I downloaded the X-Plane demo and I thought it has some potentials. However just like FSX it is somewhat demanding as it needed more RAMs. I have WinXP 32 bit so I can't go over 3 Gigs. Anyone have any experience with this new flight Sim game?

Well...

It's not really a "new" flight sim. It's up to version 10 now.

Asking, "how good it is" is like asking "which operating system is better: Windows, Apple, or Linux".

Devotees of one or the other will fight to the death defending "THEIR" system.


FSX has the clear advantages of the most add-on developers and the largest number of users. FSX has the clear disadvantage in that Microsoft has stopped working on it, and that it doesn't take full advantage of newer graphic cards.

X-Plane 10, on the other hand, has the clear advantage that it's still being developed, and the newest release of X-Plane 10 has both 32bit and 64bit built into the (online) installer. It can use all of the memory and processors you can throw at it (although the difference in my memory usage, before and after XP10 startup & program shutdown, is only 2489MB on my system).

One set of disadvantages for XP10 is both less planes and less scenery. Another is that the user interface needs to be considerably improved on XP10. IMO, anyway.

To be honest, the developer of X-Plane is working under a severe disadvantage. He's working with a VERY small crew while fighting off a patent troll law firm. That’s why I bought the full version from his website, it's more like making a donation than paying for a finished product.

There are many more differences, and claims, such as X-Plane supposedly being more accurate and true to life. I can't tell. Will the average person be able to tell? Don't know.

There are a lot of factors to consider. The most important one may be; which one do you like better.

I have the full, world wide, version and have updated it to the 64bit beta. Rock solid. But the airport scenery is non-existent for the most part. At least FSX often has some kind of generic airport scenery for large and small city airports. With X-Plane 10 you pretty much have to build it yourself, or buy it (IF it's available for your area). Most of the commercial scenery is made for the scenic areas like Alaska, Rocky Mountains, Hawaii, etc.

For example - Wichita Mid Continent Airport (KICT) has NO buildings in X-Plane 10. FSX does. They may, or may not, be accurate, but it’s there.

In the long run, though, FSX will die away. If X-Plane doesn't take its place, I don't have a clue what will. Ten years from now I'll probably be in a nursing home saying "FSX sill works on my old i5. No need to buy one of them new quantum computers"!  :)

Whilst X-Plane isn't quite as graphically impressive as FSX, it runs better on a lower-end system and the flight realism is AMAZING! There isn't much in the way of freeware for it these days sadly.
You could do a lot worse than try the latest release of the amazing freeware Flight Gear which we LOVE here ;)

It's been over 1 1/2 years since I last tried FlightGear, but I notice that the last posting, as of today, was Aug 1st, 2012.

Unless Prepar3d 2.0 ever comes out and has something “new & improved", I'll be sticking with FSX. At least until X-Plane 10 is better developed. And even if I do move to XP10, I'll still have my favorites in FSX.

I'm waiting for X-Plane 11  ;D