to this aircraft! I own vFlyte's Arrow and it's nice to see they have progressed quite a bit. Good to see them start implementing custom code and little quirks like the flap trick. I am not super interested at flying around at the 140's low speed a whole lot, but definitely willing to support them in their development. I think I initially put it off as yet-another-GA-aircraft but you may have sold me on this one. The Original version does look a heck of a lot better than the Classic one. Not sure if the pricing will do them any favors. I can see where they're coming from and it keeps the individual model rather affordable, but seeing close to the same aircraft released for almost the same price at the same time will surely put a sour taste in some people's mouths.

I'm sure they'll tackle more twins once the B58 is out. See this post: http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/forums/topic/103895-xp-needs-rep-for-the-turboprops/&do=findComment&comment=1027124

While I agree with you, I don't think they are what the OP is looking for.

Wow, that came faster than expected. Nice! I have both the CT210 and F33A packs and they're great. The V35 doesn't really tickle my fancy and I'll be looking forward to the B58 REP instead. As for the discount, I think they're charging a fair price. I've also seen them go on sale before.

Try this: http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/files/file/31085-xorganizer-windows/ It should solve all your qualms about scenery management in X-Plane. This is also a good read to help you understand the structure. Once you understand it, it's really a no-brainer: http://asn-xp.aerosoft.com/?page_id=9708 Just like any serious sim, X-Plane's environment has a learning curve to it. Think of it this way: to anyone coming to FSX/P3D from X-Plane, terms like meshes, textures and landclass, global bases and vectors and what not will make equally little sense while they are likely obvious to you. With any perceived disadvantage, you'll also find advantages (like not having dozens of installers that do god knows what to Windows and its registry, thus being able to simply copy paste your X-Plane install as a backup whenever and however you please).

Level of Detail. Objects, etc. If you play around with it at night, you'll see the effect immediately.

Great shots. This bird is looking better and better by the day. One thing I haven't seen anywhere is bad weather flying in the DC-6, which is obviously something a lot of us simmers do from the comfort of our desktops. Does the DC-6 have rain on the wind shield modeled? Or perhaps even icing? I think this is a very interesting question (as there are not too many aircraft developers that develop for both ESP and X-Plane) but I doubt you will see a response to this in official capacity.

I'm not sure what problem you're trying to solve. Why not continue to fly them if they are what you are looking for? That said: if it doesn't have to be a jet, the LES Saab 340 and CRJ-200 have both already been mentioned. Th Saab is a study level aircraft and the CRJ is very complex too. My impression is that you care more about the visuals (you mention Carenado), so the X-Crafts E175 could also be a good choice in your case. As you correctly mention, the Avroliner should be avoided. Not sure if that project is even still alive and kicking. It's also available at x-plane.org if that's the store of your preference: http://store.x-plane.org/CRJ-200_p_82.html

And if you're not a fan of Bonanzas, just go for the CT210 Centurion with Reality Expansion Pack.

Just curious, where did you hear this?

A320. I'll let Jan chime in on just how much he likes it himself

You are right that it can be daunting to newcomers. I think this is partly due to X-Plane's UI (or lack thereof, i.e. scenery ini file) and partly once again a case of what one is used to. I remember being absolutely bewildered by FSX's system and had no idea what to get or what was needed to improve the world. I wonder if it's also a case of more quality FAQs/tutorials for this being available for FSX/P3D, due to the larger amount of users.

I agree with Jimmy here and it's probably something long-time or "native" X-Planers will almost always disagree on with FSX/P3D converts. I vastly prefer the drag & drop method of installing and managing add-ons easily. Whether that is the majority of (potential!) customers I do not know.

The Saab is indeed a fantastic contender. It could use some usability improvements but otherwise, it's a phenomenal add-on. I believe the FlyJSim Q400 update is the next item on the developer's to-do list!

Picked this up yesterday and have been thoroughly impressed. The textures are top notch. There's lovely details in the surrounding areas and the night lighting looks great. Love the hangar light. Highly recommended! One thing: would be nice if they would offer an option of ortho or no ortho for those that use ortho imagery already. I guess one could go into WED and delete it though. That said, I can't wait for them to bring their other sceneries over! Not sure if Berlin is needed just yet but the others such as Mykonos and Skiathos are high on my list. Instant purchases judging by this.

This looks bloody marvellous. Instant buy. I hope it pays off for them!

I share this sentiment. When it comes to the brains of things, I would say both the IXEG and the NGX are within throwing distance. It does feel like there was a bit more heart put into the development of the IXEG. The immersion is indeed unprecedented.

Makes sense. Danke!

Jan, since you're here and x-pilot is down.. is the end of descent waypoint requirement something currently related to your product or something that affects the plane in general? How would you go about entering the route in real life?