57 replies to this topic

[Atomic_Sheep]

I installed the X-Plane 9 demo and I have to say... I love it . In fact... I haven't visited these forums for a while and now that I had a look at some FSX screenshots, I can't help but say that FSX now seems like a complete toy! Is anyone else out there using both? At the moment I see myself becoming an X-Plane supporter and I was just wondering whether theres anyone out there who has experienced something similar and is still using FSX?

[Buziel-411_RED]

You think FSX looks like a complete toy compared to X-Plane?

Take a look through these different galleries: http://www.realenvir...s/3dclouds.html

[THBatMan8]

I would like to dump MSFS and make the move to X-Plane myself, but it's the 3rd party devs that have me binded.

Buziel-411_Red said:

You think FSX looks like a complete toy compared to X-Plane?

That was probably a bad choice of wording but X-Plane is better when it comes to implementing sophisticated systems. X-Plane does have the potential to surpass MSFS, but currently, FSX is the best bet due to the 3rd party support. The platform is old, and we need to move on sooner or later.

Edited by THBatMan8, 05 November 2009 - 07:57 PM.

[Atomic_Sheep]

I meant it feels like a toy. And looks wise, it's not that impressive in comparison. I'm not saying ORBX + REX + PMDG looks bad in FSX... hands down... these addons make it look fantastic. But other than that, it does look toyish in comparison. That's just my opinion. I want to get both running well on my new comp side by side before I make any mre judgments, but based on my low gfx setting setup X-Plane and equally low FSX, I'm just no longer a complete supporter of FSX over X-Plane even gfx wise :S. Just what I've personally experienced.

And yer, the only thing that isn't making me run over to X-Plane is the lack of aircraft. The flight models are fantastic (although even X-Plane has flaws in this department, but it just feels right other than that). I really want to get ORBX and REX (but need my new comp for that)... in order to see the full potential of FSX first hand. I think the other factor that has made an impression on me regarding X-Plane is just the fact that it's new. Everything new is always exciting. Will be interesting how it stands up the test of time.

Edited by Atomic_Sheep, 05 November 2009 - 07:59 PM.

[Buziel-411_RED]

Atomic_Sheep, on Nov 5 2009, 08:54 PM, said:

I meant it feels like a toy. And looks wise, it's not that impressive in comparison. Just what I've personally experienced.

Alright, because looks wise, I don't think there is much competition.

But the main thing X-Plane lacks is addons.

[Mohammad]

With regards to Kuwait, I kinda agree with you, Atomic_Sheep. The default world textures look better on X-Plane 9. FSX has a more cartoonish feeling (perhaps more excessive) than what I was used to in FS2004. That might only be me, though. But I tried recreating that sense of flight in FSX and it just doesnt feel like true flight, not even in the visual sense, unless you compare addons together. Of course, if you buy REX and all these plethora of paywares, youre bound to have a better non-toyish experience. But for default, X-Plane got the terrain right. They just need to improve on the overall autogan placement, airport default sceneries, etc. The airport default sceneries look bad on X-Plane 9. But with the promises Austin keeps making about the next version of X-Plane, I am expecting massive improvements, especially since many FS users have now considered the possibility of switching to the other side. In the mean time, however, Im sticking with what Im used to. Better the devil you know, lol...

[Atomic_Sheep]

Excellent points Moqool. I read about the possible features of X-Plane 10 too... sounds very promising. I completely agree with the default terrain being quite spectacular. I also found FSX screenshots in the screenshot section look cartoonish after time off from FSX. I was kinda shocked to see the same screenshots I used to drool over now look kinda unexciting. Will be interesting to get back to FSX for me when it comes in the mail in a few days as I lost it due to a complete computer rebuild. Also interesting to see what Cascade come out with.

Is anyone using both though? Or are most of you guys just sticking with one?

Edited by Atomic_Sheep, 05 November 2009 - 08:08 PM.

[Mohammad]

I might make an official move to X-Plane when version 10 comes out. There are already plenty of promises around, such as a user-friendly interface instead of the annoying menu X-Plane is usually associated with. Plus, better default city and airport sceneries. A possibility of AI planes, boats and cars, perhaps? Better weather and visuals. A product that would appeal to hard-core simmers and new gamers, etc. If X-Plane 10 accomplishes its 'surprise package', you can count on me moving to the other side. And you're right about the cartoonish aspect. I used to drool all over FSX screenshots, even now I find myself attracted to pictures posted by members like Soya, etc. But when I get back to playing FSX on my computer, something's always missing. Anyway, no offence to FSX but its an overrated sim. I mean, its a product that took 3 years until people are finally beginning to master it. But it comes with faults of its own, and I agree with you about how it just doesnt look the same way when someone takes a break from it.

[Atomic_Sheep]

You can get AI in X-Plane.

Yes the menus are pathetic in X-Plane... a complete headache. The lack of decent sound sets also kills it. I believe I posed a comment saying sound isn't that important in a thread on this forum addressing this very issue. I can now say sound is important! I think at the end of the day, FSX is just the more complete package. Hmm but anyway I'll see what I think of it when I get back into it soon.

Edited by Atomic_Sheep, 05 November 2009 - 08:49 PM.

[Alaska_MD-83]

Just that no one has actually created a plane that exploits X-plane's realism yet.

[wynthorpe]

Da_KGB, on Nov 5 2009, 09:50 PM, said:

Just that no one has actually created a plane that exploits X-plane's realism yet.

Try the MU-2 then.... Simply superb.

[Spam]

Meh me and wynthorpe got it around the same time...it is indeed a great simulator. the funny thing is you just boot up a cessna and just fly not spend hours on end tweaking and downloading addons (that maybe just me!) If i had to ask austin for one thing in the release it would be for a nice airport editor or designer. The community would do the rest.

[Mohammad]

spam3d, on Nov 6 2009, 08:29 AM, said:

Meh me and wynthorpe got it around the same time...it is indeed a great simulator. the funny thing is you just boot up a cessna and just fly not spend hours on end tweaking and downloading addons (that maybe just me!) If i had to ask austin for one thing in the release it would be for a nice airport editor or designer. The community would do the rest.

Thats true. The amount of tweaking and modding you must do to Flight Simulator X in order to make it playable and realistic is exhausting. When people are too busy doing other things apart from flight-simming, they end up ignoring FSX due to that one major downside.

[Atomic_Sheep]

Really? I had a look around the menus and such... I know I'm not used to them, but it seemed like such a horrible menu system. FSX was way more user friendly. I don't know about tweaking, but by the sounds of it, with the desire for airport editors, in the end you'll probably end up doing the same amount of tweaking for X-Plane and just concentrate on areas that it lacks.

[AmericanAirFan]

At our flight school we have two full (static) simulators one of a Cessna 172R II G1000, and a Diamond Twinstar DA42. They both use X-Plane We have to pay to use these sims and we get logged sim time in our logbook. I'd say X-Plane wins for realism

Edited by AmericanAirFan, 08 November 2009 - 03:43 PM.

[Prancer]

Unlike X-plane, you can't run over a deer on a sloped runway on FSX.

[Mohammad]

Atomic_Sheep, on Nov 7 2009, 09:11 AM, said:

Really? I had a look around the menus and such... I know I'm not used to them, but it seemed like such a horrible menu system. FSX was way more user friendly. I don't know about tweaking, but by the sounds of it, with the desire for airport editors, in the end you'll probably end up doing the same amount of tweaking for X-Plane and just concentrate on areas that it lacks.

Well when people mention tweaking they usually speak of graphics configuration, etc. You know - things which make the game's performance smoother. And that's where most time is actually wasted with regards to FSX, in my opinion. I can't really imagine it ever being the case with X-Plane. But you're right, X-Plane users might end up wasting time on modifying airport sceneries instead, etc.

[Peter797]

I downloaded the demo. Demo planes suck ...Graphics not too bad tbh, and I like the physics and lighting.

But planes...horrible.

Anyways. I have a rudder problem. I touch the rudder and it cranks right and gets stuck there so I do donuts.

[Atomic_Sheep]

You have to adjust the controls in order for the inputs to be accepted properly.

Finally got FSX installed and to be honest I was incredibly disappointed. Feel wise, FSX is just yuck now that I've tried X-Plane. I honestly regret trying X-Plane as it's killed FSX for me. Feels way worse than I remembered it . That's what happens when you become enlightened. Ah well, I suppose FSX is good enough if most of the flying is done with autopilot and you don't go too nuts with maneuvering, can't wait for the next gen simulators though e.g. X-Plane 10 or what the guys from cascade announce! I suppose I can't really fully turn my back on FSX as I'm yet to try it on full video settings as I'm still waiting on my new computer, so maybe it'll redeem itself once that happens and I get REX and ORBX.

[Mohammad]

Atomic_Sheep, on Nov 10 2009, 06:18 AM, said:

That's what happens when you become enlightened.

Welcome to the new age...