View Full Version : x-plane or fs2002
01-29-2002, 01:49 PM
Which on is better?
Thanks for lookin'... Any comments????:-jumpy
Eagles May Soar, But Weasles Don't Get Sucked Into Jet Intakes.
Always try to keep the number of landings you make equal to the number of take offs you've made.
There are old pilots and there are bold pilots. There are, however, no old, bold pilots.
Every takeoff is optional. Every landing is mandatory.
01-29-2002, 09:36 PM
I prefer X-plane as I have a lower end computer and X-plane is very fluid with my machine. I have to turn stuff down with FS2k2. I also like the real weather function in X-plane as it doesn't seem to effect frame rates as much. I also like how X-plane cames with all of the tools needed to make planes and scenery. No expensive add-ons to buy!! just my 2 cents!!
01-30-2002, 10:12 AM
My two cents worth.
I have X-Plane 5.66 and just installed FS2002 Pro. Used to have FS2000.
Graphics - FS2002 better scenery and graphics but not by much.
ATC - FS2002 is little more realistic but X-Plane allows you to choose runway and has approach plates available for ILS frequencies. Need add-ons for these in FS2002.
Flight dynamics - X-Plane by a nautical mile. Never crashed a plane in X-Plane with realism set to highest; crash more than half the time in FS2002 with realism only 50%. Planes DO NOT take off correctly in FS2002 and have read numerous messages about uncontrollable aircraft.
Support and add-ons - Obviously FS2002 by a landslide, BUT you can contact the X-Plane creator directly and he provides constant updates via web downloads. MS might issue a FS patch at some point if it feels like it. X-Plane comes with Scenery and Aircraft maker standard if you are into that.
Summary - FS2002 has tons of downloads and add-ons with lots of bells and whistles. With a few exceptions, the f----n' planes don't fly right! In X-Plane, the first time I attempted a complete flight with ATC I made a successful landing. I've tried so many times to do the same in FS2002 I've lost count and I haven't even seen the runway yet. The plane doesn't take off, it crashes, ATC cancels my IFR because I can't stay on course, blah-blah-blah. I'm ready to chuck the whole thing into the trash.
But that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.
It's nice to have both!
You will not be dissapointed.
For more information visit www.x-plane.com and www.x-plane.org
I use x-plane to fly.
I use FS2002 for eye candy.
02-03-2002, 08:09 AM
I thought X-Mag was for eye candy and not FS2002!
Yes one should have both because each has fun to offer and that is what it is all about!
I feel X-Plane is better because it is not a MS product!!! LOL
I like X-plane over FS2002 because it offers space flight and a great RC flying setup and also one can read all the nasty posts about the X-Plane maker from so many that for some strange reason keeps flying what they complain about!
Hey that is part of the fun to complain...
Mac / Fatts
BTW I sure hope someone can fix the water splash in FS2002 it is so poor out of the box.
and the ships need to be worked on... and the sub will not submerge and the... see this is fun!
02-05-2002, 10:29 AM
One other thing, I believe they are making a flavor of X-plane for Linux. I may be wrong though. I doubt you will ever see FS2002 built for Linux.
02-08-2002, 04:00 AM
I'll start by replying jayubl (hope it doesn't bother you, Jay) because I have different opinions @ some points!
>Graphics - FS2002 better scenery and
>graphics but not by much.
Than FS 2000, maybe! And how about the deserted X-airports?
The airport lighting and the landing lights in X-Plane are far better, though!
>ATC - FS2002 is little more realistic
a little?? 'had no problems understanding what ATC said in x-plane, had to study to learn about FS ATC! By the way... around airports in X-plane the ATC messages to you get interrupted by background chatter!
> X-Plane allows you
>to choose runway
>Flight dynamics - X-Plane by a
>nautical mile. Never crashed
>a plane in X-Plane
I have never crashed a FS2002 plane while fling it by the book! I mention, that the only birds I seriously used are 737 & Baron 58 (the FS2002 itself crashes, though). Nevertheless I agree that there might be some problems in FS Flight dynamics. X-planes are very easy to fly. TOO EASY! I've done on "Heavies" things that no real pilot will do in the real aircraft! X-planes are also unrealistically resistant to hard landings!
>Support and add-ons - Obviously FS2002
True, but FS often let things unfinished in order to make you buy add-ons! Imagine that! Microsoft sells CLOUDS :-mad ! How about fuel? It will be fun :)
>can contact the X-Plane creator
Austin Meyer (creator of x-plane) answered all my (to many) mails! He's just great!
>X-Plane comes with Scenery and
>Aircraft maker standard if you
>are into that.
That's great too!
For ME (who don't give <shXt :)> about designing airplanes or playing God and creating sceneries) FS 2002 is far more challenging and more complex than X-Plane.
I like to get really busy in the cockpit. That doesn't happen in X-Plane. X-Plane is fun, FS2002 is serious. I'm sorry to say that, but DreamFleet 737-400 is so ahead of any x-plane that I know about, that I only go back to X-plane to enjoy the nice clouds & sunsets and also try the great planes have been created by fans*! I left my big love, the (x-plane) A 319 for DF 737-400!
*I'm just mean, that's much more to it!
That's all folks!
Adamwarren, YR-ATD is ATR-42-500, leaving your topicspace!
04-06-2002, 04:22 PM
Correct, like Adamwarren, i left my A320 for dreamfleet 737-400
04-17-2002, 07:06 AM
I aggree with you!
But, I have a tendency to us FS2002, and I'm not even sure why.
04-25-2002, 10:50 AM
I've flown Xplane for the past two years. Now, xplane is a zipped up file sitting in a folder somewhere on my harddrive. Not even close to FS2002 when you take away the default 2k2 airplanes and replace em' with third party airplanes. Come on. The flight models in xplane are no better than the third party flight models in 2k2. Sure, you can find an occasional exception. But once you know what you're looking for and replace those stupid default aircraft in 2k2 with really good fms and eye candy available from many sources and drop in a couple dozen excellent third party aircraft, FS2002 beats Xplane by a country mile. One thing you need to know about Xplane. The ground is green and brown with nothing else. Just runways and taxiways. No buildings. Crappy trees. Airplanes are just plane janes. Sticks for struts. Nothing to look at but blue sky and empty ground. It does have a few nice panels but they're not interchangeable with other aircraft without two hours worth of work and the know how.
04-26-2002, 02:12 AM
LAST EDITED ON Apr-26-02 AT 01:17AM (EDT)[p]It just has to be said.....
"..and the first consumer-price sim to get FAA Certification (Instrument Rating, COMMERCIAL and AIRLINE TRANSPORT Certificate) is"
drum roll.... you know what's coming, don't you ? :)... X-Plane.
Though I should add for completeness (no doubt to the relief of everybody ;) ) that "actually LOGGING this time requires you to be in a Motus full-motion sim (price tag: about $150,000.00) with an instructor"
MSFS is prettier though.. :)
04-26-2002, 02:13 PM
X-Plane is a fine sim with a good flight model. I won't go as far as others and say that it is a superior flight model. It really varies from plane to plane.
Just be aware that if you do get into X-Plane you'll be tying yourself in with a developer who is constantly changing things. Of late he has been charging money for those changes which has led to some unsavory results.
If all you want to do is fly around in X-Plane it should be okay. If you are the type that needs to keep up with the latest and greatest or you are a developer, prepare yourself for some heartburn.
05-07-2002, 03:55 AM
My two cents...
I really, really, really miss flying with the virtual cockpit in MSFS. :( It was soooo much nicer.
I switched to X-plane, because MSFS 2002 will no longer run on my computer. It refuses to acknowledge I have a 3d card. Everything -ELSE- works fine. MSFS -USED- to work. Now it's in my closet. X-plane runs great.
I don't care -WHAT- the FAA says. X-plane airplanes fly like tiny toys being whipped around in a hurricane. MSFS wasn't much better, though, but at least you could be whipped around in your virtual cockpit.
In MSFS, you can start in the loading area if you want, and taxi to the runway. In X-plane, if you try to do that, the plane won't turn fast enough, no matter how slow or fast you go, and you run off the runway onto the ground, where you can't turn at all. Very irritating. Kind of neat how the landing gear jiggle, though.
X-plane's ATC totally rocks. In MSFS, if you get so much as a hair off course, they cut you off and you're on your own. In X-plane, you can change your flight plan while you're flying, ask for a different type of approach, ask for an emergency landing...
MAPS AND CHARTS
You also have immediate access to maps and charts of all the surrounding airports, with all frequencies listed. In MSFS, I think you have access to maps, but I can't recall ever using them. I'm not sure why. X-plane's are much easier to access. Maybe that's it.
X-plane loads faster too. It must be better coded. But that's a given. Microsoft made the other one.
You can't run into other aircraft in X-plane. :( I tried. MSFS lets you do that... loads of fun, hard as blazes to do. Just -YOU- try landing on top of a Boeing 777!
ALL IN ALL
X-plane would be nicer if it had a virtual cockpit, and better ground steering, and ground traffic. But I think it's better than MSFS.
05-21-2002, 10:27 PM
FS2002 Pro superior to X-Plane in just about everything.
06-13-2002, 05:16 AM
>FS2002 Pro superior to X-Plane in
>just about everything.
LOL! funniest statement dude! You obviously dont know much about plane physics.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.