I want to love X-plane 10 but so many things to hate

[fogboundturtle 2,708]

I got X-plane 10 last week and I am trying to get into it but tere is so many things to hate about it. Its not the flying that is bad, its everything else.  The UI is probably the worst UI I have ever seen of any modern games. I am only playing with the X360 controller but I am not looking forward to my X52 coming this week. Its going to be a pain to setup. Its not very intuitive to say the least. 

 

The 2nd part I am having a hard time with is the scenary. What's the point of flying if the view is not photo like scenary. I got Mesh V2 HD install and I am looking at photo scenary addons but its nothing like OrbX library. I am sure someone can suggest some better addons from simheaven that can get me over the hump.

 

The last part I have a hard time with is half cooked planed like the Cessna 172 where half the functionality doesn't work. I can they release such simple plane without basic gps, altitude and nav stack working properly.

 

I actually like the flying model and it does run much better on my beefy pc but there so much work to be done on X-plane 10 to make it a competitive product. I think at this point I am ready to live with FSX crashes and quirks rather than X-plane 10 short coming.

 

So, if anyone have any suggestion to make X-plane 10 better. Feel free to comment. I am not giving up on it yet.

[tonywob 4,768]

Default X-Plane, just like FSX/P3D isn't particularly good without addons, sure it serves the basic purpose, but it's pretty ugly. You need to spend the time setting up the sim as you like it, installing addons and learning how it works (Just like you did with FSX).

 

The UI in X-Plane isn't the friendliest of things, but it gets the job done. Setting up the X52 was incredibly easy, and took me about 5 minutes. Once you've found your way around the interface, it's fairly easy to navigate and doesn't get in the way.

 

 

The 2nd part I am having a hard time with is the scenary. What's the point of flying if the view is not photo like scenary. I got Mesh V2 HD install and I am looking at photo scenary addons but its nothing like OrbX library. I am sure someone can suggest some better addons from simheaven that can get me over the hump.

 

Well, you pretty much answered your own question in regards to photoscenery. Grabbing the areas you want from Simheaven, along with OSM (Will, IMO, give you a far better experience than more generic scenery such as the OrbX regions) at the expense of disk-space. However, this depends where you fly, Europe is well covered, but for other areas, you'll have to do some searching (e.g. On x-plane.org).

 

 

The last part I have a hard time with is half cooked planed like the Cessna 172 where half the functionality doesn't work. I can they release such simple plane without basic gps, altitude and nav stack working properly.

 

If you want decent aircraft, you're going to have to look into purchasing some addons. Look around on the forums, there are plenty of high quality aircraft available, e.g. Carenado, Alabeo, LES, etc. In 10.30 beta, they've added a high quality GPS which is much better than the default in FSX, and provides instrument approaches using up-to-date navdata. This GPS will more than likely make its way into most freeware and payware aircraft over the next few months when 10.30 is final. The default aircraft aren't particularly impressive, and really don't show what X-Plane is capable of. My personal favourites are nearly all the Carenado aircraft, especially their latest ones, the LES Saab 340, and all of Dreamfoil's helicopters, which are fantastic.

[pracines 823]

I totally agree with you fogbound, and I could add a lot more problems like ATC, WX, AI, lack of seasons, barren airports etc.. I want XP to succeed as well, but I don't see it as a possible competitor with even FS2002 currently. In my view XP has been around far too long (1993) to be this far behind in version 10, given the price tag it originally had on it. If version 10 was first priced at $39.99 or so then I would not be so critical of this product. And because of the price tag put on this product I will not allow for the excuse that its a 1 or 2 (less than 10 even) man operation.

 

The street and railroad signs do look nice, the police cars add a neat touch, but this is not a car or train simulator. But this is an interesting twist; Laminar Research is now also in the car race simulation genre ,what a coincidence www.stradale.net 

 

I would have hoped that they would concentrate on XP alone, but they can do what they want.

 

XP is a work in (a snails pace) progress ( you disagree? think seasons) with way too high a price tag on it, somewhat typical of many software companies these days, but they are not fooling me.

[hangar 660]

X-plane is an acquired taste. Honestly, if you consider yourself a casual gamer or casual simmer then you'll probably not understand or learn to appreciate the positive things it has on offer and the huge amounts of potential that it has just sitting there all ripe and eager for 3rd party development.

 

Other than it's too small staff (larger staff would mean more and quicker progress) it's biggest trouble right now holding it back from shooting forward and taking over the genre is that there's ALOT of poor quality payware and freeware with hardly any of the very HIGH quality guys from FSX moving over to it as a new platform. Carenado is there but it's not nearly enough to make a real dent. They are sorely in need of support from many more of the FSX developers at this point...and X-plane will likely never have good enough content or features without this happening.

 

X-plane has no systems enthusiasts touting it's virtues because there ARE no really well modeled systems as you are used to in FSX. Currently there might be 1 or 2 or 3 planes on offer that will give you PMDG-like systems modeling...but too much of the time the available planes are developed by 1 person which means the product they sell will be lacking in 1 or more areas, especially when compared to what your money buys in FSX. There are alot of amatuers selling sub-par products in X-plane and it has hurt the title alot IMO...it needs to be cleaned up but users are so desperate for anything they can get their hands on that it won't get cleaned up until the REALLY talented with good work-ethics make their way on over...that would clean things up naturally over time. Right now it's a little like cowboys and indians over there (even in the sites and forums that promote it, but we wont go into that can of worms).

 

As I said earlier, however...the sim is full of fantastic potential...and while much of it has not yet been fully realized there is still enough that HAS been realized to keep the average die-hard simmer holding on in 1 way or another...and waiting/hoping for the big boys to come on board to finish the job.

 

If you are serious about giving X-plane a chance then try an experiment for 30 days. Do not boot up FSX at all for 30 days and take this time to really USE and LEARN X-plane instead. Buy either the Carenado B200 or C90 and use that (as its one of the better cost/value products that has a very good balance of flight dynamics/looks/sounds/light systems) while you are learning.

 

Next, Install the freeware HD2 Mesh you'll see mentioned everywhere...and thats IT (unless you can find an ok freeware version of your home airport but dont count on it).

 

Next, turn up the in-game render settings as high as your system can handle...this should make short final approaches put a smile on your face. The AI is there but dont bother with it for now...Voice activated ATC can be purchased as an addon which is fun but again just use it as is for a few weeks to LEARN all about it and give yourself a chance to noticed all the little refined things about it that you WON'T see in or experience in FSX. Including higher fidelity flight behaviors. Learn the excellent and simple to use camera system, learn to use the replay system...learn how to perform windy approaches with stick/rudder in turb.

 

There's really alot here to enjoy ALONG with FSX if you give yourself enough time alone with it to really explore and learn it.

Have fun :-)

[gizmosellsbunnys 106]

I totally agree with you fogbound, and I could add a lot more problems like ATC, WX, AI, lack of seasons, barren airports etc.. I want XP to succeed as well, but I don't see it as a possible competitor with even FS2002 currently. In my view XP has been around far too long (1993) to be this far behind in version 10, given the price tag it originally had on it. If version 10 was first priced at $39.99 or so then I would not be so critical of this product. And because of the price tag put on this product I will not allow for the excuse that its a 1 or 2 (less than 10 even) man operation.

 

The street and railroad signs do look nice, the police cars add a neat touch, but this is not a car or train simulator. But this is an interesting twist; Laminar Research is now also in the car race simulation genre ,what a coincidence www.stradale.net

 

I would have hoped that they would concentrate on XP alone, but they can do what they want.

 

XP is a work in (a snails pace) progress ( you disagree? think seasons) with way too high a price tag on it, somewhat typical of many software companies these days, but they are not fooling me.

Microsoft had 100s of people making FSX while X Plane had 5 to 10 people at most.  Lots of GA fields in FSX that are just as generic as XPX.  Flying VFR XPX with HD2 mesh is better than UTX or Orbx , and if can be updated with time at no charge. I find at low levels and certain airfields X Plane is far better than FSX love the fact I can land up a hill or use the hills to land to my advantage especially if the wind is blowing correctly.  Windstocks not just decorations like FSX ones as I use them to determine if it safe to land there or to determine wind direction. Its built for VFR flying actually the more I use it with time. 

[SpoonerFLIGHT 10]

Payware $$$$$ = beauty. Start buying stuff like everyone did with fax.

[alexcolka 183]

In fact I love the user interface, perhaps is unfriendly but it has a professional look for a simulation not a game interface with lots of effects like a console. As I said in other post, it's about our preferences not the game and or the simulation itself. But I agree that to some the interface may look ugly. Just try to focus in the good things of the software, you may end liking it a lot and having much fun.

[JasonHarris 96]

In fact I love the user interface, perhaps is unfriendly but it has a professional look for a simulation not a game interface with lots of effects like a console. As I said in other post, it's about our preferences not the game and or the simulation itself. But I agree that to some the interface may look ugly. Just try to focus in the good things of the software, you may end liking it a lot and having much fun.

 

So you  agree with the following  10 seconds of this posted the other day, starting at 57 secs.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDltW3znb5o#t=57

[fogboundturtle 2,708]

maybe hate was harsh word. Its more like violent discomfort :-). There is a few thing I like thought. You could setup your view with CTRL+NUM Key and switch like EZDok. Its not all bad.

[hangar 660]

There's also a free plugin called HeadShake 1.2 which gives you the same effect as Ezdok on landings where you get that bump!...its adjustable and the harshness/softness of the bump is relative to how hard/soft you touch down. I dont fly without it as it help the immersion factor alot as far as landing go.

 

it really is a great looking and great flying sim...but I also hated it at one time. In fact I've been buying xplane every few years since the begining...but everytime I tried it I couldnt stand it for long...or at all. But now with version 10.3 I am really giving it the attention it deserves. There are alot of little things I either missed previously or that werent there and now are. Looks way better than FSX to me (as far as out of the window landscapes). Plane textures and sounds are still not quite as good as FSX's best...but they're closer than ever before and good enough...and im pretty picky.

 

I've said it in another thread somewhere and I'll say it again because I feel there's alot of truth to this...and gives you the basic idea in 1 short sentence:

 

FSX shines at being a  "systems" sim, and X-Plane shines at being a "flight" sim.

 

If you are a button-pusher at heart who flies on a/p 90% of the time then right now FSX has more to offer you and Xplane has little to excite you. If you do lots of hand flying, or GA stuff, or alot of pattern work...then Xplane has alot more fidelity on offer...and even prettiness (if you can turn up the settings high enough).

[Longranger 148]

I totally agree with you fogbound, and I could add a lot more problems like ATC, WX, AI, lack of seasons, barren airports

Well, exactly there are points that are currently changing. ATC was always a problematic feature, but who worries about the in Sim ATC if you have PilotEdge?

If you want usefull weather in FSX you always had to rely on external systems, and that is what is currently happening for X-Plane. 10.30 had sevewral changes that will allow the use of external weather engines.

And the barren airports become more and more a problem of the past with the community based airports and the huge amount of decent freeware airport. While most of the bigger airports are simply better in FSX, there are many smaller airports that no longer have to fear competitors.

And the seasons, well I was never a huge fan of them since they were totally unrealistic. How often did I fly through a snow covered land scape while we had temperatures of 20° C

[Paraffin 2,197]

I understand  complaints about the UI, but it looks that way because it was designed as a generic "industrial" UI to support all three platforms -- Windows, Mac, and Unix -- and not localized for Windows. It takes some getting used to, but it's at least logical (mostly) in the way it works. It just takes a little time to find and remember where everything is.

 

Aside from specific complaints about ATC or seasonal textures, the main complaint for all current and prospective users is the slow pace of development. Even the FSX users know that what they want, like better ATC, seasonal terrain textures etc. will happen "eventually" but everyone is frustrated at the pace of development.

 

Part of that is due to the small size of the dev team, and also Austin's lack of interest in competing on a direct commercial level with other products. But I think it's also a result of the need to defer some advancements for the major version release cycle every few years. Otherwise, we would have less incentive to upgrade. The only income Laminar gets from the user base is with the major version releases. They don't get anything from 3rd party add-on sales (AFAIK).

 

I think we tend to forget how this is tied into the release cycle, when we complain about "slow development." For a sim that costs this much to buy, Laminar can't milk us with once a year major versions. I think they also want the more CPU/GPU-intensive features kept on a longer cycle, to keep in step with the hardware upgrades of the user base. So we're going to see some things, especially the eye candy stuff, deferred for release on that longer product cycle of every 4 years or so. 

 

The alternative to deferring some progress to the major version numbers, would be moving to a monthly subscription model like Adobe is doing with Photoshop. We'd get a constant stream of improvements, but only as long as we pay our monthly fees. You can count me out on that one. That's also rough on 3rd party add-on developers, a problem X-Plane already has in getting some of them on board.

[scotchegg 4,166]

I really don't understand complaints about the UI. It's not pretty but in terms of functionality it's perfectly clear and logical.

 

OP, the artref changes with the Real Terra Haze scripts will help the look of the sim no end.

[JasonHarris 96]

I really don't understand complaints about the UI. It's not pretty but in terms of functionality it's perfectly clear and logical.

 

OP, the artref changes with the Real Terra Haze scripts will help the look of the sim no end.

 

    That advanced button screen is far from perfectly clear and logical.   It doesn't take too long to figure out how it works but the fact that you need to start off with trial and error to see how to make a setting implies it's not perfectly clear at all.    It doesn't overly bother me though.

[HiFlyer 9,343]

I really don't understand complaints about the UI. It's not pretty but in terms of functionality it's perfectly clear and logical.

 

In another thread, NERD reviewed X-PlaneX and immediately had a bad (but funny!) reaction to the interface. I think it hits a lot of people about the same way.

 

​Meanwhile this little article (the meat of the text is below) pretty succinctly sums up my feelings:

 

http://cytokines.1hwy.com/articles/good-ui-design.html

 

It seems obvious, but it's often ignored. A good user interface design can spell the difference between acceptance of a software product and its failure in the marketplace. If the end-users find the software to be too cumbersome or difficult to understand, then an otherwise excellent product could be doomed to failure. The developer's goal should be to make the software as professional-looking and easy to use as possible.

 

Sadly, I've found that a great many companies-especially small or highly specialized software firms-pay little attention to the mechanics of good user interface style. "As long as it works, that's what matters!" seems to be their mantra, with little regard for the inconvenience that this imposes on the user.