Good review, but I think you should do another comparison of all three without any add-ons, free or otherwise. That way viewers will get a much better appreciation of what they are paying for and what the default performance is of these sims straight out of the box. This new video could use the same flight as this video, thus providing more opportunities for comparison.
Not a valid comparison of these 3 sims. You need to compare them using the sims as they are straight out of the box, without add ons or enhancements. Otherwise it's easy to make one look better than the other using $200 worth of add ons.
I completely agree. I don't know about everyone else, but I don't usually have an extra $200 to drop on add on scenery and add on weather and land class. I'd like to know what comes right out of the box with the straight up program all by itself.
Yeah, you really have to compare stock sims out of the box if not you are just reviewing add ons. Frankly I am getting tired of the comparison between P3D v4 and XP-11. It got boring some time ago.
Xplane11 is without a doubt the most decent and clearly best flightsim that currently exists. Prepar3d V4 only looks acceptable with tons of scenery addons costing way too much compared to all the great freeware scenery for Xplane. Prepar3d is just a slightly better FSX, while Xplane is a new step in flightsim history.
Honestly...if p3d had x-planes flight dynamic, night lighting and a few other features p3d would be the best flight simulator. The flight dynamics aren't realistic enough to keep me attached.
Even with ortho4xp in Xplane 11 for me P3D still looks more natural (look at the two runway pictures for each platform and you'll see what I mean). Mountainous terrain does looks good with ortho4xp installed and X-Plane 11 has fantastic lighting, but if you want to fly in the day in any season then for a natural looking sim I think the money for P3D and it's superior range of addons is worth it. I would love to like X-plane but I'm just not comfortable with the way it looks. It is its own very X-planey view of the world which it's never been able to shake off. The runway jitters is also a problem, along with poor weather effects. DLC content is getting better though and if you don't mind the way it looks then it could be a great choice. FSW is what it is. An early access game from a small studio finding there way in the flight simulation arena. I believe this video didn't show FSW in it's best light, and there is much more to come from Dovetail which will mean the final release should look significantly better.
"Some" of XP's flight dynamics are great. Some are awful. The ground handling is the worst of any simulator I've ever played. The skidding and overdone torque on takeoff annoys me so much when I play it.
I think the Ortho's he's over look very odd in the coloring. They look a lot better in other places. But for me, I just leave XP's default terrain on along with HDmeshv3. That looks really good in most situations (I'm usually in the US though, so a lot of it is tailored for there). I do agree though that XP can have a generic look too often. While the presentation is many magnitudes "cleaner" and 3D than P3D, P3D can look really good in an Orbx region for representing different variances in terrain compared to XP.
Thanks for taking the time to make the video! I've been a simmer a very long time and all of it has been on the MS platform. I have been looking a the three 64 bit sims that you demonstrated on my own. For me since I'm heavily invested in ORBX I will probably go wiith P3D V4. I also have PMDG aircarft and that will be another cost to get the P3D V4 aircraft.
Why are not people complaining about the depressing colors of XPlane has always been a mistery to me. So depressing. Looks cloudy even at noon without clouds. It has always been the case, and I can see it is still the case in XP11... Plus the trees randomly sprinkled in silly places (the superiority of Prep3d in this field is obvious in this video) make it definitely inferior to the competition.
I have all three, As for the distance which he talks about in FSW you really cannot see that far with the naked eye anyway. XP11 is nice and the free addons are a pain in the ass to get right. Prepar3D V4 Is nice also. What I like about it is you can get ORBX and it's pretty hard to screw it up. Of course everyone has there own personal preference. If we all liked the same thing we would all drive a Ford Pinto.
P3d still has big advantages like WINTER or sesonal texture x-plane dosent have it you re constanleyflying sommer textures that looks to green you cant swap plane while flying Without restarting the flight from an airport And much more
ted tedsen can you swap planes in the air when you're flying a real plane? no! Xplane 11 is sometimes used for pilot training therefore not being able to add planes in three air adds to the realism of the simulator.
Thanks for sharing this comparison and being objective. IMHO I dont see it that any sim is the best or worst as all sims have their purpose and their community so the choice is on the individual user. Same goes for sims like DCS and AF2. Personally i stick with P3D as i own tons of HQ add ons and the sim looks and performs good for my flying. Now with the shift to 64bit the dreaded OOM is history which makes flying in my favorite places a major change.
I do agree , Lockheed Martin delivered . I know it will always be an issue for some that X-Plane is it, and I do admit their user interface has improved greatly, Still there is something about the ESP platform that just makes operation so much easier. Yes it costs more to put in scenery and add on aircraft , but that is the point for me, I can make a flight simulator to suit my wants where X-Plane has it's limits. The water feature in P3D is far more realistic for one. Of course there is no such thing as a perfect simulator , but for my tastes and my needs, P3D V4 has hit my sweet spot. History will decide once you look at the sales figures who will ride on top. Once thing is certain , FSW won't make the cut, not because Dovetail cannot compete, they just came out with a product that has no developers on board, for lack of SDK profile being made available , and in Dovetails hurry to get a product out before Lockheed did , may have just shot themselves in the foot . FSW is in my opinion at Alpha stage, and it will cost you thirty dollars just to find that out!
I didn't listen with audio, but I'm assuming you didn't mention some of the FREE highly noticeable aesthetic adding available for X-Plane. For XP10 and XP11, there are multiple mods that completely change and greatly improve the look of all asphalt and concrete runways and taxiways (much crisper than default textures). There are also mods for free that modify the sky textures and cloud textures for XP. With these, along with the addons you bought, an incredible looking X-Plane 11 still costs less than half of a decent-looking P3D/FSX. I personally would have spent the money for X-Plane ad dons slightly differently to make it look even better!
Very nice video. I am currently trying Xplane 11 with a very similar installation as yours ( ortho4XP installed) but the of my scenery is nowhere near yours although we seem to have the same packages installed. Especially the quality of the autogen cities and buildings is much less realistic as well as the mountains in the far back. Can you tell me exactly how your system is configured a how your scenery_pack file looks like?
Great video. Without a doubt, you get more bang for your buck from default xplane than for p3d. Nevertheless, there was something a bit unfair in this video. You used ortho4xp for xplane, yet didn't not use fsearthtiles, sbuilderx, and/or sceneproc to create satellite scenery for p3d... In this particular instance, that would have shaved off a lot of money for p3d (just like it did with xplane) and you would have gotten very similar visual quality as xplane. Default xplane is still a better value, but just thought I'd point out you can easily create satellite scenery for p3d as well :).
Thank you for your comment! I didn't mention that simply because I didn't know that this option existed for P3D. I am amazed! Can you provide some links for me and the viewers so that we can check some screenshots of these tools in action?
I am sorry but this is not a comparison. The first sim had several scenery related add-ons and the last two didn't have any. Xplane11 had something for weather but that didn't count considering the first vid you mentioned you left out REX (for weather). This is not a comparison of scenery but a comparison of addons. The scenery addons in the first video were amazing but this video and its description are misleading. Especially now since you can have Xplane11 and have free photoscenery and mesh and tons of plug ins.
Most of us can't legally buy Prepare3D. Just look at the licensing. requirements. The prices quoted for it aren't relevant unless you buy it illegally. It is something I am not prepared to do.
what zoomlevels was done for ortho in xp11 , THAT is very important I guess max 16/ 17 in your case , if you use 18 you will see a difference while flying as low as you did
I used 17. Correct. What you have to keep in mind is the size of the tiles you're creating. What I heard is that with zoom levels of 18 and 19 the data can get pretty big pretty fast. So that could easily become an issue of available space.
matter is performance. Xplane 11 performance are much closer to the real. It calculates the airflow over the wings in other way. Prepare 3 d whit all add ones free or payware can not come close. to x plane 11.
In what way is the interface better? It's the same one that has been in use for the last 20 years. IMO it is far less flexible that the XP 11 interface.
It is very funny bad comparation. Anyway....p3d v4 is a very Nice simulator...really...but xplane 11 is the top specially for the aerodinamic. Because it is a simulator not a game. And also the graphic is GREAT...the night light are something incredible...And without any add-on.
Lots of xplane fanboys in here. I have both Xp and p3d4. With Orbx global added P3d it's far better than messing around for weeks on end filling your disk with ortho4xp tiles, even then it's not really global, just little bits at a time. I have really tried liking xp but I can't.
Michael King ive been an fsx/P3d user for a long time now, and I purchased x plane only a month ago, and I can already see why people rave about it. I feel like I wasted years of flying enjoyment when I should have hopped onto x plane earlier. If nothing else.. The micro-stutters that continue to dominate P3d (even v4) is enough for it to put a bad taste in my mouth. X plane is what a sim should be, straight out of the box. Period.
Yes, I have similar experience as 1BassJohn. Was a die-hard FSX user and XP10 hater. Tried P3D on and off, but to me the extra money was never worth the marginal improvement over FSX. Then I bought XP11 on the Steam Summer Sale and was blown away. I did also get the 1month ($10) version of P3D4 just to compare. But I'm spending all my time in X-Plane 11 and having a blast. It is much better than XP10 and I think it is the one to watch for the future. ORBX makes P3D4 look better but it is expensive and their new in-house buying and downloading system is a pain and I'm not using them anymore. Even more reason to move over to XP11
The main thing that will keep XP from ever being the top platform (at least in terms of sheer number of users) is money and, to a lesser degree, the myopia of the community. The old industry giants, being FSX, it's spinoffs and mainly the addon makers who want to continue selling licenses for the same dated products, will hold down XP just like GM, Ford and Chrysler destroyed Preston Tucker's company and then stole all of his innovative ideas over the ensuing 10 years. That didn't mean the Tucker Sedan wasn't a far superior vehicle to the crap Detroit was putting out at the time. And it doesn't mean XP11 isn't a superior product now. But most of the addon developers refuse to create releases for it because that would require time, effort, and MONEY. Why bother if they can continue to convince people that their aging addons are still the best that can be had and that users will have to stay with FSX/P3D to use them? This is the stagnation that has been present for most of the last decade. It's funny how XP went to 64-bit 5 years ago and companies were completely downplaying the development possibilities it presented. Now suddenly P3D has gone 64-bit and the fanboys are singing about how innovative it is and those same companies are telling us all about the wonderful things they will now be able to do. I can only scoff. Those who are content with the status quo can continue to throw money at ORBX, Aerosoft, et al. As for me, I'll continue to cast my support to the innovators, not the imitators.
In P3D do you see how it takes a couple seconds to render the plane when you go from inside to outside view? No modern Flight Sim should do that. P3D v4 but it still built on old technology and doesn't use the graphics card the way it should or could.
To price of X-Plane add price of your time to get all work, especially in locations where i bad satelite coverage it is really challenging and cost too much time and there is no payware to buy
I haven't had any issues with X-Plane yet, what have your issues with it been? I've used Ortho4XP many times (created about 45 tiles) and had no problems, which was nice, and I find the UI quite good too.
Wenn es darum geht, die Grafik der 3 Simulatoren zu vergleichen, verstehe ich nicht, wieso Du das mit Addons machst. Jetzt weißich nämlich erst recht nicht, wie die Basis-Grafig von PREP3D 4.0 ist! :-/
Du hast recht. Ist eine gute Idee für ein weiteres Vergleichs-Video. Allerdings ein wenig schwierig für mich zu bewerkstelligen da ich alles wieder deinstallieren müsste. Ehrlich gesagt bin ich selber ein wenig "erschrocken" als ich die Addons in P3D angefügt habe was ich da schon alles investiert habe. Aber das kam eben alles über die Jahre und nach und nach, manches davon auch in Angeboten und Sales. So ein Flugsimulator ist eine Investition für Jahre. Und ich denke dass es anders rum auch wieder interessant ist zu sehen wo man mit seinen Investitionen hinkommen kann. Was noch wichtig ist: FS Global Ultimate NG ändert nicht viel an der Szenerie-Qualität. Es liefert nur genauere Höhendaten. Wenn ich ehrlich bin, weiss ich nicht mehr so recht ob der Kauf so schlau war. Es kann nämlich auch zu Problemen und Konflikten mit der ORBX Szenerie kommen.
Good review, but I think you should do another comparison of all three without any add-ons, free or otherwise. That way viewers will get a much better appreciation of what they are paying for and what the default performance is of these sims straight out of the box. This new video could use the same flight as this video, thus providing more opportunities for comparison.
Not a valid comparison of these 3 sims. You need to compare them using the sims as they are straight out of the box, without add ons or enhancements. Otherwise it's easy to make one look better than the other using $200 worth of add ons.
pcaviator687 agreed. Terrible invalid comparison.
I completely agree. I don't know about everyone else, but I don't usually have an extra $200 to drop on add on scenery and add on weather and land class. I'd like to know what comes right out of the box with the straight up program all by itself.
Yeah, you really have to compare stock sims out of the box if not you are just reviewing add ons. Frankly I am getting tired of the comparison between P3D v4 and XP-11. It got boring some time ago.
pcaviator687 what would be good is if he compared what they are like out of the box and then compare what you can do to make them look the best
no you don't have to compare out of the box .. he chose to show what you could make the sim look like ….. stop crying babies
Xplane11 is without a doubt the most decent and clearly best flightsim that currently exists. Prepar3d V4 only looks acceptable with tons of scenery addons costing way too much compared to all the great freeware scenery for Xplane. Prepar3d is just a slightly better FSX, while Xplane is a new step in flightsim history.
Honestly...if p3d had x-planes flight dynamic, night lighting and a few other features p3d would be the best flight simulator. The flight dynamics aren't realistic enough to keep me attached.
Even with ortho4xp in Xplane 11 for me P3D still looks more natural (look at the two runway pictures for each platform and you'll see what I mean). Mountainous terrain does looks good with ortho4xp installed and X-Plane 11 has fantastic lighting, but if you want to fly in the day in any season then for a natural looking sim I think the money for P3D and it's superior range of addons is worth it.
I would love to like X-plane but I'm just not comfortable with the way it looks. It is its own very X-planey view of the world which it's never been able to shake off. The runway jitters is also a problem, along with poor weather effects. DLC content is getting better though and if you don't mind the way it looks then it could be a great choice.
FSW is what it is. An early access game from a small studio finding there way in the flight simulation arena. I believe this video didn't show FSW in it's best light, and there is much more to come from Dovetail which will mean the final release should look significantly better.
"Some" of XP's flight dynamics are great. Some are awful. The ground handling is the worst of any simulator I've ever played. The skidding and overdone torque on takeoff annoys me so much when I play it.
I think the Ortho's he's over look very odd in the coloring. They look a lot better in other places. But for me, I just leave XP's default terrain on along with HDmeshv3. That looks really good in most situations (I'm usually in the US though, so a lot of it is tailored for there).
I do agree though that XP can have a generic look too often. While the presentation is many magnitudes "cleaner" and 3D than P3D, P3D can look really good in an Orbx region for representing different variances in terrain compared to XP.
bonchie1 the ground effect, are not flight dynamics 🙄
we cant appreciate how p3d v4 will look native without imagining all your addons removed?
Thanks for taking the time to make the video! I've been a simmer a very long time and all of it has been on the MS platform. I have been looking a the three 64 bit sims that you demonstrated on my own. For me since I'm heavily invested in ORBX I will probably go wiith P3D V4. I also have PMDG aircarft and that will be another cost to get the P3D V4 aircraft.
Why are not people complaining about the depressing colors of XPlane has always been a mistery to me. So depressing. Looks cloudy even at noon without clouds. It has always been the case, and I can see it is still the case in XP11... Plus the trees randomly sprinkled in silly places (the superiority of Prep3d in this field is obvious in this video) make it definitely inferior to the competition.
I have all three, As for the distance which he talks about in FSW you really cannot see that far with the naked eye anyway. XP11 is nice and the free addons are a pain in the ass to get right. Prepar3D V4 Is nice also. What I like about it is you can get ORBX and it's pretty hard to screw it up. Of course everyone has there own personal preference. If we all liked the same thing we would all drive a Ford Pinto.
great video, thanks for helping to bring the big picture for all the products out there.
Thanks for making this video. I've been trying to decide between P3D and X-Plane.
P3d still has big advantages like WINTER or sesonal texture x-plane dosent have it you re constanleyflying sommer textures that looks to green you cant swap plane while flying Without restarting the flight from an airport And much more
ted tedsen can you swap planes in the air when you're flying a real plane? no! Xplane 11 is sometimes used for pilot training therefore not being able to add planes in three air adds to the realism of the simulator.
Abdul Muhid well can you pause real life or look at external views?
Thanks for sharing this comparison and being objective. IMHO I dont see it that any sim is the best or worst as all sims have their purpose and their community so the choice is on the individual user. Same goes for sims like DCS and AF2.
Personally i stick with P3D as i own tons of HQ add ons and the sim looks and performs good for my flying. Now with the shift to 64bit the dreaded OOM is history which makes flying in my favorite places a major change.
After trying all of that simulators, I am using X Plane 11 more than other sims. Depend of what you are waiting from a simulator.
You need to compare each one right out of the box. Without addons. O
You can use FreemeshX and FSXWX for P3D, they are freeware terrain mesh and weather engine.
I do agree , Lockheed Martin delivered . I know it will always be an issue for some that X-Plane is it, and I do admit their user interface has improved greatly, Still there is something about the ESP platform that just makes operation so much easier. Yes it costs more to put in scenery and add on aircraft , but that is the point for me, I can make a flight simulator to suit my wants where X-Plane has it's limits. The water feature in P3D is far more realistic for one. Of course there is no such thing as a perfect simulator , but for my tastes and my needs, P3D V4 has hit my sweet spot. History will decide once you look at the sales figures who will ride on top. Once thing is certain , FSW won't make the cut, not because Dovetail cannot compete, they just came out with a product that has no developers on board, for lack of SDK profile being made available , and in Dovetails hurry to get a product out before Lockheed did , may have just shot themselves in the foot . FSW is in my opinion at Alpha stage, and it will cost you thirty dollars just to find that out!
P3D is great, but I only use it once in a while. Everytime I do so I seem to spend about $300 on upgrades.
I didn't listen with audio, but I'm assuming you didn't mention some of the FREE highly noticeable aesthetic adding available for X-Plane. For XP10 and XP11, there are multiple mods that completely change and greatly improve the look of all asphalt and concrete runways and taxiways (much crisper than default textures). There are also mods for free that modify the sky textures and cloud textures for XP. With these, along with the addons you bought, an incredible looking X-Plane 11 still costs less than half of a decent-looking P3D/FSX. I personally would have spent the money for X-Plane ad dons slightly differently to make it look even better!
P3D for day flying x-plane 11 for night
I use and love X Plane but I HATE these trees!!!
download free addon cald HD trees
As soon as XPlane gets Active Sky it will be superb!
Very nice video. I am currently trying Xplane 11 with a very similar installation as yours ( ortho4XP installed) but the of my scenery is nowhere near yours although we seem to have the same packages installed. Especially the quality of the autogen cities and buildings is much less realistic as well as the mountains in the far back. Can you tell me exactly how your system is configured a how your scenery_pack file looks like?
Great video. Without a doubt, you get more bang for your buck from default xplane than for p3d. Nevertheless, there was something a bit unfair in this video. You used ortho4xp for xplane, yet didn't not use fsearthtiles, sbuilderx, and/or sceneproc to create satellite scenery for p3d... In this particular instance, that would have shaved off a lot of money for p3d (just like it did with xplane) and you would have gotten very similar visual quality as xplane. Default xplane is still a better value, but just thought I'd point out you can easily create satellite scenery for p3d as well :).
Thank you for your comment! I didn't mention that simply because I didn't know that this option existed for P3D. I am amazed!
Can you provide some links for me and the viewers so that we can check some screenshots of these tools in action?
Could you tell me what airport you took off from? I would like to check out this scenery, looks beautiful.
Yes, please - where is this?
Dâm Tặc LOIH
fsx was unstable for me the box type not steam SO WHICH IS MORE STABLE DUDE I DONT WANT CTD OR VAS ISSUES
I am sorry but this is not a comparison. The first sim had several scenery related add-ons and the last two didn't have any. Xplane11 had something for weather but that didn't count considering the first vid you mentioned you left out REX (for weather). This is not a comparison of scenery but a comparison of addons. The scenery addons in the first video were amazing but this video and its description are misleading. Especially now since you can have Xplane11 and have free photoscenery and mesh and tons of plug ins.
Most of us can't legally buy Prepare3D. Just look at the licensing. requirements. The prices quoted for it aren't relevant unless you buy it illegally. It is something I am not prepared to do.
just buy it like all the others …… 95% of the folks on the student license are violating the EULA
I use x-plane to fly the excellent Bell 407 helicopter from Dreamfoil, I use P3Dv4 to fly A2A planes.
They are all similar games in the end of the day. All a matter of preference
Does P3D 4.0 have updated runway numbers? Because X-Plane 11 does.
what zoomlevels was done for ortho in xp11 , THAT is very important
I guess max 16/ 17 in your case , if you use 18 you will see a difference while flying as low as you did
I used 17. Correct. What you have to keep in mind is the size of the tiles you're creating. What I heard is that with zoom levels of 18 and 19 the data can get pretty big pretty fast. So that could easily become an issue of available space.
matter is performance. Xplane 11 performance are much closer to the real. It calculates the airflow over the wings in other way. Prepare 3 d whit all add ones free or payware can not come close. to x plane 11.
my only problem with X plane is that, it requires a very high performance PC in other to work! that's driving me crazy!
I am going with P3D V4 because the user interface and lighting is much better than xplane.
In what way is the interface better? It's the same one that has been in use for the last 20 years. IMO it is far less flexible that the XP 11 interface.
frossbog it's easier to navigate around tbh
BaconFat Studios it isnt actually.
Can you please add "custom" to the title? It's a bit misleading, it implies you're using default scenery.
Totally not needed to use skymaxx pro 4 in x-plane 11 ! the clouds are great even at stock !
It is very funny bad comparation. Anyway....p3d v4 is a very Nice simulator...really...but xplane 11 is the top specially for the aerodinamic. Because it is a simulator not a game. And also the graphic is GREAT...the night light are something incredible...And without any add-on.
Lots of xplane fanboys in here. I have both Xp and p3d4. With Orbx global added P3d it's far better than messing around for weeks on end filling your disk with ortho4xp tiles, even then it's not really global, just little bits at a time. I have really tried liking xp but I can't.
Michael King ive been an fsx/P3d user for a long time now, and I purchased x plane only a month ago, and I can already see why people rave about it. I feel like I wasted years of flying enjoyment when I should have hopped onto x plane earlier. If nothing else.. The micro-stutters that continue to dominate P3d (even v4) is enough for it to put a bad taste in my mouth. X plane is what a sim should be, straight out of the box. Period.
Yes, I have similar experience as 1BassJohn. Was a die-hard FSX user and XP10 hater. Tried P3D on and off, but to me the extra money was never worth the marginal improvement over FSX. Then I bought XP11 on the Steam Summer Sale and was blown away. I did also get the 1month ($10) version of P3D4 just to compare. But I'm spending all my time in X-Plane 11 and having a blast. It is much better than XP10 and I think it is the one to watch for the future. ORBX makes P3D4 look better but it is expensive and their new in-house buying and downloading system is a pain and I'm not using them anymore. Even more reason to move over to XP11
Funny you say that. I think there are MORE FSX/P3D fanboys in here by far. Say... you're one of them!
The main thing that will keep XP from ever being the top platform (at least in terms of sheer number of users) is money and, to a lesser degree, the myopia of the community. The old industry giants, being FSX, it's spinoffs and mainly the addon makers who want to continue selling licenses for the same dated products, will hold down XP just like GM, Ford and Chrysler destroyed Preston Tucker's company and then stole all of his innovative ideas over the ensuing 10 years. That didn't mean the Tucker Sedan wasn't a far superior vehicle to the crap Detroit was putting out at the time. And it doesn't mean XP11 isn't a superior product now. But most of the addon developers refuse to create releases for it because that would require time, effort, and MONEY. Why bother if they can continue to convince people that their aging addons are still the best that can be had and that users will have to stay with FSX/P3D to use them? This is the stagnation that has been present for most of the last decade. It's funny how XP went to 64-bit 5 years ago and companies were completely downplaying the development possibilities it presented. Now suddenly P3D has gone 64-bit and the fanboys are singing about how innovative it is and those same companies are telling us all about the wonderful things they will now be able to do. I can only scoff. Those who are content with the status quo can continue to throw money at ORBX, Aerosoft, et al. As for me, I'll continue to cast my support to the innovators, not the imitators.
frossbog Very true. Well put.
Why are x-plane colors so washed out? The ground textures look OK but so washed out!
In P3D do you see how it takes a couple seconds to render the plane when you go from inside to outside view? No modern Flight Sim should do that. P3D v4 but it still built on old technology and doesn't use the graphics card the way it should or could.
Nice video :-)
To price of X-Plane add price of your time to get all work, especially in locations where i bad satelite coverage it is really challenging and cost too much time and there is no payware to buy
I spend more time trying to fix things than I do flying.. Granted it is still in beta but jesus..
I have exactly same experience with X-Plane as you, even XP11 is little bit better than XP10 was
And likewise add all of the installation and configuration time spent to the price of P3D and the myriad of pricy addons to get it to look decent.
I haven't had any issues with X-Plane yet, what have your issues with it been? I've used Ortho4XP many times (created about 45 tiles) and had no problems, which was nice, and I find the UI quite good too.
Dude...X-Plane freeware looks a hell of a lot better than P3D payware.
No sloped runways, whta a dissapointment
FSW makes XP look like trash
A lot of words but no structure...
Wenn es darum geht, die Grafik der 3 Simulatoren zu vergleichen, verstehe ich nicht, wieso Du das mit Addons machst. Jetzt weißich nämlich erst recht nicht, wie die Basis-Grafig von PREP3D 4.0 ist! :-/
Ja
Du hast recht. Ist eine gute Idee für ein weiteres Vergleichs-Video. Allerdings ein wenig schwierig für mich zu bewerkstelligen da ich alles wieder deinstallieren müsste.
Ehrlich gesagt bin ich selber ein wenig "erschrocken" als ich die Addons in P3D angefügt habe was ich da schon alles investiert habe. Aber das kam eben alles über die Jahre und nach und nach, manches davon auch in Angeboten und Sales.
So ein Flugsimulator ist eine Investition für Jahre. Und ich denke dass es anders rum auch wieder interessant ist zu sehen wo man mit seinen Investitionen hinkommen kann.
Was noch wichtig ist: FS Global Ultimate NG ändert nicht viel an der Szenerie-Qualität. Es liefert nur genauere Höhendaten. Wenn ich ehrlich bin, weiss ich nicht mehr so recht ob der Kauf so schlau war. Es kann nämlich auch zu Problemen und Konflikten mit der ORBX Szenerie kommen.
nice dogs :D
speedgame4u aviation ;)
They're both shite.... face it.... we need a complete new simulator, built from the ground up. Look at the ATC in FSX... I mean P3D.... outdated junk.
Vince the atc in fsx and p3d are far superior to xplane
FSW (Alpha) looks like better than P3D V3/4.
Are you blind?
On FSW the senery looks like crap, specely in distance, and more near plane not near the quality of XP11 and alot worse when P3D also