Again, hopefully the future will tell a different story, but it won't without change, change from within the minds at Laminar Research.

 

I'd like to see core engine developers (P3D/LR/Aerofly FS/Other) PLUS 3rd party developers get together and create a new core engine, starting w/ in depth surveys to determine which features make or break core engines for flight simulation going forward. These would be in the domain of building for optimal use of hardware thru multicore, multithreaded, 64-bit, DirectX & perhaps OGL support, multi GPUs, AND the key feature set of the scope you are remarking LR hasn't gotten to yet. Factor in the scope & depth of SDK's needed by 3PDs to build for. Build it from the ground up. If done to a very high level of scope & depth I think this could be the engine 3PD's could count on to build for knowing the product will be there to develop for. I have to think a huge amount has been learned about how to do this now, 20+ years later, and certainly there is so much more to build with these days. I would also imagine the team to do this doesn't need to be the size of ACES to get very far, were the right folks involved from the start. Since the market/audience would be primarily 'serious' flyers/simmers, there would be no need to build for everyone. In a world of 7B I have to think there is enough market and the depth and scope of developers for XP/FSX/P3D supports this claim.

Um... I'm not with her because of her mathematical abilities.

 

 

 

Looks like TomK has some fixes in the pipeline.

 

Hook

 

I think / hope you get the point. I knew folks would have fun with it.

 

Yes, Tom has already offered some "fixes" that I have applied, and things are better. Not something that the average user in Xplane should have to do though. And frankly, were not aeronautical engineers, we just want to fly something that simulates flight, reasonably well. Constant trimming of control surfaces didn't seem to be reasonable to me, thus my post about it.

Which actually doesn't exist in the real world!! At least not to the extent it is in XP10 which illustrates the problem with slope runways in a flight sim. To do it accurately you really need a high resolution mesh!

 

 

Now THAT VIDEO is what I'm talkin' about! Filmed using X-Plane 11??

 

Seriously! That's MY IDEA of what FLIGHT SIMULATION should ultimately look like! Let's face it, we'd all pay whatever it cost to have THAT experience in our home simulator, yeah?

I would!

Robert, and the rest for that matter. Nobody is debating how "pretty" XPX looks. There's no doubt it looks (most aspects) and performs, better than what the competition has to offer. That's not where the glaring flaws with Xplane lie, and they can't be hidden by looks.

 

The lack of functionality in key areas of flight simulation are what detract a lot from accepting Xplane as their daily flier. We all know what they are, we all know what needs to be done, outside development, and or outside help. Whether it be ATC, AI traffic, Weather System, RW Landmarks / Landclass, and the most important for the real world fliers, the flight model (this is beyond my scope, not a rw flier), XPX is lacking. As for the other stuff, all I have to do is look towards FSX which does have all those things through addons. Not only are they poor in XPX, their not available for purchase either, is that point clear? As was pointed out earlier, Laminar Research / Austin have been at this for 20 years, and it's still painfully deficient in those key areas. We can sit here and debate, marvel, look at in awe, it does not change the facts.

 

You "Invite those who are debating the pluses and minus of XP to watch it". You say that as if it's going to change / sway some minds? I hope you don't think that's the case. Honestly, those of us that "debate" the pluses and minuses don't need to watch any video. It's no different than another member here who got upset or put off because I wouldn't watch a video of him flying his plane level in flight. I know the default aircraft roll side to side more than they should, it's been substantiated by too many real pilots to ignore or dismiss. Just the same, I don't need to watch some ones videos of how pretty the clouds are in Xplane, they don't look great, and that too has been negatively discussed at length by many more than the few here, and at other forum groups as well.

 

Just as the video posted here, all it shows is how "pretty" XPX is, who cares, really. A flight simulator has to be far more that pretty, and XPX continues to fall far too short, we know why, we know in what areas, it really shouldn't be up for debate any more at this point. As has happened in the past, new people are coming for a look, and they do like what they "see", but it doesn't take too long for the glaring deficiencies to rear their ugly heads. These issues are what need to be addressed / discussed, not how pretty it looks.

 

It's like that great looking girl / guy that you meet, all you want to do is be with them. Then, the opportunity presents itself, and in a short time you come to realize they can't add 2+2. At that point, if this is someone you thought you might like to spend a lot of time with, you have to realize that it's not going to work. Well, Xplane is very similar. It looks pretty, but falls short in so many areas. It doesn't have to, for reasons that are discussed here every day, but continues to do so. Again, hopefully the future will tell a different story, but it won't without change, change from within the minds at Laminar Research.

 

 

Glen

 

Edit: Until the day comes, that a "press release" is announced stating that Laminar Research is changing the way it has done business in the past, and "we" are now going to stop development (what ever needs to be done) for (? time), thus facilitating 3rd party development to better improve the overall functionality of Xplane, I won't be happy, nor will I give up with my "fight". There's no other "general" flight simulator with a future as far as I'm concerned, Xplane is it. But it needs a lot more than "good looks" to have a bright future.

 

We all acknowledge the good in Xplane, let's have an open / less defensive mind, and acknowledge / discuss the not so good, in hopes that it gets addressed and resolved, once and for all (that seems to actually be happening as of late, some "level headed / new" folks are joining in the discussions with strong valid points that need to be addressed). There's no disputing the deficiencies, if were talking about a total and complete package / flight simulator.

 

Heck, for all we know Austin would be quite happy to keep Xplane in it's current state, a flight engineering "tool", I hope it can be a lot more than that, and be a complete flight simulator, something it isn't yet, and one I continue to fight for.

 

Wow! You are really fired up over this - and if I ruffled any feathers, accept sincere apologies! I was just remarking on what I thought was a nicely done video. I'm the LAST guy who will say I'm 100% happy with XPlane as it is now, asking me if development stopped on both FSX and XPlane and all 3rd Party stuff stopped as well, which platform would I keep is a patently unfair question. XPlane is still morphing. Maybe not as FAST as we would like - and possibly some of the stuff that has Muskoka disconcerted won't be resolved in the immediate future. I think FSX is 'more mature', but it stopped developing six years ago, period. Anything 'new' in FSX since then is NOT in the underlying code - it is in the add-ons. So 6 years of multiple companies like PMDG and Aerosoft and ORBX developing and refining the scenery, the textures, the airports, the airplanes, the instruments, yada yada yada is something that X-Plane has not (yet) enjoyed the benefit of.

 

Admitting that X-plane is our best 'hope' for a brighter future is arguably a true statement. But the landscape is littered with threats: the lawsuit (by far the biggest single threat), the personalities of the Laminar team (they determine priorities and there are only so many man-hours available to do the work required, and the economics (just how many people will continue to buy X_Plane and thus support continued operations and development?). There is no doubt that Austin has talent and vision. Compared to the army that built FSX, he is the Robin Hood of simulation! His little band of developers did amazing stuff over the years, look at the Direct X 1 video game that someone posted here on this thread! Primitive? I think so!

 

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that XP10 is a work-in-progress. Yes, very pretty, but difficult to work with thus far. I agree with the comments Muskaka made about the flaws. They are annoying, no question. I regard FSX as a mature adult, and XPlane as a toddler. A very good looking toddler, but immature. If X-Plane is allowed to grow up, it MIGHT turn out the way we and other prospective adoptive parents might hope for. Unfortunately, we aren't sitting on the board at Laminar. If we were, we could make our desires into top priorities, and hire the additional manpower needed to ramp up development to a faster timeline. Perhaps we outsource to India?

Wow! You are really fired up over this - and if I ruffled any feathers, accept sincere apologies! I was just remarking on what I thought was a nicely done video. I'm the LAST guy who will say I'm 100% happy with XPlane as it is now, asking me if development stopped on both FSX and XPlane and all 3rd Party stuff stopped as well, which platform would I keep is a patently unfair question.

 

I didn't ask that question (Noel did), get your facts straight before you start accusing, please! -_- As for the rest that I said, I mean every bit of it. I'm so sick (pretty blunt, feel I need to be at this point) of people coming here singing the praises of Xplane, when there is still so much that needs to be finished, and LM will never be able to accomplish it to the levels it deserves. Is it pretty, yes, does it offer near the functionality that the competitors do, not even close. Am I comparing, you bet I am, because that's all we have to measure against. When Xplane offers the same functionality that FSX does, I will be one happy camper. Until the 3rd part developers are allowed in, and fully in, Xplane will always lag behind, that is proven fact. So come here and praise all you like, there is still a lot of work to be done, and I'm here advocating for it.

 

Glen

I'm so sick (pretty blunt, feel I need to be at this point) of people coming here singing the praises of Xplane

 

You're sick of people singing the praises of X-Plane in a forum devoted exclusively to X-Plane? What would you think if I said "I'm so sick of people coming here singing the praises of FSX" in the FSX forum?

 

Marco

You're sick of people singing the praises of X-Plane in a forum devoted exclusively to X-Plane? What would you think if I said "I'm so sick of people coming here singing the praises of FSX" in the FSX forum?

 

Marco

xp10 is Muskoka's preferred sim in his profile, I don't understand all the negative replies. Yes xp10 has issues......BECAUSE IT'S A BETAAAAAAAAAA! :angry: :lol:

xp10 is Muskoka's preferred sim in his profile, I don't understand all the negative replies. Yes xp10 has issues......BECAUSE IT'S A BETAAAAAAAAAA! :angry: :lol:

 

But isn't it pretty much a perpetual beta?

 

perpetual?

you made me reach for a dictionary :lol: :LMAO:

You're sick of people singing the praises of X-Plane in a forum devoted exclusively to X-Plane? What would you think if I said "I'm so sick of people coming here singing the praises of FSX" in the FSX forum?

 

Marco

 

Yes, their delusional......

 

Edit: Sick is a little harsh, tired would do just fine.

 

Marco, the point is they don't. There's more belly aching and complaining going on in the FSX forums than there ever has been in Xplane. FSX users know what it's shortcomings are, they accept them, and deal with them. If not, they buy an addon to remedy the situation. It's the overly sensitive types in this Xplane forum, that can't stand the least bit of criticism of Xplane, but have no problem singing it's praises, when quite honestly it lacks so much, that I get tired of. That I will call out, and yes I get sick of it.

 

You don't, day, after day, after day, see people in the FSX forums singing away about how great it is, because they know better. It is what it is, has been for years, and they live with it. The way some folks carry on around here, Xplane is the greatest thing since sliced bread. If nobody else will, I will step in and say, there are certain aspects that are nice, there are some that just plain stink. So, does all the singing get a little tiring, you bet.

 

It's a whole other delusional world around here. It's as if people exist in the Xplane world with blinders on. I have acknowledged favorably on numerous occasions the praising that goes on around here when it's warranted. Unfortunately, some of the praising goes a bit too far, especially in areas that need a lot of work. In situations like that, I'm going to speak up, and give an alternate view.

 

Don't get me wrong, I like Xplane, but won't just sit by and see a fantastic opportunity wasted without voicing an opinion. If it's warrants praise, I'll give it, if it doesn't I won't. Will I continue to harp about it's shortcomings, side by side with the signing praisers, you bet. Were all allowed a voice in here, I'm sure a lot of people are tired of listening to me, well it goes both ways. Sit by and say nothing, chances are nothing will ever change. I'd rather say something, to at least get people to think of change. If everyone only ever came here thinking all was well, singing the praises, then some at the top may think the rank and file are content, well their far from it.

 

Glen

 

But isn't it pretty much a perpetual beta?

 

Yes JD it is, always has been.

 

I don't understand all the negative replies.

 

Whatever your name is today , I can't help you there if you don't understand. Someone has to voice the negative sides, there's enough of them. There's also some good.

 

 

I didn't ask that question (Noel did), get your facts straight before you start accusing, please! -_- As for the rest that I said, I mean every bit of it. I'm so sick (pretty blunt, feel I need to be at this point) of people coming here singing the praises of Xplane, when there is still so much that needs to be finished, and LM will never be able to accomplish it to the levels it deserves.

 

Glen

 

LM?

LM?

 

My bad, thank you John, I will correct it. (no edit option available), was meant to be LR, Laminar Research.

 

Glen

NIce explanation, and I even agree on several points. I even gave a "thumb up". :smile:

 

 

Whatever your name is today , I can't help you there if you don't understand. Someone has to voice the negative sides, there's enough of them. There's also some good.

i'm not too far from Muskoka, Ontario :girl_devil: :spiteful: :aggressive: :lol:

Well, to be fair, Glen, I think that like people in the FSX forums acknowledge the bad parts of FSX and deal with them in the way they know how, most of us acknowledge X-Plane's shortcomings and deal with it in our way. That is, dialogue with the developers themselves. Email, bug reports, interaction on the forums, etc. I think a lot of us understand the reality of the situation with XP in that a smaller dev team is only going to be taking incremental steps. While there are some things that I would like to see (as stated before, more regional specific autogen, a more robust AI/ATC environment, etc), sometimes we just want to enjoy what is available. So we do what we can to improve it on our own, like tweak the flight models for those who are so inclined, or use tools to improve the scenery, like I generally do, and we're happy with it. Not content, make no mistake. We want to see improvements as much as anyone else. It's just at some point, it becomes a dead horse. LR pretty much knows what the desires of the community are by now. How those desires get implemented (or not) is purely up to them.