Quote from [RCG]Boosted :

FSX is not FTP tho right?

Free-to-play? Nope

thought so...
wont be able to join in then.
/me waits for new planes on MS flight...hopefully.

microsoft flight wasn't a suc6...

left microsoft behind, and made the step to X-plane 10

Thanks for bumping and letting us know.

Quote from n910e :

microsoft flight wasn't a suc6...

left microsoft behind, and made the step to X-plane 10

yeah, because Xplane 10 takes 50gb of download and installed used 100gb+

If you have any sort of standard, your install of FSX with addons will be far above that!

and Xplane comes on discs as well.

Six discs of XPlane here. Now anyone wanna point me to good addons? (Or, can I get, say, a fully working FMC that can fly a route in XPlane like I can in FSX payware?)

All that data, and it looks utterly crap compared to any decent FSX scenery...

But it does have proprely modelled turboprops (FSX's turboprop modelling is....strange, being nice. Broken, according to the big payware people), so that's a plus, AND a free demo, and stuff FSX don't have.

Quote from DieKolkrabe :

But it does have proprely modelled turboprops (FSX's turboprop modelling is....strange, being nice. Broken, according to the big payware people), so that's a plus, AND a free demo, and stuff FSX don't have.

Trial does suffice IMO.

I would still take any FS above Xplane just because it looks shit.

If you were choosing a flying game based on graphics, surely you wouldn't choose either of them?
If you were choosing a flying simulator based on realism, surely you'd choose X-Plane?
If you were choosing a flying game based on what's available in computer shops and didn't care that it was actually a bit rubbish, surely you'd choose FSX?

Similar arguments to those that ever bothered with GTR, GTR2, iRacing and rFactor in the racing world. And, currently, PCars (but that's in constant flux, so hardly fair or logical to criticise too much at this stage).

Ooops, that was meant to be an edit, not a double post. Oh well.

Quote from tristancliffe :

If you were choosing a flying game based on graphics, surely you wouldn't choose either of them?
If you were choosing a flying simulator based on realism, surely you'd choose X-Plane?
If you were choosing a flying game based on what's available in computer shops and didn't care that it was actually a bit rubbish, surely you'd choose FSX?

Spoken like a man who hasn't got good FSX addons...

Fill your world with ORBX scenery and A2A aircraft and tell me it looks poor and has crap physics.

OrbX scenery is stunning, and Holger Sandmann has developed some brilliant scenery too.

I haven't tried Xplane in a while, couldn't get on with the old versions, but if I was to choose a flight sim for graphics and physics, it would be this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGN35BeYkeE