Suggestions on civilian flight simulator

[Inseckt]

Hello:)

 

I've been flying lock-on since 1.02 (pre-FC) and been following ED through everything and love it. I have never been interested in civilian flight simulators, and I always thought they looked like crap. But there's a change in the wind, and this year I want to check out a civilian flight sim and I need some answers and suggestions.

 

Through my initial peer into the civvie world, it appears to be mainly two operators, namely FSX and X-plane 10. Or are there any other big ones worth considering?

 

In a simulator, I will bee mainly looking for the following:

 

-Environment. Scenery, weather and airports are important factors for me. X-plane seems to be the leading contender in this regard, at least in an out-of-the-box configuration. Is this an apt observation?

 

-Flight model. Needs to be accurate. Appears to be the main purpose of X-plane, so they seem to win in this regard as well, and again; at least in an out-of-the-box configuration. Is this also an apt observation?

 

-Avionics. I think my decision will stand on this. How detailed has it become these days? I've heard no celebration about X-plane avionics and I'm suspicious about it's level of avionics. In FSX it seems to vary between the different 3rd party projects. How does the two compare to DCS:A-10C for instance?

 

I'm planning a new system this year, which will be a considerable investment so I'm not considering system requirements for the time being...

 

Any input is highly appreciated, THX!:D

Edited January 4, 2012 by Inseckt

[Jona33]

I'm an FSX player a bit and it's a good game but only for fun. Cockpits (default aircraft) are all partly clickable for the important stuff. In some places the scenery is beautiful and other's less so. It is a fun game but I do recommend the acceleration expansion pack as it adds in reno, red bull racing, The Fa-18 and sling load operations. It's good fun. The missions are good to fly and there are amazing payware expansions and dozens of freeware's that are good. UKMIL, IRIS and Alphasim are highly recommended companies and simviation is full of mods. If you want FSX be prepared to spend a while trying to get it to be very good. The SDK allows easy creation of missions. (the included ones have a tendency to be cheesy) and quite a lot else.

Edited January 4, 2012 by Jona33

[cichlidfan]

If you want FSX be prepared to spend a while trying to get it to be very good.

 

...and several dollars on add-on packages!!

[MTFDarkEagle]

*text*

If you're talking about A-mark addons for FSX: look no further than PMDG (commercial aircraft), A2A Simulations (Vintage aircraft), VRS (F/A-18E), Lotussim (L-39, but they have a Mig-29 in development so I've heard..). These are just a couple of examples. If you need more, let me know.

[Yskonyn]

The new X-plane 10 has a very realistic weather engine, at least graphics wise. The actual modelling of the atmosphere is still off, but so is the case with MSFS.

 

Terrain wise I think that of Xplane looks much better out of the box, BUT the new iteration uses a new autogen system which has its quircks like powerlines crossing runways, fictional small airports being generated and cities having odd housing and no flats or skyscrapers. Also landmarks are currently missing, but we are promised this will come.

So, while the terrain itself looks much better in X-plane, I think you have a more familiar terrain packed into MSFS.

Airports (see X-plane thread) come devoid of any buildings and objects out of the box in X-plane, whereas in MSFS at least some rudimentary objects are placed.

In X-plane you only have the ramps, taxiways and runways unless you add custom scenery or place objects yourself.

Lighting, however, is VERY realistic in X-plane if you have a good computer!

 

Flight model depends on what you fly. The flightmodel of PMDGs 737 for MSFS is very good, but also X-planes flight model is decent, although (just like MSFS) the stock aircraft are rubbish in that regard.

Problem is that there aren't too many great X-plane addon aircraft yet. Especially not the bigger airliners. MSFS has a much broader offering there.

 

Avionics ties in with the above point. X-Plane has support for all kinds of intricate avionics, but its up to the third party developers and modders to use it.

Because of the earlier mentioned lack of many decent addons I find the avionics part in X-plane underused and in its current form therefore lacking.

BUT (again) the analog instruments are of higher quality than MSFS's even in stock aircraft and the framerate or update rate is much much higher than MSFS's. This makes flying hands on a far better experience than anything I have ever experienced in MSFS.

Regarding avionics MSFS has the same problem out of the box, but again, the offering of third party addons is much larger and make for some high quality avionics (PMDG again).

 

As you can see, there is no package which has it all.

X-plane supposedly has the better fight modelling, but we (modders) need to start doing stuff with that. Nonetheless X-plane does offer a lot for civil aviation enthousiasts.

And you can actually fire weapons off aircraft that have em too... out of the box! ;)

Mid-air refueling, entry from orbit in a space shuttle, carrier takeoff and landings... al there out of the box in Xplane.

Edited January 4, 2012 by Yskonyn

[ec-swr]

VFR xplane- great flight dynamic

 

IFR FSX - maddog is the very best

 

http://www.flythemaddog.com/

 

condor soaring simulator- is wonderful

 

http://www.condorsoaring.com/

[Yskonyn]

VFR xplane- great flight dynamic

 

IFR FSX - maddog is the very best

 

http://www.flythemaddog.com/

 

condor soaring simulator- is wonderful

 

http://www.condorsoaring.com/

 

I wouldn't agree with IFR - FSX. The framerate and instrument updates of Xplane are much better and therefore make for a better IFR experience.

The problem, however, is probably the choice of aircraft.

[Inseckt]

Hmm, will be difficult, I may end up getting both though, as they seem to both have exclusive things to offer. If I want to learn a new aircraft, lets say boeing 737-800 with it's avionics and so on, I would go for FSX with high quality addons. But when just flying for the sake of it, then X-plane..

 

oh, and one more q: How does ATC interaction in X-plane and FSX compare?

[Yskonyn]

Out of the box I'd say the new X-plane 10 ATC engine is more realistic than FSX's out of the box. But there are no addons yet for X-plane, while FSX does have some to increase realism (RadarContact for example).

But out of the box I like X-plane's more.

[exodus]

I recently bought FSX+Acceleration and just added REX 2.0. I'll probably get a PMDG cockpit. Pretty fun so far.

 

Any recommendations for a terrain addon? Maybe UTX?

[hassata]

These guys are pretty awesome: http://fullterrain.com/

 

Thing about FSX, you have to decide how much you want to sink into it and stick to it. Otherwise, you can dig yourself into a hole quicktime. I must have spent an amount = to a decent machine, DCS, and a WH, and you still end up spending A LOT of your time tweaking.

[Inseckt]

ok, I just read through the entire "X-plane 10 news" thread, and I'll think I'll begin with that. Seems like getting the full FSX experience will require a lot of add-ons and payware, while xp10 can be somewhat satisfactory out of the box. Seems like it might turn out to be the future when more 3d parties turn in this direction anyway. Plus I love what I have seen in screens and youtube's regarding night lighting. I love taking off in the early evening and landing after sunset.

 

Still have to wait some time for my new system anyway, so the continued patching of xp10 might improve it some more until then:)

[effte]

To enjoy FS you need:

1) Base simulator

2) One good aircraft, payware or freeware

 

Most people aren't content with flying one aircraft, and don't want to limit themselves, to the free ones. Hence the "you need to buy add-ons" opinions. Try the XP demo. FWIW, I found XP9 useless out of the box. All gimmick, nothing which flew well.

[Yskonyn]

I would seriously suggest trying XP10s demo indeed before you buy.

It's a rather expensive package (but comes on 8DVDs with high res terrain).

[sobek]

FWIW, I found XP9 useless out of the box. All gimmick, nothing which flew well.

 

To be honest, that's not the sims fault but the plane makers.

[effte]

Sobek,

for add-ons, I'd agree. However, the sim maker provides the default aircraft with a product labelled as a flight simulator and not a flight environment.

[sobek]

Sobek,

for add-ons, I'd agree. However, the sim maker provides the default aircraft with a product labelled as a flight simulator and not a flight environment.

 

Yes, i agree and this is the biggest flaw that X-plane has and it still is very hard to fathom for me why they can't finally throw in at least one great plane into the mix of mediocre ones (maybe that is different now, i've had only very short time testing the demo).

 

However, the sim is perfectly capable of delivering, that is my point.

[Yskonyn]

Sobek,

for add-ons, I'd agree. However, the sim maker provides the default aircraft with a product labelled as a flight simulator and not a flight environment.

 

I agree, make no mistake. But the same motto goes for MSFS, doesn't it? Or would you say those stock aircraft are decent? :joystick:

So given the fact that we've now established both titles are, in fact, a flight environment more than a sim out of the box. Sobek's statement holds true no less.

It depends on the addon aircraft.

 

I would even argue to say that the flight environment X-plane delivers is superior to FS's modelling. So why aren't third party devs jumping on X-plane? Probably because X-plane still has the reputation of being the not-to-be-taken-serious little brother of MSFS and resides in beta status forever (which is partly true). The user group of MSFS is far larger than that of X-plane, so that's where the money can be made.

Perhaps X-plane should be relaunched under a different title to re-introduce itself to the simming community, now that there is definately no replacement for FS on the horizon with Flight! turning out to be a game rather than a sim.

Edited January 6, 2012 by Yskonyn

[Inseckt]

Yskonyn, this is my impression also, as an outsider looking in. It seems that X-plane 10 wins every aspect in regards to potential. Surly more and more 3d party devs will venture into said realm?

[effte]

I agree, make no mistake. But the same motto goes for MSFS, doesn't it? Or would you say those stock aircraft are decent? :joystick:

 

No, they're less awful. :)

 

That aside, it's easier to get hold of high-grade aircraft for FSX, freeware in particular but also payware. Less crap to wade through, certainly, or at least easier to filter - be it due to whatever reason, that's my subjective experience.

 

Once the aircraft issue is sorted, I've found FS far more complete, with the caveat that I have not tried XP10. Guess I have to do that someday soonish.

[Yskonyn]

No, they're less awful. :)

 

This I don't agree on at all. ;)

 

That aside, it's easier to get hold of high-grade aircraft for FSX, freeware in particular but also payware. Less crap to wade through, certainly, or at least easier to filter - be it due to whatever reason, that's my subjective experience.

 

This I do agree on. ;)

[Inseckt]

It seems that fans of FS is reluctant to accept X-plane as a serious contester, be it rationally or the opposite, but in many cases this presumtion seems to be based on experiences with xp8, 9 or so on. From what I've seen so far, xp9 and earlier really sucked and is lacking all over the place, but the improvements to xp10 seems like a huge step into an apt configuration for competing with FS. Meanwhile MS seems to be going in the opposite direction with MS flight:music_whistling:

[effte]

Well, X-Plane has always been the biggest, best, most realistic, most scientific simulator with the best coverage, best scenery, best atmosphere, best graphics, most addons etc etc etc according to Austin and the X-Plane fans, in every version.

 

At the asking price, it had to be. Especially once you had shelled out that amount.

 

So far, it hasn't ever been in the eyes of most of the rest of the world.

 

I wouldn't go the route of accusing the appreciation for other products of being the product of less-than-objective fans if I was in the X-plane camp. :)

 

Installing the demo as I'm typing, so I guess I'll see for myself in a bit.

 

One thing is for certain though: The FS series isn't moving anywhere. FSX is still a bugfest IMO, and will never be anything else. The rest of the world moves on. It will be surpassed. If XP10 is that new summit, or if it will be XP11... or something else entirely... remains to be seen.

 

(Oh great, the demo installer just started a built-in torrent client on my system without asking. "In a bit" seems to be three hours away at the moment.)

[Inseckt]

Good luck with the installer effte. If it's not too much to ask, I would appreciate hearing about your first impressions and experiences.

 

BTW, I'm not accusing the objectivity of you or anyone else in particular, rather commenting on an apparent "trend" seeing myself as rather neutral, but I guess I might already be biased since I have gotten a taste of the promises of X-p10. (it can indeed happen fast sometimes) :)

[effte]

No accusation suspected. The flight sim sector is indeed plagued with "fanboism", as it has been called in some forums. I think ragging on X-Plane is one of the most efficient ways of bringing them out of the woodwork, but FS has it's fair share as well.

 

As for first impression, you got it in my last post. Still waiting to be able to have a second impression. :)

 

Oh, this just in: TrackIR support still broken in FSX. Viewpoint repositioning only works as long as TIR is disabled. There's a way around it though, if you feel you need to be able to reposition your viewpoint in flight. Buy an addon, costing more than the simulator itself costs in the bargain bins. I'm sticking with FS9... but I think I have said that already? :D