FSX / prepar3d vs X-Plane 10. What problems are there? Not including the belly landing at the end!

[@flightsim481]

Hope you guys enjoy :-) Please don't forget to like, subscribe or share.

[@DreamFreeFPV]

Remember Microsoft Flight? i wonder what will happen with the code base for that? I reckon if they created enough content for it, and sold it for a price rather than free it would go great guns! Or perhaps they could sell on the code base to dovetail, or Flight Gear or something! I think the key to FSX success was Simconnect, so if they maximized backwards compatibility with that.Booyah.... anyhoo. one can dream...

[@RogerThat1945]

+Daniel Bayley Your dream came true..... store.steampowered.com/app/441920/

[@pickle4474]

Great video. Thank you. Made it very clear. I have fsx se edition and know its the right thing to stick with that. Maybe x plane in the future but would not invest that amount of money in such an incomplete sim. I'm looking to do my real world Ppl in the future and Fsx feels good for learning. Plus a well catered easy to use interface and tutorials. X.plane just leaves you out there on your own in the dark trying to work out how to do the most basic things. I think its possibly the future but not yet.

[@flightsim481]

+Matthew Jones Thank :-)

[@Soprano1013]

FSX SE is a 32-bit program. Where the advantage of having a 64-bit operating system comes into play is with memory. 32-bit operating systems can only recognize 4 Gigs of Ram. So there is no advantage of having FSX SE.

[@zynius]

In X-Plane if you want to see more of the cockpit you can increase the field of view (FoV) in the options. To be honest the default setting is a bit low, changing it to 80-85 really makes a difference.

[@MarkKnue]

+zynius - Right, Mate.

[@asj511]

Just remember that X-Plane has a development team of what, 10 people? Even though it's a small number they've done much more than the FSX/P3D team has done with their million dollar funds.

[@XPlaneAviation]

Yup

[@NipapornP]

But as a paying user, I don't care. I'm just interested in a good working product.

[@asj511]

Nipaporn P. Which is what you get with X-Plane.

[@Singleshot]

I have X-Plane 10 and you can move around in the cockpit by the arrow keys. Also you can move forward and backwards with the period and comma button.

[@Wopppo]

Very good comparison of the commercially available, comparatively low cost sims. As a retired Navy pilot and engineer, I find the ability of to do things myself in every aircraft I've ever flown to be intellectually stimulating.That X-Plane's aircraft carrier is realistic enough and has the entire world on eight DVDs for $70 provides a very cheap hobby. After discounting the cost of the computer with enough speed and video horsepower to run it, of course.

[@flightsim481]

+Paul Galanti Thanks for the kind words Paul and glad you enjoyed the video. There is also a vast amount of freeware scenery and aircraft for X-Plane (although of wildly varying quality!) which makes the hobby relatively inexpensive.

[@RUssianPilot757]

I don't get why people say the graphics in X Plane are not good. As long as you a have a decent computer, you'll be fine. I have a MacBook Pro 13'', that's a laptop mind you. And X Plane runs great on it. And the 15'' is WAY better in performance, especially in this kind of stuff. But anyway, there are tons of free addons that make X Plane look as good as FSX maxed out, if not better. For example FlyWithLua, Realistic Skycolors, and tons of free, good quality scenery at X-Plane.org. Also if you are able to spend some money, SkyMaxxPro is an amazing cloud addon. So anyway, the graphics in X Plane are good. You just have to customize it to fit your needs.

[@flightsim481]

I think that's often the problem. The graphics can be made to look awesome (although the night lighting is excellent straight out of the box). FSX has better scenery in many areas, particularly looking at airports. The difficulty is that whilst x-plane can look awesome, it does take quite a bit of effort to achieve it. The support from the community helps, big time though.

[@Mirandorl]

flightsim481 I would agree with this and say it comes down to your background. Veteran flight simmers know that sims are all about addon packs, and with time you learn which are the best ones to go for and how to tweak your system to fit. But if you are new, and mostly used to 'traditional' video games with recent graphics that you will rarely add to unless you are into mods, being confronted with the "base" graphics in any of the sims can be a shock, especially if you got sold on watching a video with add-on packs and a guy running them on a brutally overclocked 4790K :D Its just a learning curve, but in all fairness the STOCK graphics for all the sims are utterly dreadful compared with modern video games (In my opinion of course, beauty is a subjective thing -_- )

[@brndn2208]

They look alright but after I get to about 10,000 feet it just don't look as good.

[@echsomat4611]

+flightsim481 Not anymore... X-plane is now in Version 10.40, and Thousands of Airports have now Scenery by default.

[@gregorybentley5707]

This was a blast from the past, I really enjoyed this video. I hope you're doing well. How are you liking FS2020?

[@EchoChick2009]

in trying to decide which flight sim would work best 4 us,,, we have been reading up, watching vid's and pouring through forum archives but really weren't able to see the BiG Picture,,, that is, until we watch this comparison. thank u 4 sharing your take on things.

[@AlexsFlyingClub]

I just watched this video (somehow missed it before). Very nice commentary! You mention at the end you have the JRollon CRJ-200 for X-Plane. I was considering purchasing this addon, but then saw in a video that it has some routing bugs in the FMC (related to true vs. magnetic headings). Anyway, I'm thinking I may have been too hasty in losing my interest in this addon, since I do like the CRJ-200 in real life. I'd love to see a review of this aircraft if you're ever in a regional jet kind of mood :)

[@flightsim481]

It is really quite nice. It was one of the first XP aircraft with a dedicated FMS. It's lovely to fly. I know Aerosoft are doing one for FSX and P3D.

[@TheDonny2014thedonny2014]

Couldn't it also depend on the number of other programs that you're running on your PC while using any of the sims? Like Skype for example? Also I'm thinking of getting either X-plane or FSX but my problem is I'm gonna want all the add-ons that will make it look exactly real and not just a game as some people want to make it out to be. How much money should I expect to spend? And if I use a gaming computer what are the specifics that would work best?

[@stuntcc]

I have the same problem with fsx. I recently added scenary and a water configuration and it wont start

[@BoogeyMan828]

Fellow flight simmers, how do you feel comparing FSX vs X-PLANE vs DCS World? I have Dcs World and all its content but i'm looking for something "tamer/less stressful" I guess. After 2 hours of AA/AG sorties in Dcs I find myself worn out mentally and I would like to just fly without having to master another KA-50 heli, A-10 Warthog or F-15, etc.

[@MarkKnue]

Bravo! Well done, Sir. As in the past we're on the same page, my friend - Same conclusions. My wife & I have not even considered P3D for the same reasons you mentioned. I'm going back & forth between X-Plane 10 & FSX Gold with Acceleration, as well as with this year's release on the "Steam" servers. FSX Steam Edition (FSX SE) is growing at a massive pace, residing on "Steam" delivered platforms at very reasonable costs (The new owner: "DoveTail", or a similar name). Of course, there are many prepubescent players to hassle with on every forum or discussion group, and even crazier global users on FSX SE to contend with on Multiplayer. I have found that FSX SE provides better and smoother detailed graphics in 64 bit, and it is very easy to get up and flying at any level of difficulty - It's down right fun. Thank you, again for the wonderful, well-edited production we always like to watch more than once! Mark

[@flightsim481]

Mark Knue Hi Mark, huge thanks for your kind words :-) You are quite correct the FSX Steam is building a fan base, including some new users. Ultimately, new users are the life blood of any hobby, so I'm keen to see that development. In that sense, one could say that SE has been a success. Many thanks for the support, Rich

[@MarkKnue]

***** - A great question, my friend. I believe you. Microsoft Flight Simulator X development stopped about 8 years ago - the same time my DOD subcontractor career ended; and a quadriplegic I remain. I say this because I've had so much time on my hands to follow where FSX was being redeveloped. The easiest way to get up to speed on FSX and X-Plane 10 is to join "Steam" for free; then buy "FSX SE", and also buy "X-Plane 10 Global 64 Bit SE". (SE = Steam Edition) I'm not rich, so I got them on sale - FSX SE for 22 $ (US), as well as X-Plane 10 64 Bit Global for 28 $ (US). It's hard for me to interact with chats, multiplayer, and forums for obvious reasons, but both products continuously improve and provide me with "cheap thrills" if I can keep up with changes - as well as a quadriplegic can - secretly of course. Best wishes to you and ALL for 2016 - From the luckiest SOB on earth - seriously - I Am Alive!!! "HOW YA' LIKE M' NOW, MFs?!!" Joking of course. :)

[@MarkKnue]

+pqxxedf What a positively decent thing to do, my friend. THANK YOU! Thanks for the VoiceCoder link, as well. Dragon NaturallySpeaking is a great tool, and with that said, I turn back to my bed for rest. BEST WISHES! Mark

[@stephenmason4559]

Thanks for your efforts and showing us all that either your PC system is naff or each of these sims is crap!

[@Aleksandar6ix]

I stick with FSX because of the experience it provides. I am all for the visual experience with addons and details which FSX has, and X-Plane does not. MS Flight's architecture looked great and ran smooth - it's too bad their development plan let everyone down. I sure hope somebody comes out with a simulator to actually REPLACE fsx in the near future!

[@XPlaneAviation]

X Plane 11 is your solution.

[@Aleksandar6ix]

X-Plane Aviation The comment was a bit late....LOL. Since then I've discovered Prepar3D.

[@Soprano1013]

Oh... X plane has another update X plane 10.40

[@daowei4211]

thank for the info, I actually stopped playing FSX because of crashes and just played FS 2002. Yes it's old but it has never crashed on me. I will buy Xplane 10 for it's stability.

[@flightsim481]

No problems. I have to say that since recording this, I have used P3D very little because it's too dark for me with it's lighting model and I now find I am using X-Plane more and more.

[@peejay1943]

Thank you. I too am toying adding X Plane to my FSX which, contrary to your claim, is not crashing, very much at all. I am warming to X Plane.

[@flightsim481]

People's experiences of FSX vary wildly, so what problems one gets, another may not.

[@GpTekR]

flightsim481 Great presentation. I enjoy FSX and will also buy X-Plane soon. Like you mentioned i think it's great to have both of these sims. Also, crashing issues...i haven't experienced crashing FSX. This is a very touchy topic. Nobody mentions what systems they run. What temperatures their systems are reaching, do they thermal throttle or do they simply get so hot that the cpu causes a crash? Is their memory combined and working well with the system? Are they running out of memory? How many add-ons they run and if they conflict each other combined with the sim? I agree the Sims are never perfect, but neither are some the computers running these resource heavy games. Wonders of software also as i noticed you had engine failure and visual discrepancies. Cheers

[@chrysalide_aero]

Hi, FOV can be changed, I typically use 100 degree view, wide enough, too much it becomes more disturbing.

[@DivergentDroid]

For those who don't have rudders for X-Plane - X-Plane does have a simple auto-coorinate but it only works IF you have NO flight controls (even a joystick) plugged in. The Fix for this is a free add-on called X-Coordinate found here- it adds a new auto-coordinate system that works.: forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/files/file/15906-x-coordinate-linmacwin3264/ You can get the free demo of X-Plane and use the x-coordinate add-on with it before you buy.

[@leanna7657]

I appreciate the non-partisan view of the different flight sim programs. I use x-plane primarily because I use multiple computers (4) to run my sim. A discussion of multiple computer use would be interesting. Nice video. I subscribed. Thanks.

[@flightsim481]

I could contribute to that......if I had multiple computers!!!!! Lol, when I win the lottery I'll get back to you.

[@thematrixfanneo4602]

lol

[@lampexxl8599]

In my opinion everybody who wants to start with flight simulation should buy X-Plane 11. I fly in FSX and X-Plane 11 because I' ve got many Add-On' s for the FSX. X-Plane 11 is out of the box pretty good (better than 10 xD and in comparison to the fsx + xplane 10) and for beginners a *must*.

[@AquaStevae]

I would love to know why they would take the time to get the dynamics so perfect, and then drop the ball on some of the more basic things, like the actual aircraft? Don't they get that people want to feel as realistic as possible in all aspects of flight?

[@XplaneJunkie]

Good video! I currently have and play 4 major sims, XPlane, FSX, P3D and DCS and I'm definitely playing X Plane a lot more than the rest, esp as I find ways to improve the scenery, as more 3rd party add ons become available, etc. X Plane does have a steeper learning curve and requires a lot more effort to getting looking great but have a look at some of my vids to see what's capable, esp when you create your own photoscenery + osm data, IMO, it's better than FSX and P3D, just basically due to X Plane taking advantage of my high end system. It's a little frustrating running 15 FPS in the PMDG 737 NGX over a major city where I get 25 - 30 FPS in a similar comparison in X Plane.

[@jibeneyto91]

Excellent video. Its arguments are still very valid after almost 2 years. How has your opinion evolved over this time? FSX hasn't changed at all, P3D still has licencing issues and XP10 has improved a LOT.

[@flightsim481]

+jibeneyto In a nutshell, X-Plane 10 has changed greatly, both in terms of the product it is, and also the add on market. It still lacks in some areas, notably weather (although that is changing) and high fidelity FMS systems but it's changed quite a lot since this video was made. Other than Dovetail getting a better install system sorted and slight improvements to FPS/stability I would suggest FSX hasn't changed. P3D has moved on a considerable way, however, Lockheed Martin's licencing causes confusion and issues. Version 3 has clarified that the Academic version is only for 'Academic students' not student pilots, a much tighter definition than v2 had. However it doesn't seem to be enforced and the cost of changing from v2 to v3 is significant and LM don't offer discounts. Moreover, whilst they have fixed many problems, with every update, there is a need to patch all of the add ons people add to their default sim. I have lost count now of how many time I have re-installed P3D. So XP10's latest version has fixed a good proportion but there is still work to be done. More significantly, I fear LM will eventually run out of ways to keep their 32 bit ship afloat as the demand for better performance continues.

[@jibeneyto91]

+flightsim481 Thanks for your detailed response! I've had FSX since it launched in 2006, then I got XP-10 and I won't even consider buying P3D until they move over to 64bit and "stabilize" a bit on number of releases. As you say, I don't want to be re-installing my simulator every couple of months. And even though I am a university student (MSc aero engineering), I don't like those licensing issues at all. I think I read something like if you're studying an MSc you have to go Professional but if it's a BSc you can go Academic, I mean, seriously, what the hell? Once I finish my studies this year would I have to wipe P3D off my system? Come on LM!

[@davidroman4107]

witch one has best physics

[@Dkentflyer]

A very interestng comparison between the sims, I have just got X Plane and while i like the night lighting I am a bit dissapointed with the scenery.

[@flightsim481]

Most of the comments from X-Plane users have been highlighting options for how to improve scenery, which seems to be a busy part of the community.

[@Dkentflyer]

flightsim481 I have noticed that there a quite a few new airports being done by the community so hopefully things will improve scenery wise

[@Worstplayer]

About X-Plane's unrealistic autogen - just go to simheaven.com and download their OSM continent data (and OpenSceneryX ). It's free and the difference is massive. Just be aware that it'll make load times even longer. And if you want some extra bling, install Aerosoft Sky Tools and RealTerraHaze (installation is a bit tricky, pm me if you need help) . BTW good channel, subbed.

[@JapaneseNathan]

Change your fov in settings to see more

[@jlloretcubill]

Thanks for the video...very interesting points.l also use both sims but l am not a great fan of xplane. On FSX you can really create a very realistic virtual world and with the new commercial agreament with steam it will boost again.

[@flightsim481]

I agree that FSX can be made to look very realistic, particularly with the vast number of add ons. Unless you have flown a particular passenger jet or general aviation aircraft, it's hard to know if the flight modelling is accurate, you just have to take the designer's word for it! And that add on availability is a very important difference between the two. Regarding Steam, it's nice to have a new channel for buying FSX, but without a radical change in the actual program strycture, I can't personally see much more forward development. I still spend 80% of my time on FSX due to the add ons though.

[@rixxy9204]

Ironically my fsx never crashes. Keep an eye on add-ons and get rid of the bad ones

[@CallsignSimba]

To move your head back and forth, ude , and . Also, just get freeware scenery.. there's plenty of it and it's not difficult to install...

[@HarbardWild]

You are aware of that in X-plane, you do have to change your FOV to 80-90, right? Or else you will get that view where it looks like you are zoomed in all the time...

[@flightsim481]

Didn't know that buts there's so much in x-plane to tailor it, you learn something new every day :-)

[@HarbardWild]

Yes, i highly recommend using 87 FOV. Works good for me :)

[@flightsim481]

HarbardWild Just had a look at the FOV. Awesome, set mine to about 70 now. Much better. :-)

[@HarbardWild]

Glad it helped! The Default FOV is terrible, they should put 70FOV by default, some people just don't know about it. 70 to 90 in FOV depending on how close you sit in front of the monitor, and also depends on your resolution :)

[@shannonlinquist2649]

I've been a MSFS since Flight Simulator 95. But just like you said the architecture is getting old. Currently using Fsx and having issues with Direct 10 displaying older model textures. Plus XPlane is looking quite nice with night lighting and rain effects which I've seen in other videos. Great video BTW!

[@flightsim481]

Shannon Linquist Lol, I remember being stunned by the realism of FS95, having started out on 8 bit computers. FS95 was really high tech :-) If you are having trouble with DX10, it might be worth looking at this which is a DX10 fixer; stevesfsxanalysis.wordpress.com/ I've never used it, but many swear by it, and it fixes texture problems when using DX10 preview mode. Thanks for the support, Rich :-)

[@speedygon21]

you should get the a2a spitfire its awsome

[@flightsim481]

+speedygon21 I'm really tempted by it :-)

[@speedygon21]

+flightsim481 its well worth it

[@ThePlaysight]

...... If you would just interest you a little bit in X-Plane you would know you can change the FOV (Field Of View) easily in the Settings,

[@augustinr.3662]

Just for interest... I'm an fsx/p3d pilot. Will XPX have better performance than fsx? With about the same settings? If it's the same or even better, I will certainly buy it, just to have a third simulator. Thanks in advance for your response (Excuse my English, I'm from Belgium...)

[@augustinr.3662]

Another question: Is the load of xpx bigger on the system? Becaus FSX at mid settings is the highest I can run...

[@jakecole7447]

What kind of a system do you have ? (CPU etc.)

[@totoritko]

X-plane should be faster, though of course it depends on your system. XP is mostly GPU-intensive, but turn on lots of cloud puffs and high-res global shadows and it will tax the system quite a bit. Overall, though, I'd say the performance is good. Also keep in mind, in reality, XP is cheaper than FSX with addons that make it usable and/or look pretty. Just ORBx by itself is $100. Add EZDock and Active Sky Next and you're looking at a pretty hefty price tag. Meanwhile, in XP world, the equivalent of EZDock is built-in, the weather engine is built-in and realistic textures and building placements can be obtained for free from the likes of simheaven.com. TBH, besides the sim, I've only ever paid for addon aircraft (especially love Carenado's products, see my channel). And FSX doesn't even have things like elevation meshes with an accurate terrain height map at airports and runways following terrain contours. Also, much of the criticism levied in this video on XP doesn't apply: 1) views too narrow: settings -> rendering options -> widen field of view 2) availability of addons: getting very good. Less than FSX, true, but not bad either. 3) lack of airport scenery: google " scenery x-plane" and 99% of the time you'll to a download of some free scenery from the x-plane.org forum and similar sites Overall, I'd say get X-Plane Global when it's on sale on Steam, some quality aircraft on the x-plane.org store, some free scenery addons and you'll be a very happy camper. Let me know if you'd like some pointers on where to look for this stuff.

[@augustinr.3662]

Thank you very very much for this nice and lenghty explanation. Is the performance roughly the same when using and addon aircraft compared to fs. Do you think my system will run it fine? (with a detailed aircraft addon) I5-4200m 3ghz GTX760 8GB of ram Thank you very much ;-)

[@totoritko]

TheMinecraftRepublic I can't compare to FSX, since I don't have it, but the system you list should be fairly okay. I've got a GTX 970 and an i5-4460, so a little more powerful, but then I'm recording video and audio at the same time, so that's costing some CPU performance. Overall, at 1920x1080, you should be able to get ~25fps at close to or the same settings I have in the videos on my channel. (And keep in mind, I'm running OSM scenery and HD elevation meshes with object & road density set to "tons" (upper-mid value) and distance detail set to "high" (second highest)).

[@vololibero8330]

Would be nice wouldn't it if the person who developed the Spitfire model had remembered that it had a RR Merlin and not a feeble buzz as in the video.

[@flightsim481]

Very true. Its crying out for a sound pack.

[@Malcolm701]

I've used FSX for years and it's never crashed once- mind you I have quite a powerful computer.

[@Malcolm701]

FSX has still never crashed on me!

[@XPlaneAviation]

+Malcolm Browning FSX is crap

[@XPlaneAviation]

+Malcolm Browning FSX is crap

[@Malcolm701]

You could say that about Xplane...depends what you want.

[@NipapornP]

+X-Plane Aviation What a kindergarden behavior.

[@lampexxl8599]

You spoke to me from the soul. :)

[@MrSiciro]

I have not had 1 crash with FSX and I have been using it since release

[@GoFlyDude]

Depends, if you're on windows 8 it would crash all the time. It also had some issues on vista I think. On windows xp and 7 it runs great however. BTW I'm not talking about addons.

[@MrSiciro]

Yeah. I couldn't play it in Win 8 as well

[@GoFlyDude]

I installed FSX to often (and have no working copy now), it's hard to get another code from MS, I'm getting x-plane soon, I like what I've seen so far.

[@GpTekR]

GoFlyDude Strange, i had installed fsx deluxe about 3 or 4 times and not had a problem although i've heard one can only use the code twice. Having said that i went a game store and found fsx gold on special for $AU18. Obviously how could i refuse an offer so cheap to have a complete fresh copy with all service packs and Acceleration. You must admit, lot of software for little money. I will in near future also buy X-Plane though. I think it's great to have both.

[@SubTonic]

Good look at both games. They both have problems, but I think X-Plane has more. Two things it does far, far better than FSX: Night time effects (which are jaw-droppingly good) and flight model. FSX does...everything else better. Neither game is perfect and I'd love to see a flight simulation made with a new engine more compatible with modern tech, but I don't think that's going to happen anytime soon. As for Prepar3D, DX11 support is great, things like the water effects are the best yet and it's a more stable game, but the problem I have with that is the ridiculous pricing and the *severe* lack of default aircraft. Overall, FSX gives the most bang for the buck out of all three sims, especially when it's so cheap nowadays (and available on Steam). I do think X-Plane has a lot of potential, but I'm unsure that we'll ever see it reach that potential. The progress is just too slow.

[@bulwinkle]

In the final analysis X-Plane 10 is the only 64 bit flight sim in town. It is the only one that can make full and proper use of 64 bit processors and high end graphics cards. As good as others may be, they will never be able to use more than a bit less than 4Gb of RAM. FSX and it's derivatives are a dead end in my opinion. DCS is basically a good combat sim, but doesn't float my boat. There is another flight sim out in the wild that no one seems to have heard of that goes by the name of Flight Gear Flight Simulator V3.4, and like X-Plane runs in Windoze, OSX and Linux. I have not looked at it recently so I don't know what it's like.

[@MaxWaldorf2011]

I think you should refresh your approach on X-Plane, a loooooot of things have changed since last summer and honestly, there flaws that were corrected... For the view in the cockpit, you haven't changed the FOV which help in the cockpit view... There is now a global scenery airport that is updated and pushed to X-plane on regular updates. You forgot to mention that X-Plane is continuously updated and freeware sceneries are astonishing (Mesh HD v3). Now with Major player in sim world (PMDG) moving to the platform shows that this will be the next big entertainment platform... Keep up with X-Plane :) Cheers

[@flightsim481]

MaxWaldorf2011 Thanks. One of X-Planes nice problems is that it is continually developing and I haven't been able to do as much with any simulator for quite some time so it's easy to fall behind :-) Barely a week goes past without some update or change, and I think we have probably seen more active development in the last year than it has had previously. For me, the single biggest indicator of change is PMDG developing the DC-6 with the primary platform being XP10. From what I am aware, the main reason is that there are elements of the design (particularly things such as the functional fuse panel) which just cannot be achieved in FSX/P3D. That could well be the biggest factor in the future development of X-Plane as a platform.

[@MaxWaldorf2011]

Oh yes but due to major players coming in, they have reduced the pace of major versions releases. As a developer on X-Plane, that's clearly a factor that can jeopardize an ongoing dev... PMDG is a sign but I would also expect a lot from IXEG and their 737 classic... Cheers

[@flightsim481]

Yes, I have to say, I am very keen to see the release of the IXEG 737. It is a project I have been following for a while now, and it looks stunning.

[@hovercat4141]

Good video! Thank you

[@flyingdolphino5757]

Can't see much of the cockpit in x Plane? Increase the FOV in the settings. Come on your coming across a bit biased

[@MichaelFlatman]

dat c130 at 23:44

[@lampexxl8599]

Yeah. ^^

[@sturmanaskie]

the reason they don't have the entertainment thing on p3d is not to "catch people out" and fine you for playing games on it.. the reason is that fsx license was sold to dovetail games i.e the entertainment version of microsoft flight simulator.. so the rights to "playing games" on ms flight simulator belongs to dovetail games not lockheed martin

[@flightsim481]

Yes I agree Michael, it's not to 'catch people out', rather it's probably due to the licencing agreement between LM and Microsoft and the EULA reflecting that. In my opinion, it enabled Microsoft to sell 2 separate licences under the proviso that one is entertainment, the other is professional/training, and therefore to maximise the returns. I suspect that unless Dovetail and LM have a corporate fall out, there may never be any efforts to 'enforce' the P3D not for entertainment licence elements. After all, if LM decided to enforce the EULA, then all they would do is potentially drive customers to Steam. One previous poster made the valid point that if one is using P3D as a simulator (even at home) and therefore using it for it's intended purpose, that does not mean that one can't be entertained. The 2 do not have to be mutually exclusive. Indeed, I have used commercial simulators and despite the 'training environment' have enjoyed it immensely when my head wasn't about to burst. I must admit, with such ill defined terms, the EULA seems very difficult to enforce. Just my thoughts :-)

[@sturmanaskie]

flightsim481 right exactly, nice video btw... I agree re: xplane... that sim could be THE sim.... it runs easily x2 as fast as p3d or fsx on my machine BUT it is FLAWED by : weak default scenery, airports without buildings (c'mon just stick a tower and a terminal building!!), weird looking roads, you need to be a programmer even to start the thing up... anyway shame... I really appreciated the xplane effort and I've got it installed on my second hard drive just don't really use it.

[@flightsim481]

***** Thanks :-) Likewise, X-Plane is on my second drive. I don't use it as much as FSX/P3D which is a shame because it has some really excellent aircraft. Indeed, aircraft such as the FlyJsim 737 are the reason I keep going back to it.

[@Alexander-iq5yq]

I dont understand why flight sims are so shit. The physics may be good in a few, but theyre all so ugly, clunky and generally extremely dated feeling. Its 2014, why isnt there something that doesnt feel like its over a decade old?

[@317andrew317]

Couldn't have said it better. My guess is that simulators alone are a niche market and FLIGHT sims are an even smaller market. Also considering how much physics and design goes into these sims, there isn't much motivation for people to create newer sims, especially since a lot of people dont want to chip out 200+ for a sim. But yeah I agree with you, I just wish there was a flight sim that had everything, the whole Earth in HD and 3D would be awesome!

[@flightsim481]

317andrew317 I guess it may be down to simple market economics. Program a good first person shooter and you can sell millions of copies in a relatively short period of time. Just look at the queues at midnight for releases of games like CoD and Battlefield 4. With huge potential sales (at £50 each for next gen console titles!), producers of these games can readily attract investors and indeed, many games have the same underlying 'engine'. Conversely, flight simulation is a very small percentage of the gaming market, and even then, a sim is dependant on the development and release of good quality add ons. Good add ons take years to develop, so unless add on developers are involved from the outset, then the sim has to be amazing to stand on it's own. Just take a look at the development process of DCS. It has been in house for many years but now that external add on developers are coming on board, the DCS arena is growing more significantly than it has done previously. The economics of flight sims is just not on the same scale as other games genres. I suspect programming the physics isn't the hardest bit, getting the money, to pay the staff to design, program and distribute the sim is most likely the hard bit.

[@Alexander-iq5yq]

flightsim481 Do you really think its that small? Theres very recent truck, train and farming simulators for heavens sake! They made flight sims in the past and they sold well. FSX sold at least 250k times if I remember correctly. I guess Im just upset I have to deal with shitty software...In fact I dont even use them any more, but Id love a modern sim.

[@Mirandorl]

J583 Out of the box, agreed they all look awful. I actually laughed out loud when I got in the space shuttle in X-Plane, after all those sexy external shots in the trailer, you get inside and are transported back to the 16-bit era. Very nostalgic, but makes you wonder what all that money went on. The answer would be that it went on the simulation, which is very very good. However to make it LOOK modern you need to put add-ons into your sims. There are many good free ones as I understand, though being new myself I am yet to try them out. There are lots of YT videos however where the makers are using free addons, so its worth looking through them for the good ones. It is frustrating though - you just want to get in and fly and enjoy the awesome, and you have to load all this stuff in. In the case of FSX you may also have to spend a week or so tweaking it for performance. Sadly the accessibility and user friendliness of normal games is absent. Additionally, a PC that may run normal games really well, could be a total dog for sims. Most sims need a VERY good CPU at high clock rates. Though some use your GPU, an expensive graphics card wont make the same difference in sims as it would in say, BF4. FSX almost doesnt care what GPU you have in there, it just wants CPU POWAH lol

[@flightsim481]

There is no doubt that flight simming has a fairly healthy user base but I doubt if the numbers get remotely close to mainstream games. Other areas of technology, be it cars or computers have developed through either better engineering/design or a competitive market place forcing producers to make the next big development. Sadly, this same impetus does not appear to have translated to flight sims. FSX seems to me to have become so dominant over the years that there has been little competition or incentive to invest in developing it. I hope someone raises the capital and ambition to create a 'next gen' sim.

[@Soprano1013]

FSX is obsolete

[@lachlangainey8452]

just be aware that x plane 10 is still in development so don`t judge too much.

[@echsomat4611]

You cant say that. X-plane is "finished", but still improved and enhanced...

[@MauritsVeen]

X Plane 10 is finished and available since 2010 but sometimes they will change some stuff

[@Malcolm701]

Forget the licensing issues of Prepar3d.... I don't think it's worth the money. The presentation of LMs version is amatuerish.

[@celsius2946]

X-Plane is better now.

[@flightsim481]

+Celsius X-Plane is continually being developed and each step is making a huge difference IMHO.

[@henrychan1039]

X-Plane, IMO, is the most advanced and realistic simulator available now. However, it lacks all the addons FSX and P3D has.

[@henrychan1039]

+Aaron Fang Shenhao There are scenery converters, but they aren't perfect and you can't convert planes.

[@rixxy9204]

Xplane 11 looks amazing but the ATC sounds horrible. They don't have snow in the beta either... kinda need weather in a sim!

[@bobgilley2081]

well its nice to see a spitfire in a game that's not getting shot down but this is why I am complaining because a spitfire is a fighter plane not a cruise liner so please play war thunder and see who you struggle in simulator battles

[@flightsim481]

I watched a Spitfire, Hurricane and the only 2 airworthy Lancaster Bombers in the world fly overhead a WW2 re-enactment day today. One of the Lancasters had flow over from Canada for the D-Day rememberance days (I prefer not to say celebrations). You don't need a dogfight to appreciate what magnificent machines they are and the sight was quite emotional for a few of the old boys present.

[@RUssianPilot757]

Dude... Your icon pic though.....

[@flightsim481]

RUssianPilot737 Who's, mine or bob's?

[@RUssianPilot757]

flightsim481 Bob's.

[@gothops154]

I'm sure P3D would much rather have you pay for that Academic "license" than have you pirate the game so they really shouldn't complain about people using this for personal use. Welcome to 21st century software usage, if it's on your computer you can do whatever you want with it privately. Get with the times P3D

[@flightsim481]

I think you are quite right about LM's attitude towards home P3D users and the academic version. Up until now LM haven't, to the best of my knowledge, complained about anyone buying the academic version of P3D. Whilst I agree with your sentiments about using legally bought software as you see fit, I suspect there may well be many in the legal profession who may take issue with that. However, the legal bill would probably cost far more than would be won from any prosecution, and I suspect any legal action would be targeted against unscrupulous commercial users using the academic license for commercial operations, rather than the small fry individual home users. However, with P3D not licensed for entertainment, and FSX: Steam being released as an entertainment counterpart, I'll be interested to see what develops. The question really is whether Dovetail consider P3D to be costing them lost sales and if they would challenge LM about them not enforcing their licensing agreement. Ultimately, Lockheed Martin make the licensing very clear, with the 'not for use for entertainment' pointed out several times, not hidden away in small print. I strongly suspect that the reason was more to do with their licensing agreement with Microsoft. Microsoft have licensed P3D for the commercial training world and FSX: Steam for entertainment and I suspect for Dovetail to have bought the FSX distribution licence, they would have wanted some sort of protection for their product. I suspect the licensing is to try to differentiate between the 2 markets, and thus for Microsoft to 'sell' 2 separate licenses, which of course would potentially be of huge benefit to them. Dovetail have said they intend to release a new flight sim in 2015 but have said nothing more, whilst LM are known to be developing P3D potentially as a 64 bit application. The question on my mind is if, with 2 separate developers/distributors, they will work together to retain compatibility or do their own thing for their respective markets? Just my humble opinion, but I guess time will tell. :-)

[@MoonWalkersbin]

you seriously complaining about buildings in a flight simulator??? come on.... disliked instantly

[@RobertGeez]

I mean via a monitor not the overpriced DK2.

[@RobertGeez]

No stereoscopic in prepar3d. Crap.

[@kimmossige263]

Check DCOC mod

[@Malcolm701]

X Plane...er No.