- Flightgear flight simulator pro software game for ms microsoft windows mac professional#
- Flightgear flight simulator pro software game for ms microsoft windows mac free#
X-Plane like FlightGear works on Linux too. It's also a resource hog, even very fast computers can't achieve a good frame rate with all features maxed out.Īnd there are various other small things that I would prefer in FlightGear, mostly because I am used to them.Īlso Xplane has a plane-maker where it's very easy to tweak planes and even create new ones graphically (although to make a good one it's still needed to use a 3d graphical program). It also has areas where it's weaker than FlightGear: the weather and ALS equivalent looks worse, no regional textures (although the global ones look great and can be easily changed), less freedom in configuring various preferences like display preferences, and most importantly the flight model is tied to the graphics engine which means you can't really fast forward much unless you have an extremely fast computer and turn down all the graphic settings, so you would have to make very long trips in almost real time on average.
Flightgear flight simulator pro software game for ms microsoft windows mac free#
I find it strange that a commercial software has so much more free stuff compared to an open source project like FlightGear. Neither costs too much (for prepare3d people usually buy the academic version), the planes and addons are the expensive part but with xplane you can make a big collection of only free planes. Xplane has a *huge* amount of free high quality planes and free sceneries and various free plugins and add ons. In general it looks closer to Flightgear than Xplane, not sure why, maybe because FlightGear developers were more influences by FSX.
Flightgear flight simulator pro software game for ms microsoft windows mac professional#
There are areas where Prepare3D is better, they have more ultra professional expensive planes (because of the long history and greater popularity of FSX) and in some areas better visuals compared to Xplane. Most professional expensive planes that come for FX/Prepar3D or Xplane more or less use they own fdm as extensions.īesides FlightGear I prefer Xplane, which seems more realistic and on average has better flight models (no, I am not contradicting myself, I said on average) compared to FSX/Prepar3D. I would like to try to correct an opinion that always appears when this is discussed: All 3 popular flight sims (FSX/Prepare3D,Xplane,FlightGear) can have good or bad planes, they don't have any limitations, all allow an author to basically build his own flight model independent to the ones that come with the simulator. Richard Posts: 804 Joined: Sun 10:17 pm Version: Git OS: Win10 * AeroFly FS1 (or FS2): Looks great but never used it. There are some areas that are well modelled but mostly it's terrain with airports and the occasional building. * FlightGear well yes it's the best in many ways, but the chances are that if you want a really detailed ground map of your preferred location you'll have to make one. I don't like it much and the flight dynamics are always going to be a bit "almost" because of the inherent limitations of the blade element method.
* XPlane with the HD scenery it looks quite good but I've only ever used the demo. FlightDynamics about the same as FSX - not sure about this though. * Prepar3d: development of FSX (ESP), even more expensive, not as many addons as FSX, requires expensive addons to get it looking great. The flight dynamics are limited in what can be modelled which usually results in less accurate modelling. * FSX: can be good but usually requires lots of expensive addons to get it looking like the screenshots, and being 32bit only it'll tend to run out of memory with these loaded. FlightGear with an F-15 is, of course, the best option.
0 kommentar(er)
