Bigbear

Sigh ..........i've seen better 1 april jokes. XP8 had 'great potential' ..... XP9 had 'great potential' ..... XP10 still has 'great potential' ..... maybe XP11 .............. ??? After testing every new XPX demo version i am still disappointed. X-Plane always created the hype of being the better or 'only real' flight simulator and still can't live up to it. Let me guess: Perhaps the Blade Element Theory still calculates only the aerodynamics and not mass and inertia? I am glad FSX still has many years to go with current hardware and dozens of high quality addons still released. Now even Prepar3D is available for 50$ and it's constantly developing, i think it has also 'great potential' Perhaps Laminar Reasearch should hire the ACES team that was working on FS11 ? Not to put their efforts to fly XPX on a telephone, just on the basics of flight simulation. Maybe they can start with developing more realistic flight dynamics for the default XPX aircraft?

Flight dynamics/physics are surprisingly good. Clouds bad, scenery, details and lighting very nice. Great framerates, even with 'medium' hardware, looks like the program engine is good. But i don't like the 'game elements' before you can do free flight. Also the 'adventures' are to arcade looking to me. And of course they left out lots of things available in FSX at this moment : no world cover yet, only Hawai, only a few planes, no 3 rd party addons, no ATC, no big planes, ..... the list is long! They release a Canadian scenery pack for bush pilots this spring. At this moment i still prefer my expanded FSX. But the latest demo XPX beta 7 is nice too: looks like even the old flight physics errors are better now !

Good idea zoltron_rulez, i have the impression that to many people react without even trying it .....

I don't feel the need to 'rant' otherwise i should have used less polite words. As i read in several forums lot's of people have this complaints. It's good to be patient, but XPX attitude doesn't feel serious anymore to me. In the mean time, live goes on!

Just tested version 10.04 beta 6 demo. It's again 1 step forward and 2 steps back ...... SIGH ............. Back is the ridiculous exagerated turbulence, back is the wind that rotates the aircraft around its axis, still the unrealisticly left turn tendancy in level flight and unstable airplanes. Don't they test those things? I never buy XPX before the flight dynamics and general behaviour become at least as realistic as FSX. I know, folks will say again: 'You must be patient, it's still an early beta. Don't judge on the default planes, they are bad, third party planes are muuucccch better!' Oh i see, this means i have to buy the unfinished thing first, and then within a few years XPX will be 'finished' like XP 9.7 ? I don't mind about clouds not finished yet, i don't mind some roads starting and going to nowhere, i don't mind having deserted airports at this moment, i don't care about playing XPX on a telephone : I just want to be able to FLY. When i really want to be in roller coaster i shall buy a ticket in an amusement park or maybe download MS Flight as it is now !

About keepings things in perspective .......... Sorry, couldn't resist

I found this topic on another forum and since it made me very confused and a bit shocked, i think it's an important issue to discuss. The topic starts about 'auto-rudder implementation' in XPX but the subject changes to the very nature of X-Plane: the 'Blade Element Theory'. http://forum.avsim.net/topic/363310-auto-rudder/

All important basic knowledge of a real world pilot here: http://www.faa.gov/library/manuals/aircraft/airplane_handbook/ http://www.faa.gov/library/manuals/aviation/media/00-80T-80.pdf http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/ATpubs/AIM/ http://www.faa.gov/library/manuals/aviation/pilot_handbook/

Some doubts, some concern and a little bit of hope .......... http://forum.avsim.net/blog/1/entry-24-the-ms-flight-sim-my-thoughts/

Hi CK, Of course they weren't, i like humour. It's just that it disturbs me every time i still read in a forum things like 'FSX is a game', 'there is only one 'serious' flight simulator', or that 'hardcore simmers have XP only'. Usually by people who never tested FSX seriously with the right hardware. Until now a third party like PMDG or iFly released their fantastic B737 NG only for FS9 or FSX. Why not for X-Plane? Lack of confidence, conversion problems, or was the community just still to small? (Not enough profit). Luckily PMDG announced they will start developing for X-Plane. I think that the community deserves it. So things go the good way. I just hope it doesn't take until XP 10.7 before XPX is 'mature' like with 9.7 It's also a question of priorities for Laminar Research. I mean why for instance put they time and effort in a mobile 'telephone' (game?) version if they still don't provide most airports in the desktop version with generic but 'plausible' scenery? The good thing is of course that there are constant updates for XPX, so i am optimistic I5 2500K @ 4.3 Ghz Asus P8Z68 M-PRO 8 GB 1600 DDR RAM --------------------Saitek Pro Flight Yoke Intel SSD320 160 Gb --------------------Saitek Pro Flight Rudder Pedals Asus GTX 570 DCII 1.28 Gb ----------2x Saitek Throttle Quadrant WD Caviar Black 1 Tb Windows 7 - 64 bit Early days: FS2 > FS4 > FS5.1 > FS98 > FS2002 > FS2004 Now: FSX Expanded and X-Plane 10 Demo

Like a lot of hardcore simmers i was angry and felt left alone when became clear that Microsoft would not release a 'Flight Simulator 11' at this moment. Nevertheless I shall try Ms Flight 'game or simulator' without prejudice, it's not my habit like some fanatics in several forums i read, to reject it before i know it or tried it. Yes it has no real weather, no AI planes, no ATC,... but IF the flight dynamics are ok, IF you can, beside 'playing' it with low realism settings with your mouse or keyboard, also 'fly' it with high realism settings with my Saitek yoke, pedals and quadrants and if it is at least as realistic as FSX with addon expansions then it can be nice because the graphics look very good. In this optimistic scenario it could have the technical potential for growing and even becoming a kind of FS 11. But even in that case i'm afraid it will be limited because there will be no room for third party addons so it seems. So in the worst scenario there's besides an expanded FS 2004 or FSX, only X-Plane 9.7 or the new XP10 as a real modern simulator left. Yes FSX is no more a game than XP10 like serious flightsimmers know, both have their own benefits and drawbacks. Yes XP10 has indeed great potential but is still in an early beta with many drawbacks: At this moment there are still no buildings on most airports, no seasonal textures, clouds are more processor demanding than FSX even with my GTX 570 card, there is not much AI Traffic in the air unless you let drop your framerate, etc .....) I still don't have the feeling in XP10 to be in a 'living, plausible world, but i hope it will be better in future updates. ( XP 9.7 took some it's time also). Some call a realistic looking world 'eye candy'. I suppose those people fly only in night conditions or perhaps blindfolded. There is also the new AeroflyFS from Ikarus: great potential but also very restricted at this stage: only (stunning graphics !) Switzerland, instruments: only the 'basic six' for VFR flying (no fuel or weight control, no radio's, no NAV, so no IFR and no ATC) but good flight dynamics thanks to their experience with gliding simulation i suppose. And you have of course also the FREE Flight Gear and iFly! Legacy: very nice projects in evolution, especially !Fly! Legacy, but at this moment not a real alternative for an expanded FSX or X-Plane. In my humble opinion FSX flight dynamics are in general still a bit more realistic at this moment than XP 10.04 ( i now buckle my seat belt and put my my helmet on ): groundhandling problems with wind, still exagerated yaw from props (to much left rudder in level flights, ...), luckily the flight dynamics in one of the the latest betas in wind and turbulence are more realistic, a roller coaster was fun but not realistic flying! I fly from time to time as passenger with a friend of mine who pilot's a Cessna 182 RG. He is not a simulator fanatic, he says no simulator feels 'real' enough to him, but tried several times my FSX and XP10 demo and has the same comments about the flight dynamics i mentioned. So he claims FSX has still the 'closest' feel in general, except for stalling where XPX should have some advantage. I will test every new release candidate or beta, but i'm very happy at this moment to go back to my trusted and balanced expanded FSX. Maybe in the future i shall buy XPX. Oh yes: the FSX bashers may start shooting NOW, but some arguments would be nice also. I5 2500K @ 4.3 Ghz Asus P8Z68 M-PRO 8 GB 1600 DDR RAM --------------------Saitek Pro Flight Yoke Intel SSD320 160 Gb --------------------Saitek Pro Flight Rudder Pedals Asus GTX 570 DCII 1.28 Gb ----------2x Saitek Throttle Quadrant WD Caviar Black 1 Tb Windows 7 - 64 bit Early days: FS2 > FS4 > FS5.1 > FS98 > FS2002 > FS2004 Now: FSX Expanded and X-Plane 10 Demo

After reading this, i know for sure that i shall download it and test it very thoroughly ....

I shall try Ms Flight 'game or simulator' without prejudice, it's not my habit to laugh with something before i know it or tried it. If the flight dynamics are ok, if you can, beside 'playing' it with low realism settings with your mouse or keyboard, also fly it with high realism settings with my Saitek yoke, pedals and quadrant and is at least as realistic as FSX with addon expansions then it can be nice because the graphics look very good. But even in that case it will be limited because there will be no room for third party addons so it seems. So in the worst scenario there's besides an expanded FSX, only XP 10 as a real modern simulator left ( it has indeed great potential but is still in an early beta with many drawbacks: At this moment there are still no buildings on most airports, no seasonal textures, clouds are more processor demanding than FSX even with my GTX 570 card, there is not much AI Traffic unless you let drop your framerate, etc .....) and: maybe also AeroflyFS from Ikarus which has great potential but is very restricted at this stage: only (stunning graphics !) Switzerland, instruments: only the 'basic six' for VFR flying (no fuel or weight control, no radio's, no NAV, so no IFR and no ATC) but good flight models. I've read a report in the Avsim General X-Plane forum from a beta tester of Flight who is a retired 737NG Pilot. (KLM and RYANAIR) and he claims the flight dynamics are a lot better than in FSX, dynamics that in my humble opinion are still more realistic in general at this moment than X-Plane 10.04 Beta 2 (groundhandling with wind, exagerated yaw from props, ...), luckily the flight model in the latest beta in wind and turbulence is more realistic, a roller coaster was fun but not realistic flying! Let's wait and try it. I5 2500K @ 4.3 Ghz Asus P8Z68 M-PRO 8 GB 1600 DDR RAM -------------------- Saitek Pro Flight Yoke Intel SSD320 160 Gb --------------------Saitek Pro Flight Rudder Pedals Asus GTX 570 DCII 1.28 Gb ----------2x Saitek Throttle Quadrant WD Caviar Black 1 Tb Windows 7 - 64 bit Early days: FS2 > FS4 > FS5.1 > FS98 > FS2002 > FS2004 Now: FSX Expanded and X-Plane 10 Demo