Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 11 to 19 of 19

Thread: Disappointed

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    End of the Universe
    Posts
    1,058

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NatGeo View Post
    Might have to give P3D a shot. I have been a little disappointed with 11 too.
    Sorry to hear that. Anything in particular that disappointed you?

  2. Default

    He is so disappointed, he wouldn't even care to answer.

    When XP10 came out, I didn't like it, either, but even then I acknowledged the superior flight model. And since then XP11 came out, and with photoscenery it's an absolute dream. Laminar is finally (it was about **** time) starting to put real world landmarks in, too. Funny, I was a lifelong Microsoft simmer, and now when I look at FSX/P3D's scenery compared to XP's photoscenery + correctly placed buildings, I applaud the variety and much prefer XP. And I believe people will have less-and-less reasons to trash XP, it has really picked up steam.

  3. #13

    Default

    In the upcoming XPL11 updates, Laminar is planning on adding many more detailed cities/landmarks such as Las Vegas, Sidney, London, etc...
    I-7 4770K @ 4.5 Ghz, EVGA 1080ti 11Gb SC2 Gaming, Corsair H110 water cooler, Asus Maximus VI Hero, EVGA Supernova 1000 watt power supply, Team Extreme LV 16 Gb ram @2100 MHz, Four Samsung Evo solid state drives, Windows 10.

  4. #14

    Default

    I kinda see where the OP is coming from, I too once didn't bother to lift a finger to do anything with X-Plane and just waved it off. Years later when I actually put a little effort into it, I realized how nicely you can hook up XP9, 10, etc. There are lots of tools and things out there for XP for those willing to learn something or put some time into things.
    Ricardo
    FSThrottle.com

  5. #15

    Default

    OK. This is longer than I intended, so if you're in a hurry, skip it.

    Interesting discussion. For years I have used FSX and its precursors (since 84), and have enjoyed them. But while raising the family and being in the work world, I only had time for simple, VFR, GA flying (with as much eye candy that I could afford - which wasn't much) because I had an average machine that couldn't handle a lot. In fact, I've never flown a tube liner! But my time flying, limited as it was, was magic to me - a step away from the laws of gravity, physics, checklists, with all the gas you want, no damage no matter what dumb things I'd do... I was flying!
    I knew this XPlane sim was out there, took a look at it once, a very short look. Went back to FSX, my 500s, and the Orbx PNW. But I was watching the XPlane generations come along. Finally, three things happened:

    1. I needed to make some equipment investments in my PC if it was going to keep me flying in FSX. Try increasing your "flying" spending when you retire on less than you used to be making.

    2. My major retirement project is to pull together 50 years of slides, video, 16MM, 8MM, etc to capture our family history. My trusty 2008 MacBook Pro (that I was going to use) picked now to die. The WIFE said we should probably invest in a replacement Mac to pull this huge family project off!! So I bought a new MacBook Pro, and realized these older eyes need more real estate on the screen to see details. So we went to the Apple store and swapped it out for an iMac 27 5K with 2TB HD, Hybrid SSD, 3.3 to 3.8 GHz CPU, 24G RAM, etc. ...which was cheaper!

    3. I started following the Plane 11 Beta progress and saw a level of realism that I realized I now wanted to tackle. I was impressed with what I saw about the night lighting, the new sound physics, and the new developments that were coming down the road. I also realized that now was the time for me to learn to use procedures, checklists, and get as realistic as I can. And I can use my new iMac!!!

    All this to say, I like FSX, and now I like Plane 11 too. It's OK to go from one to the other without implying that one is better than the other. We each need to make our decisions based on where we are in life...and then enjoy this great hobby!

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Mojave Desert, California
    Posts
    1,256

    Exclamation Giving it another go.

    Quote Originally Posted by ricardo_NY1 View Post
    I kinda see where the OP is coming from, I too once didn't bother to lift a finger to do anything with X-Plane and just waved it off. Years later when I actually put a little effort into it, I realized how nicely you can hook up XP9, 10, etc. There are lots of tools and things out there for XP for those willing to learn something or put some time into things.
    Your post convinced me to give it another try.

    I now realize what was disappointing. I have flown Microsoft FS since its wireframe amber-screen Chicago with single wireframe tower and flew the slide show into Miggs field, though FS4 is probably my first flight sim that I got totally into. The ways and means to program ones interfaces were always user friendly and predictable. Lockheed stepped in and maintained the protocol of customization of interface and the switch to Prepar3d was relatively painless. Quite user friendly. I am used to software in all areas maintaining a standard convention of use. Even Adobe and Jasc use similar hotkeys and conventions in their graphic programs. Then along comes X-Plane 11. Delightfully done graphics, planes, clouds, and framerates out of the box. Its default definitely a step up from the other two flight sim's default. But it does very little the way its always been done in the way of interface. So will the gain be worth the pain of the learning curve and the replaced auto-responses? I am still not very familiar with the available aircraft add-ons so wonder about the diversity I get with the other Sims. Time will tell

    I can't answer that right atm since I am painfully trying to relearn all my old moves. Is their a plug-in to default to the user friendly interface I know and love?

    Your post is causing me to give it another go and see if an old dog can learn new tricks. Dang but old habits die hard!!! I wonder if the expansion opportunities ahead will measure up to the effort.
    Last edited by jring2; 06-29-2017 at 10:06 PM.
    AMD 8350 Eight Core 4.0ghz oc'd to 4.4, 8 gig 2133 DDR3 64 bit ram, Microsoft Sidewinder Precision II. GeForce GTX 970 w/4gig
    OS=Windows 10 64 bit, FSX w/Acceleration & P3d v3.4, REXII, OrbX
    John

  7. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jring2 View Post
    Your post convinced me to give it another try.

    Your post is causing me to give it another go and see if an old dog can learn new tricks. Dang but old habits die hard!!! I wonder if the expansion opportunities ahead will measure up to the effort.
    I'll be the first to admit that the XP interface/menus, as far as versions 9 and 10 go do take a little getting used to, but they work and are logical. That aside, there are many resources and plug-ins for taking a vanilla installation of XP and making it look really nice. The XP community itself is doing lots of work with the airports and those can be downloaded from the gateway. Lots of plug ins and freeware stuff is out there and the tools for scenery creation are really good for those who want to go the extra mile. The photoreal ground utilities and tools to convert payware scenery from FSX to XP are also worth looking into. Some convert better than others, some are not even worth the attempt. Try messing with the plug-ins that modify night lighting and haze, those are good tools. It will be a while before XP11 gets the add-ons it really deserves but I think it will happen soon because XP has picked up serious momentum with version 11.
    Ricardo
    FSThrottle.com

  8. Default

    As has been said by others, the feel of a flight model is quite subjective. Not all pilots agree even those with considerable experience. Some years ago when I was between jobs I did some considerable development work on 737 flight models in FS2000 (yep- that long ago). I tuned a FM that actually corresponded well with inertia properties, positive dynamic stability properties, etc. It was the closest I had ever felt a desktop sim feel to being correct. However when I gave it to others to try out most did not like it. They were used to the over damped, improper stability of the FS models they had been flying! I also realized that what felt good with my flight control rig needed tuning by others in theirs. Interface makes a huge difference!

    As for XP11, I have only been using it for a week. Before this I had not done any desktop simming for nearly 15 years. I was too busy flying the real thing earning a living!
    Out of the box I am both impressed, and in some ways disappointed. The B737 flight model is the first one I have ever been able to fly accurately with all the sensitivity at max and the stability augmentation completely off! It is the only way it feels right, and I can fly it with the same techniques I use in real jets all these years. I'm using only a Saitek Pro Yoke, which is not ideal because it is too heavily damped near center. What don't I like? The FMS is terrible, the MSP and autoflight don't function well, and it is hard to do a complete flight in the stock 737 without something going haywire. But all that is only a disappointment because the crisp graphics of the stock cockpit and seeming functionality (first glance) mislead me into expecting more than I should have from a stock package.

    Though specific details are missing out of the box, the scenery impresses me a great deal! The clouds and atmospherics are great, better than I get in real simulators by far and better than what I was used to in FS in days past. I get solid hickup free frame rates of 30-35 with nearly no stuttering in any area, and I am only using a P3 3.7 Ghz rig with 8GB Ram and a Geforce GT750X. Not bad for a low to midrange rig... Now if they would fix the auto flight on the 737 I will be very impressed! Overall a great sim with potential. Time to download a decent add on FMS and MSP if can find. ATC drives me nuts though!

    P.S. I try to use the FMS and MSP as I would in a real jet, but there are too many limitations still. VNAV needs a lot of work, as it stands it is useless and would have got me violated in real life .

  9. Default

    "if only you are willing to go through a tiny amount of trouble." OH, I have spent more time trying to get photo real scenery using a couple different methods and even at a zoom level of 17, the images are a mixture of photo real and make believe. It is not an easy thing to do to get it right. Other then that, X-plane if a great sim.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-16-2003, 07:44 PM
  2. Disappointed
    By TruffleShuffle in forum FS2002
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-21-2002, 01:37 PM
  3. Replies: 25
    Last Post: 09-05-2002, 09:18 AM
  4. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-29-2002, 10:42 PM
  5. Palamino 2Ghz and disappointed
    By ndkeh01 in forum FS2002
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 03-20-2002, 07:52 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •