To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
0 Responses
Oh my! I thought it was pictures from FS2004, glad I haven’t bought X-plane yet 🙂
OK, it isn’t exactly Orbx quality! But for a price less than the price of one (1) Orbx airfield, you get 120 airports and seaplane bases.
And you can buy 3d party airfields in X-plane just as good as Orbx, or even better. But granted, X-plane could do with a little more 3d party support.
The prejudice! FS2004 can look like FSX if the scenery is right (thinking of certain airport sceneries available on simmarket). And FSX can look like FS2002 given the right scenery (thinking of certain payware sceneries available on simmarket) 🙂
I’d have to disagree, in that FS2004 simply cannot display the resolution of textures and complexity of models that FSX can. The two sims are simply wired differently. That said, I’d have to agree that this doesn’t exactly show X-Plane in its best light. Other sceneries are Orbx quality, though and as XP10 gathers more support, there will be more like them as well.
I currently have about a dozen flight simulators of varying types installed including XP10, FSX and FS9. They all have their strengths and weaknesses in various areas, so I have no problem at all in running them side by side. Except maybe X-Plane on the iPad, which I wish I hadn’t got. Although I do still have it installed, I never use it.
Edited to add (admin’s advantage!): simMarket are very aware that some sceneries available there are “not as good” as others. I’m not simMarket staff and don’t have numbers, but I would say they don’t sell very well, to say the least.