Simviation Forum - Looks like "Flight" is in for some tough competition....

	Search the archive:

Simviation Main Site | Site Search | Upload Images

Simviation Forum › Current Flight Simulator Series › MS Flight › Looks like "Flight" is in for some tough competition....

(Moderators: beaky, ozzy72, Fly2e, Bob70, JBaymore, BigTruck)

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Pages: 1

Send Topic

Print

Looks like "Flight" is in for some tough competition.... (Read 1189 times)

Jan 15^th, 2011 at 12:13pm

Moach Offline
Colonel
Jet-Powered PropellerHead
São Paulo, Brazil

Gender:
Posts: 991

i was pretty stunned when i saw it, X-Plane 10 is looking quite promising right now, look: Shocked

Shocked

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCoDPNvOMP0&NR=1

amazed yet?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-8e8-9yzHg&feature=related

default craft preview:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qDhY6Pj2L8&feature=related

i just wanna take this opportunity to say two words that i believe sum up every request we could possibly make -- "top that!" Grin

Grin

seriously, if MS manages to measure up to the advanced features and incredible looks of XP10, whilst still making it "all-welcoming and fun for everyone" such as they have mentioned, we shall have one seriously awesome simulator at hands Roll Eyes

Roll Eyes

i guess it doesn't hurt to point out how MS is definitely NOT ALONE in the FlightSim business - and it's got some pretty hard ~~ground~~ sky to cover if they wanna be still "on top" by the time "Flight" hits the shelves Cheesy

Cheesy

needless to say - but i feel it's impossible to overstate this - "Flight" MUST be able to run SMOOTHLY at top-settings on viable hardware existing at the time of release - X-Plane, as far as i've flown it, has a far superior looks-to-performance ratio, and that's NOT something that MS can afford to overlook anymore...

and as for us sim-pilots, we have nothing but to gain from this situation - ain't a little competition a grand motivation? Wink

Wink

cheerz!

Come, one and all aboard! - The Russian Roullete in the sky!
One in each Six of my personalities knows not at all how to fly!

IP Logged

Reply #1 - Jan 15^th, 2011 at 2:18pm

BrandonF Offline
Colonel
The Future of Flight
Location: Earth...Duh!!!!

Gender:
Posts: 2296

Was it just me, or did that first video stutter quite a bit? Nothing in it really "shocked" me. You can make FSX look just as good as far as most of the details go. I think Flight and XP10 are both trying to appeal to different audiences, too. Flight is to the same hardcore flight sim fans along with beginners and the average person. X-Plane 10 seems to be more for the expert simmers and real world pilots. Both sims have great potential, but I don't see myself ever switching to X-Plane.

IP Logged

Reply #2 - Jan 15^th, 2011 at 6:47pm

Spindrift Offline
Colonel
Simple things done well.
58N

Gender:
Posts: 267

"Amazed yet?"

Ermmm... no.... I've tried X-plane (well, the demo. Ran great!) and it's just, well... OOGLY. No offense to fans but it really looks like FS2000 on a bad day. Cheesy

Cheesy

I WILL however concede that JRollons aircraft models are pure works of art! MS won't have a hard time making Flight Prettier, but boy, if they can match that level of detail for default AC *whistles* Cool

Cool

And yes, a little healthy competition is good for everybody!

IP Logged

Reply #3 - Jan 16^th, 2011 at 4:01am

New Light Offline
Colonel
Mandeville, LA

Gender:
Posts: 93

Well, if it looks and performs as well as seems to demonstrate in the snippets, I might be switching. As I've said in other posts, if screenshots are FS's main objective, then they should call it what it is, an "Aeronautical Photoshop" with a side note that states something to the effect of "Oh, and, by the way, you can 'fly' the airplanes too..."

Screenshots are a wonderful subdiscipline of the many other subdisciplines and interests within FS, but the title "Flight Simulator" seems to leave the "flight" "simulation" in the background. Once, all bugs, patches, and buying all of the associated programs along with a pc that will run the program smoothly and properly, FS9 & FSX are very nice looking and the "flyability" is very nice.

FS does seem to faulter in some major areas as far as "flight" "simulation" is concerned, some of which are proper and fully functional panels for the correct aircraft, fully functional avionics, ATC and emergencies. Again, the title, FS, seems to be a bit misleading - simulating flight is a somewhat of another subdiscipline of the program, not the main objective of the program. Of course, the new program name of "Flight" might be the first sign of admittance that FS is not really a "flight simulator".

If X Plane 10's panels look and perform as good as the they seem on the snippets, I'll have to take a serious look at the program. I, as well as many others have had many of the same complaints and wishes for FS. We even have a section devoted to "Wish Lists" for the new program. Will MS put out a good and well tested program? Or will we still have the same ole, tired avionics, panels, ATC, etc., with A LOT better trimmings? Time will tell...

Believe me when I say that I'm not a real pilot (4 hours in a C150M), but, I do try to "fly" as close to "by the book" as possible. I started from the very beginning in the Cub and built my flight skills from there, and have learned to "fly" somewhat decently in more powerful single engine aircraft - not great by any means - but good enough to want to do things right. My current pc allows me "fly" FSX with all settings on 100% and still be silky smooth without stutters and such. Right now, I'm happy with FSX, but it was a painful and expensive path to get everything to work correctly. I'll see what "Flight" offers verses X Plane 10 when the time comes. It may be a pos, and it may deliver...

Semper Fi,

Dave

IP Logged

Reply #4 - Jan 16^th, 2011 at 2:29pm

Spindrift Offline
Colonel
Simple things done well.
58N

Gender:
Posts: 267

New Light wrote on Jan 16^th, 2011 at 4:01am:

FS does seem to faulter in some major areas as far as "flight" "simulation" is concerned, some of which are proper and fully functional panels for the correct aircraft, fully functional avionics, ATC and emergencies. Again, the title, FS, seems to be a bit misleading - simulating flight is a somewhat of another subdiscipline of the program, not the main objective of the program. Of course, the new program name of "Flight" might be the first sign of admittance that FS is not really a "flight simulator".

You just reminded me of something else I didn't really like about X-plane 9... no traffic! and no actual ATC either! Unless I was really missing something, or it was excluded from the demo... if X-plane 10 delivers the whole package, I may try it out, but I don't know about switching... yet... the realistic experience is one thing, but a living world with terrain detail and some modest eye-candy push it over the edge to near-reality and add quite a lot to the enjoyment of any simulator. For me, only FS has that going right now. Hide & Watch!

Smiley

IP Logged

Reply #5 - Jan 16^th, 2011 at 4:19pm

Moach Offline
Colonel
Jet-Powered PropellerHead
São Paulo, Brazil

Gender:
Posts: 991

from what i've been reading, the "vanilla" package leaves much to be desired... BUT.... for addon developers it's a FAR more interesting platform than MSFS... it's THAT MUCH more versatile...

it allows addons to add a lot more to the overall experience... and they claim their API is easier to deal with (which in comparison to the FSX SDK, doesn't really require much to achieve)...

i think we're almost at a turning point... if XP10 delivers as much as it promises, then for the first time, MSFS will have a true competitor to worry about... specially if they continue with the GFWL-down-our-throats concept, which already seems to be reason for a lot of dirty looks

at the moment, FSX and XP-9 is still a dispute that most claim will favour the former - yet in the aspects where XP does prevail (which are mostly simulation-wise features), it does so by a longshot... Roll Eyes

Roll Eyes

right now, if I were mr. Austin, i'd be aiming to invest a lot into covering all that FS fans expect of a sim, such as the awesome aircraft models with 3D cockpits, the built-in ATC engine... i'd even go as far as developing a FSX-to-XPlane aircraft converter, so users can migrate the immense FS addon-base to XP10 Roll Eyes

Roll Eyes

i think this is a critical point for both sides... if XP-10 delivers best right now, it has a good chance of taking over the flightsim community Shocked

Shocked

Come, one and all aboard! - The Russian Roullete in the sky!
One in each Six of my personalities knows not at all how to fly!

IP Logged

Reply #6 - Jan 16^th, 2011 at 6:13pm

skoker Offline
Colonel
Jordan never wore his
safety goggles...
1G3

Gender:
Posts: 4611

They would need to severely need to increase texture quality for me to consider it at all.

IP Logged

Reply #7 - Jan 16^th, 2011 at 6:30pm

New Light Offline
Colonel
Mandeville, LA

Gender:
Posts: 93

I just watched the vids again and noticed two things.

The first is, that there was AI traffic in all three vids. Is that a whole add on? Does the "basic" program have ANY AI at all? If not, there would have to be an AI program available before I'd switch. That's a big deal in my book, because part of "flying", is having to deal with ATC and other traffic on the ground and in the air. There's obviously, an AI program for XP9, so hopefully that could be converted fairly quickly to XP10 - but I'd wait until that got hammered out.

The second thing I noticed, is the high LOD (Level of Detail) in the cockpit and the panels - they look outstanding. I can only wonder, and hope that they will be as functional as they are good looking. If so, I'd readily trade scenery LOD for better cockpit/panel LOD and functionality - I/we would have to pay for better scenery for Flight or XP 10 anyway.

I'll note that Carenado has begun making planes for XP 9.5+, and more payware sites are beginning to offer more products for X Plane.

I'll also submit that, if it's an even toss up between Flight and X Plane 10, there may be enough backlash against MS for holding us at their mercy for so long, that a good amount of simmers will switch to XP10 just to spite MS. That fact may be just the thing to spur MS to get one helluva program out there without any major league bugs, patches or updates. Either way, it still seems that we will have to spend a boatload of money to get both of the sims looking good and performing well. Overall, we may indeed, have ourselves a real b!tch slapper coming over the horizon... creators and consumers alike.

Semper Fi,

Dave

IP Logged

Reply #8 - Jan 17^th, 2011 at 6:52am

Moach Offline
Colonel
Jet-Powered PropellerHead
São Paulo, Brazil

Gender:
Posts: 991

one thing that i REALLY appreciate about X-Plane is the way the developers talk openly and straight-up to their public...

while M$ has some *urgh* publicity chump write up a perfectly generic piece of rambling on vaguely how they intend to approach the development of "flight", which sounds like a fishy sales pitch and tells us a whole lot of nothing as to what's REALLY going on - the XP10 crew has no holdbacks into blogging highly technical details on EXACTLY what they're doing, how it's going, and why they're doing it they way they are.... Roll Eyes

Roll Eyes

heads up, M$ - people DO NOT appreciate being "publicit'ized"... when you treat us like that it feels like politicians making vague promisses in a way they can "fine-print" themselves out of the heat, WHEN they don't deliver Angry

Angry

we wanna hear details from the development team, how are they addressing the performance bottlenecks that plagued FSX? how are they employing (if at all) new DX11 GPU capabilities? - what new simulation features they're working on?

we DO NOT care for the dumbed-down, sugar-coated, "everything we do is perfect" salesmens spew of a P/R team who very likely have no idea what FS is all about!

look alive! - i advise you M$ folks in the most friendly of ways - treating folks like this is why EA is the most hated/pirated game company out there... M$ is not far behind on that aspect - and should a tie between Flight and XP-10 arise (highly likely, from what i read on their dev-blog), ppl could very well go with the guys who are "not evil" for a change Roll Eyes

Roll Eyes

Come, one and all aboard! - The Russian Roullete in the sky!
One in each Six of my personalities knows not at all how to fly!

IP Logged

Reply #9 - Jan 17^th, 2011 at 12:12pm

Spindrift Offline
Colonel
Simple things done well.
58N

Gender:
Posts: 267

Moach wrote on Jan 17^th, 2011 at 6:52am:

one thing that i REALLY appreciate about X-Plane is the way the developers talk openly and straight-up to their public...

...the XP10 crew has no holdbacks into blogging highly technical details on EXACTLY what they're doing, how it's going, and why they're doing it they way they are.... Roll Eyes

Roll Eyes

...we wanna hear details from the development team, how are they addressing the performance bottlenecks that plagued FSX? how are they employing (if at all) new DX11 GPU capabilities? - what new simulation features they're working on?

we DO NOT care for the dumbed-down, sugar-coated, "everything we do is perfect" salesmens spew of a P/R team who very likely have no idea what FS is all about!

I heartily agree with you on this! I've got a little confession to make... even though I'm not a fan of X-plane's looks... every tuesday, I check out their Developement News Blog! Hey, maybe you've just opened up a little part of my conscience! Cheesy

Cheesy

We want to hear more about Flight and it's development! give us some nitty gritty details Microsoft!

Smiley

IP Logged

Reply #10 - Jan 23^rd, 2011 at 8:40am

FuturePilot Offline
Colonel
FSX Gold
Grand Cayman

Gender:
Posts: 1544

I haven't been excited about X-Plane ever since I tried the demo. To me, the graphics are still better in FSX, but the main problem I have with X-Plane is the controls... to me the airplanes don't look like they're flying, they look like some two year old is holding them playing...

Of course, I would be thrilled if it did motivate MS but I don't think it needs to to keep it's audience. Wink

Wink

X-Plane looks like Graphics-wise they should be looking pretty good in a few more versions...

ASUS M4A89GTD, 16GB 1333MHz DDR3 RAM, 160GB 10,000 RPM HDD + 1TB 7200 RPM HDD, AMD Phenom II x4 965BE 3.4 GHz OC @ 3.8 GHz, 1GB EVGA GeForce GDDR5 GPU

IP Logged

Reply #11 - Jan 23^rd, 2011 at 8:53am

JSpahn Offline
Colonel
Im too sexy for my hair
Philadelphia,PA

Gender:
Posts: 1808

Hey guys all the information out there for XP 10 is kinda misleading right now, for instance nobody on the XP side of development has the completed product right now and the majority of the screen shots are from XP 9 showing specific features due for XP10. I suggest looking at everything linked below to get a better idea of whats in store for XP.

As far as ATC and default airport buildings, which in my opinion was a major drawback of XP, they will be implemented in this release. Also a major update of the weather system. I have to admit i am skeptical in regards to the new weather system....but wont know until the final release what it will be like ...

Links:

http://x-plane.com/pg_news.html

http://xplanescenery.blogspot.com/2010/10/no-one-has-all-of-x-plane-10.html

http://xplanescenery.blogspot.com/

Here are a few movies showing the new global lighting system:
http://xplanescenery.blogspot.com/2010/08/more-global-illumination-video.html

And they are focusing on Multi-Core processing, good thing cauz i got an i7:
http://xplanescenery.blogspot.com/2010/08/multicore-and-version-10.html

IP Logged

Reply #12 - Jan 29^th, 2011 at 12:02am

BAW0343 Offline
Colonel
No, now go away or I shall
taunt you a second time
Mesa, AZ

Gender:
Posts: 3294

I'm a die hard MSFS fan and never considered switching to XP....

Until now.

After looking at those videos and reading what people have wrote, my plan is to switch to the simulator that fill what I consider the minimum requirements for the next gen of FS:

1. ATC that's more in depth then the FSX default system. It would be nice to declare emergencies but not necessary. However, as an aspiring ATC myself It would be nice to see some more real world procedures take place. For example, if one of these sims implements actual separation between aircraft, then they have a big leg up IMO. FSX IFR flights are a nice feature.. but 99.99% of the the the ATC warn me about hazardous aircraft in 2 specific situations that don't matter to me anymore. 1. When they aren't a threat. Standard separation is 5 miles horizontal and 1000 ft. vertical. If I'm at FL320, I don't give a crap what the guy at FL280 is doing. and 2. After it's already passed me. At least 50% of my traffic advisories are off. Had it been an actual situation I would be long dead before ATC got around to telling me about it.

2. Decent graphics. I run FSX medium to medium low for ground textures and slightly higher for everything else. I feel this is a fairly good standard as a base. The biggest drawback for XP10 so far is the graphics I've seen in the videos. Looks too FS2002 or 90's era console gameish for me. Of course, the videos are preliminary so no real judgement has been made just yet. I just don't want to feel like I took a step backward.

3. Improved flight model. Something we've always wanted. I think it's about time we got it, right?

4. Detailed and fairly accurate aircraft. So far since I became a Flight sim enthusiast, MSFS has impressed me with some of their aircraft and the systems therein. Of course for every model they've nailed, they messed up 3 others. So far from the video from XP10 the default look AMAZING. As long as the systems work as well as they look.

5. AI of course. I've replaced FSX AI with WOAI and it's quite nice. Hopefully something like that comes up for XP and MS Flight.

I figure since I've become used to FSX and its now technically the "old" version of FS we can use it as a base to compare the newcomers to. I have little doubt in my mind that MS Flight will blow XP10 out of the water with the graphics, however, if that's all they have to offer there's a good chance I'll be switching to XP10 if they model the flight environment as well as they seem to be. MSFS has had a long run. It's time they upped their game and stopped trying to impress us with eye candy. Beautiful eye candy it may be Tongue

Tongue

IP Logged

Reply #13 - Jan 29^th, 2011 at 12:05am

DowninFlames Offline
Colonel
KJAX

Posts: 182

From my experience with X-Plane 9 it's like flying MS2002 birds over Orbx terrain.

IP Logged

Reply #14 - Jan 29^th, 2011 at 12:42am

JDB Offline
1st Lieutenant
I Like Flight Simulation!

Posts: 2

Well I hope that MS Flight does has some stiff competition. There are a large number of simmers who will never be able to experience it because MS do not intend to roll out the online service to a large swathe of Asia and Africa. It has been hard enough to get FSX in these regions, but now we face a total lockout. Cry

Cry

Cry

IP Logged

Reply #15 - Jan 29^th, 2011 at 9:38am

JSpahn Offline
Colonel
Im too sexy for my hair
Philadelphia,PA

Gender:
Posts: 1808

Honestly though guys I do find issue with the development team for X-Plane. Personally I dont think they are willing to support third party development enough.

My recent example of this, REXplane hit the market and it was developed under version 9.21 of X-Plane. That version of X-Plane had an option in the rendering settings for cloud puff size and frequency. Under 9.21 REXplane looked fantastic, problem is if you upgrade past version 9.4x those settings are gone and the REX clouds look horrible. I took issue with this on the REX fourms and basically those guys were told that XP 10 is being worked on and there is no plans on developing XP9 anymore. Since that post XP9 has been updated about 3 or 4 times without an update to the rendering settings, so still crappy clouds.

Honestly feel bad for the REX team since they went out on a ledge and started developing for XP and this is how Austin pays these guys back. I can only assume that bad press killed REXPlane sales. So who would want to develop for XP knowing this?

Im excited about XP10, but honestly gave up on 9, I feel ripped off, and hope Austin pulls his head outta his arse in the future.

There is a segment of the community who are into eye candy and although there is debate on the aircraft physics being more realistic, I always thought the MSFS series was more convincing overall because of the fantastic scenery available....so I am on the fence again...lol

Hopefully flight changes enough to convince me to come back...

IP Logged

Reply #16 - Feb 5^th, 2011 at 4:51pm

Fr. Bill Offline
Colonel
I used to have a life;
now I have GMax!
Hammond, IN

Gender:
Posts: 962

It's precisely because X-Plane's development environment is a constantly "moving target" that I won't invest any time or my money in developing for it...

Bill
Gauge Programming - 3d Modeling Eaglesoft Development Group Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600-4GB DDR2 Crucial PC6400-800 GB SATA-ATI Radeon HD2400 Pro 256MB DX10 NOTE: Unless explicitly stated in the post, everything written by my hand is MY opinion. I do NOT speak for any company, real or imagined...

IP Logged

Reply #17 - Feb 6^th, 2011 at 8:33am

usapatriot Offline
Colonel
Please Upload Image To
SimV!
Miami, FL

Gender:
Posts: 270

Needs better GFX. FSX with REX + GEX + UTX = AWESOME.

Antec 902 - i7 920 @ 4.0GHz - G.Skill 6GB DDR3 - Radeon 5870 1GB - Win 7 x64

IP Logged

Reply #18 - Feb 6^th, 2011 at 12:45pm

Daube Offline
Colonel
Alternative bloomer
Nice (FR)

Gender:
Posts: 5833

usapatriot wrote on Feb 6^th, 2011 at 8:33am:

Needs better GFX. FSX with REX + GEX + UTX = AWESOME.

Yes, but from what can be seen on the screenshots and what has been annouced on the future scenery technique, XPlane 10 = EVEN MORE AWESOME.

JSpahn, I just read your post and I'm extremely surprised by what you describe.
I feel sorry for the REX team that invested efforts into developping addons for XPlane9, as well as for the REXPlane customers. I really hope XPlane 10 will have a better "marketing" strategy...

Got bloom ?
Got mountains ?
Got damage ?

IP Logged

Reply #19 - Apr 5^th, 2011 at 7:03pm

wahubna Offline
Colonel
WMU Bronco
Michigan

Gender:
Posts: 1064

I have to say I will stick with MSFS unless Flight takes a radical departure. I have grown up in the aviation community, done some flying, and currently studying aeronautical engineering. Based on my experience and all the pilots and aeronautical engineers and professors that I have talked to about flight sims, they all agree MSFS wins hands down. When my dad goes to re-current for the Lear 45 and Falcon 10 they use a commercial version of MS FS2004 strictly made for those aircraft. The thing is, MSFS matches the REAL aircraft behavior to the sim, X-Plane (at least the one we all would buy) does not account for enough of the phenomenon that happen with aerodynamics. "Kite" feel and "lack of scale" are thrown around a lot when talking about X-Plane aerodynamics. Some of the specifics is X-Plane does not realistically match wing tip affects (which are HUGE) and does not match weights very well. Thats the advantage of MSFS' "tabular aircraft performance" method. You can take the real figures from the real aircraft thus making the sim version behave like a real one. That said, X-Plane does have $1,000-$5,000 improvements to the commercial sim (that we buy) to make it as real as it gets..BUT even though I would like that, no way in hell I am dropping over a grand for it.
One more thing, those of us that have aviation in our blood and LOVE flying and I stress that LOVE, know that the scenery is a big part of making a flight enjoyable. Its all about taking off on a nice cool fall morning and seeing deer through the shedding trees, the rising sun glistening off the thickening clouds, steam coming off from lakes and rivers, etc. FSX, and it looks like Flight will too, capture the beauty of the Earth below you as you fly, X-Plane looks like a game.
Lastly, MSFS is made by pilots, with the help of pilots, for pilots (and pilot wanna be's). X-Plane is made by aeronautical engineers for aeronautical engineers originally, they just decided to release a cheaper version albeit I am hearing $80+ for X-Plane 10.
In short, X-Plane and MSFS are too me two different classes of sims. X-Plane is something you would find in the aero lab while MSFS is what you would see at flight school.

‎"At that time [1909] the chief engineer was almost always the chief test pilot as well. That had the fortunate result of eliminating poor engineering early in aviation."- Igor Sikorsky

IP Logged

Reply #20 - Apr 5^th, 2011 at 7:47pm

Steve M Offline
Colonel
Cambridge On.

Gender:
Posts: 4097

Very well said Wahubna, I really don't think MS wants to be caught with their pants down this time. If MS doesn't know what other flightsims are up to by now, they should hang up their hats and turn out the lights.

Flying with twins is a lot of fun..

IP Logged

Reply #21 - Apr 22^nd, 2011 at 4:04pm

cavity Offline
Colonel
I love YaBB 1G - SP1!

Posts: 388

Check out this plane and x-plane itself, it even has me interested and I have never thought of purchasing X-plane.

http://forums.x-pilot.com/index.php?topic=2014.msg18735#msg18735

Todd

IP Logged

Reply #22 - Apr 22^nd, 2011 at 4:48pm

JSpahn Offline
Colonel
Im too sexy for my hair
Philadelphia,PA

Gender:
Posts: 1808

cavity wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2011 at 4:04pm:

Check out this plane and x-plane itself, it even has me interested and I have never thought of purchasing X-plane.

http://forums.x-pilot.com/index.php?topic=2014.msg18735#msg18735

Todd

That AC uses an imbedded version of VAS FMC, think that idea is fantastic...It will allow aircraft designers to quickly develop complete systems without starting from scratch.

I've only read bits and pieces but from what I see, I think more developers are hopping aboard and using VAS FMC this way

It would be nice to see more aircraft that match the detail of any of PMDG's work

IP Logged

Reply #23 - Apr 23^rd, 2011 at 2:05am

Rocket_Bird Offline
Colonel
Canada

Gender:
Posts: 1214

Yeah, that CRJ-200 makes me drool, even though I'm not normally a fan of the CRJ-2. Now I'm tempted to reload XP9

Cheers,
RB

IP Logged

Reply #24 - Apr 23^rd, 2011 at 7:33am

rvtmendoza Offline
Colonel
Lovin' It
philippines

Gender:
Posts: 51

That video made is mouth-watery, very nice detailed aircraft. I hope Flight would be better than that, not in terms of graphics, but in improved flight dynamics and important things that make up a good simulation.
The first list on the things I am wishing for Flight is the panels, Microsoft please let us use all the buttons and switches you include in the aircraft
Next one is better simulation of emergencies and include more of them too. Maybe include also an option so that emergencies occur randomly. That would be very exciting to some or most of the players.
And last on the list is the improve graphics and environment

IP Logged

Reply #25 - Apr 29^th, 2011 at 6:45pm

wahubna Offline
Colonel
WMU Bronco
Michigan

Gender:
Posts: 1064

I just bought, installed, and flew around my local airport (Tulip City KBIV) in X-Plane 9. FSX is FAR superior! The flight dynamics on the Cessna 172SP were so far off that I could do SNAP ROLLS right after take off nose high with less than 90kts airspeed. My roll rate must have been around 300 degrees per second! I could also side slip it wwaaayyy over 45deg with virtually no adverse affect on the aircraft. I would also like to mention that the graphics sucked a lot. I have FSX cranked 85%-90% (depending on how you define it) and it looks amazing. X-Plane....it reminded me of FS 98. The local scenery was no where near the same. I live near Lake Michigan and Lake Macatawa, Lake Mac did not even show up, the draw distance was so short I could not find Lake Michigan either which is sad to say the least. I was really disappointed, FSX is superior in almost every way except modding I think. I fiddled around with the plane maker, it is good and very easy to change aircraft and import them. Plus you can see the vector fields, pressure diagrams, and force vectors which as an aeronautical engineer student is very cool. So I will keep X-Plane for academic purposes but as for siming, STAY AWAY FROM IT!
Oh, the rumors of planes feeling like "kites" and not having correct maneuvering capability is dead on true. Snap rolls in a 172 below 90kts?!
Oh, I forgot too, I don think the gauges are accurate, I had to point the 172 nose down about 5 degrees at 80kts to stop climbing....at least according to the VSI...but the altimeter was barely moving (VSI was indicating over 500ftpmin +) and the ground was not moving away even after several minutes.....I dont know what to make of that. At any rate, looks like the 172 is a real acrobatic plane! lol

‎"At that time [1909] the chief engineer was almost always the chief test pilot as well. That had the fortunate result of eliminating poor engineering early in aviation."- Igor Sikorsky

IP Logged

Reply #26 - Apr 29^th, 2011 at 6:54pm

wahubna Offline
Colonel
WMU Bronco
Michigan

Gender:
Posts: 1064

Okay, I just did the same flight in FSX, same plane, same airport, same time, same runway. Hmm, the 172 stalled and crashed shortly after attempting a snap roll (big surprise lol). I also just noticed something that I missed before. The cockpit view in X-plane sucks, I could not zoom out enough to see even half of what you see in the FSX 172 VC at start up. Defiantly staying with FSX!

‎"At that time [1909] the chief engineer was almost always the chief test pilot as well. That had the fortunate result of eliminating poor engineering early in aviation."- Igor Sikorsky

IP Logged

Reply #27 - Apr 30^th, 2011 at 11:30am

nickle Offline
Colonel
I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
San Diego, Ca

Gender:
Posts: 342

X Plane has a 2D look and is retro FS.
That needs to change to be a top flight sim.

IP Logged

Reply #28 - May 8^th, 2011 at 6:04pm

JSpahn Offline
Colonel
Im too sexy for my hair
Philadelphia,PA

Gender:
Posts: 1808

Yeha the current version of X-Plane leave alot to the imagination....

IP Logged

Reply #29 - Sep 21^st, 2011 at 1:28pm

turbofire Offline
Colonel
Please don't link images!
Central - USA

Gender:
Posts: 47

Been gone quite awhile due to illness, but I'm back. I believe one's operating system has a lot to do with aircraft performance in turms or jitters or frame stutters so to speak. I have FS2000, FS9, and FSX on my computer and fly all three, depending on my mood. If your system has the memory you should't be having any trouble with MSFS. If you are experiencing problems, adding new type of FS most likely will conintue to be a problem. The fix, upgrade your computer and you most likely will be fine.

Turbo

Fire

IP Logged

Reply #30 - Oct 15^th, 2011 at 1:15pm

ArcticFox Offline
Colonel

Posts: 77

I'm too used to MS FS to switch lol. X-Plane would have to deliver a very good product for me to go through the transitional pain

[ASUS P8H67]- [Intel core5 2500k]- [4gb Corsair DDR] - [Asus 560ti]

IP Logged

Reply #31 - Oct 15^th, 2011 at 3:28pm

Strategic Retreat Offline
Colonel
Wish people were less
idiotic as an average

Posts: 603

ArcticFox wrote on Oct 15^th, 2011 at 1:15pm:

I'm too used to MS FS to switch lol. X-Plane would have to deliver a very good product for me to go through the transitional pain

Habit does not a good thing make. Worse, encouraging habit some people can make a WORSE thing and sell it for good. I am not saying Anything will be worse Anything, I am simply saying that when success of a certain thing, and the money it will bring as the paramount target, is in the equation, looking around yourself (and especially at six-o-clock), and wearing steel cast pants is a magnificent idea.

There is no such a thing as overkill. Only unworthy targets.

IP Logged

Reply #32 - Nov 4^th, 2011 at 10:39pm

U4EA Ex Member

DowninFlames wrote on Jan 29^th, 2011 at 12:05am:

From my experience with X-Plane 9 it's like flying MS2002 birds over Orbx terrain.

You got it! I picked up XP9 on the cheap when Circuit City was going out of business.

I found it to be most underwhelming.

IP Logged

Reply #33 - Dec 21^st, 2011 at 1:36pm

expat Offline
Colonel
Deep behind enemy lines!

Gender:
Posts: 8499

Just watched the video; X-Plane's 2010 Official OshKosh Video created for Laminar Research. Funny old world, the featured 737-800 from Air Berlin, D-ABBF, I spent quite a bit of time last week working on the real aircraft Cheesy

Cheesy

Cheesy

Matt

PETA People Eating Tasty Animals.

B1 Boeing 737-800 and Dash8 Q-400

IP Logged

Pages: 1

Send Topic

Print

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Top of this page

Simviation Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.5 AE!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2010. All Rights Reserved.

Valid XHTML

Valid CSS

Powered by Perl

Source Forge