Lockheed-Martin for one, also Northrop-Grumman - i don't think you can classify either of them as "Game" developers! - Oh, and Flight Safety!

I missed this post.I'll add the Redbird simulator to the list... http://www.flyingmag.com/safety/training/r...ght-simulationsI got a demo at Oshkosh last year and would like one in my living room.. :( Me flying it and a certain Ron filming it...

Lockheed-Martin for one, also Northrop-Grumman - i don't think you can classify either of them as "Game" developers! - Oh, and Flight Safety!

They used payware models, didn't they?

Yes you have. FSX is merely a game for "game" developers.Thank you,Mitch

Well it seams you don't have a clue at all and funny to read ;-)

Don't forget to add Boeing to the list....

As far as the visibility (and maybe also the ATC and AI) issue goes, I'm not sure LR is going to change it. X-Plane also has a pro version (Much more expensive) which doesn't have that limitation so I have to think one of the reasons it's on the consumer version, is to prevent would be customers of the pro version from using the cheaper consumer version instead. If that is the case, I'm not sure they'll give that up too easy.

The pro version doesn't seem to be in the markets nowadays. But why?

You won't get any arguments from me regarding FSX being the more complete sim experience. XP does have it's shortcomings, but it also has quite a bit going for it. People are starting to notice the validity of it as a good development platform. The big question for developers is whether or not the cost outweighs the return. With a smaller community, XP may not have the monetary draw that FSX or even FS9 does. On the flip side, there is not much competition over there either. If a solid payware group from the FS series side of the house wanted to create an add-on and price it reasonably (reasonably being a relative term), they would have a good chance of cleaning house. The CRJ that is being worked on has a huge following and it is not even out yet. When people ask what the best payware aircraft in XP is, nine out of ten times the response is going to be the MU-2 or the Falco. Having said that, outside of the JGX Corvallis (a personal favorite of mine), there just aren't many choices. There's a wide open door for a high-visibility FS series developer to roll right in there and just grab market share. The big plus regarding XP is that many of the shortcoming you mentioned are known to the developer as well as the community and I am sure things will get addressed eventually. FSX can only really improve with regards to scenery and aircraft. The core engine itself is, for all intensive purposes, is dead from a development perspective (although kudos to Lotus for beating the VC rain issue and creating some awesome lighting effects). If X-Plane has an engine issue there is a decent chance that it can be modified, corrected, and/or built upon by the actual developer of the product. The lack of AI and the limited viewing distance are known "dislikes" from both camps, we will just have to wait and see if they are corrected and/or enhanced. A lot of people have high hopes for XP 10, lets see if it delivers.

Those limitations are based on the fact that only the PRO edition of X-Plane 9 had more realistic settings.I believe you have very high hopes on XP 10 in the near future. What do you expect from X-Plane 10, other than the so-called AI and stuff?

The pro version doesn't seem to be in the markets nowadays. But why?

The pro version is actually the same one we're using, but by adding a hardware dongle (for a minimum of $500 for a Level 2USB key, and $1000 for a Level 3 USB key), it will unlock the additional features respectively. These will also make it FAA certified (Provided you have all the other hardware and software the certification requires).

FWIW, I agree with Geofa. I have over 12,000 hours mostly in high performance singles and twins. And if X-Plane modeled thier flight characteristics better than FSX, I too would be using it. But the fact of the matter is, it just doesn't. And I have tried every version of X-Plane for over ten years. X-Plane's one virtue, in my opinion, is it's weather engine, but it's not worth the compromise in all the other areas.

X-Plane -no scenery(except the global one)-no decent aircraft-support forum is communist, literally, everyone there will ban you for trying to ask something-no future-nothing

I believe you have very high hopes on XP 10 in the near future. What do you expect from X-Plane 10, other than the so-called AI and stuff?

That might be a reason why a few people stick to x-plane. They know it's far from being perfect...but you will see....the next version will 'leapfrog' as Austin put it, FSX.But that's simply not going to happen

That might be a reason why a few people stick to x-plane. They know it's far from being perfect...but you will see....the next version will 'leapfrog' as Austin put it, FSX.But that's simply not going to happen

I don't think you understood what kaskuser posted. Some of the things that hold X-Plane consumer version back from being a better sim are the features that the sim is already capable of, but are not unlocked until you purchase a pro license (HW Dongle) for $500-$1000, like opening up the visibility limits, and more accurate flight modeling. So what makes you think LR will unlock these features for the consumer version of X-Plane 10 when it is a main selling point to purchase their Pro version?

I don't think you understood what kaskuser posted. Some of the things that hold X-Plane consumer version back from being a better sim are the features that the sim is already capable of, but are not unlocked until you purchase a pro license (HW Dongle) for $500-$1000, like opening up the visibility limits, and more accurate flight modeling. So what makes you think LR will unlock these features for the consumer version of X-Plane 10 when it is a main selling point to purchase their Pro version?

With the famous 'blade-element-theory' there's no way in improving the flight modeling further. Where did you get this info from? X-plane PRO is rather new and and I doubt that Austin held any features back previously just to make people buy the pro version. In fact the first version (X-plane HSR) I bought was already incredible expensive and over the years became cheaper and cheaper.How should 'unlocking' the visibilty limits work as this is the primary way from x-plane to keep the frame rate up ?

With the famous 'blade-element-theory' there's no way in improving the flight modeling further. Where did you get this info from? X-plane PRO is rather new and and I doubt that Austin held any features back previously just to make people buy the pro version. In fact the first version (X-plane HSR) I bought was already incredible expensive and over the years became cheaper and cheaper.How should 'unlocking' the visibilty limits work as this is the primary way from x-plane to keep the frame rate up ?

Famous?? Thanks for a wonderful guffaw. :( Everything, and I do mean everything that man makes can be improved. No exception.As for the visibility "cheat" for frame rates... a well-written graphics program shouldn't need that.

That might be a reason why a few people stick to x-plane. They know it's far from being perfect...but you will see....the next version will 'leapfrog' as Austin put it, FSX.But that's simply not going to happen

There will be a time, when MSFS will be extinct. But we'll just have to wait.I do not think that XP10 will 'leapfrog' FSX, but what about XP11 vs FS11? (Well, MS didn't say it was stopped completely, it's just that there are no future plans for FS11)If XP10 does not meet my expectations for an ultra-realistic simulation, I will forever more stick with MSFS.

There will be a time, when MSFS will be extinct. But we'll just have to wait.I do not think that XP10 will 'leapfrog' FSX, but what about XP11 vs FS11? (Well, MS didn't say it was stopped completely, it's just that there are no future plans for FS11)If XP10 does not meet my expectations for an ultra-realistic simulation, I will forever more stick with MSFS.

FS11=Flight Simulator Live, what that ends up being remains to be seen. My guess is it will have as good or better visuals then FSX has now, but may not have the more accurate flight dynamics possible now in FSX, or the openness for 3rd party development. Opting instead to provide their own addons via the Games for Windows Live platform. I hope I'm wrong, because without the 3rd party developers both freeware and payware, it would probably not satisfy the hardcore sim community.