Flight Simulator
09-23-2008 | 08:31 PM
#11
New Hire
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
From: CPL - Job Hunting
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.
I was even on the x-planefreeware team for a while, did the 744 and 763.
09-24-2008 | 11:09 AM
#12
Thread Starter
On Reserve
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
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
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
09-24-2008 | 02:07 PM
#13
Moderator
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 6,056
Likes: 0
From: ATP, CFI etc.
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
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
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.
10-27-2008 | 08:30 AM
#17
Line Holder
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,262
Likes: 0
From: Trying not to crash
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).
11-05-2008 | 04:03 AM
#18
Moderator
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 6,056
Likes: 0
From: ATP, CFI etc.
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).
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.
The one on the sim you dislike, is it an SR-22?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
