I've used x-plane since Version 5, great little thing. When going on FS after x-plane... Well, it just doesn't compare. What cubdriver said about lookup tables with FS as aposed to the real time physics of x-plane makes a HUGE difference.
I was even on the x-planefreeware team for a while, did the 744 and 763.
So how stable is X-Plane? FS2004 crashes on me every now and then most likely due to the amount of addons I've installed (even though I don't have that much) and perhaps also due to my system.
As for realism, I believe you guys since you've played them both. But one advantage that FS has over X-Plane is its third party support. It's good for eye candy. hehe
So how stable is X-Plane? FS2004 crashes on me every now and then most likely due to the amount of addons I've installed (even though I don't have that much) and perhaps also due to my system.
As for realism, I believe you guys since you've played them both. But one advantage that FS has over X-Plane is its third party support. It's good for eye candy. hehe
I doubt the X-Plane community is quite as large as FS, but there is an X-Plane Community .
As for stability, it will work with all systems but you will get less visual resolution, frame rate will decrease and scenery detail will decrease with cheaper equipment. You can see what they recommend on their website, but I have a stock Dell XPS 400 that churns along fine running X-Plane. You do need to experiment with the settings quite a bit for best results.
I've used MSFS since Flightsim 98, and have been in love (although not as much lately). I pretty much use it for FMS training, etc (with addons). My school uses the FAA approved X-plane for our lower quality cirrus sim (We have full level C equivalent sims as well), and it absolutely sucks. We don't make our guys hand fly them, they fly nothing like even the bigger sim. It's only used as a systems/gps trainer. There have been many times I wished that the sim was based on MSFS instead, as it would have been a major improvement (Not talking about graphics, but actual feel/handling).
I've used MSFS since Flightsim 98, and have been in love (although not as much lately). I pretty much use it for FMS training, etc (with addons). My school uses the FAA approved X-plane for our lower quality cirrus sim (We have full level C equivalent sims as well), and it absolutely sucks. We don't make our guys hand fly them, they fly nothing like even the bigger sim. It's only used as a systems/gps trainer. There have been many times I wished that the sim was based on MSFS instead, as it would have been a major improvement (Not talking about graphics, but actual feel/handling).
X-Plane is too fussy for casual use. MSFS is watered down to make it more approachable. We have an X-Plane sim set up where I teach and I see the same thing going on- people do not have the knowledge to adjust it for best results nor the ability to handle rapid response control inputs. It's like a Frasca on steriods, too fidgety.
Also, an inherent problem with X-Plane is it encourages hobbyists to make airplanes which get posted to the net. Most of them are horrible and you have to be careful which one you download. Only use those made by the author or one of the better model making companies. The Cirrus should be pretty good if it is made by Austin Myers.
I bought 2000 and flew the seaplane around NYC once, but I haven't used it since. I guess 13,000 real hours is enough for me to not want to do it at home.
Similar Threads
Linear Mode
