After flying just MSFS for the past 2 years I thought Id bring X-plane out of the hanger , with the latest version of XP12 and Auto Ortho i been presently surprized.

Yeah graphically its not as good as MSFS but when cruising at higher levels its not far behind when using Auto ortho , there is something about XP that still make it a awesome enjoyable  sim.

I share your opinion...

At times I wish development followed different priorities, I don't like the many instabilities / quirks sometimes introduced by betas, I would really like to have, by this time, a complete weather SDK allowing for proper "magic" to be done by those who have long experience doing it for other platforms and XP11 too, I would like to, by this time, have a much more complete and coherent ATC, I would like to have some aerodynamic modelling features to become available to better suite the developers willing to model their aircraft with stuff like negative flap settings, asymmetric lift augmentation devices (like the slats in a Bf 109), etc... But ! indeed X-Plane, specially after a while playing other sims like P3D or MFS, always brings a taste of "closer to the real thing feel"...

Unfortunately and although I continue to be very critic about it's flight dynamics, I have settled with MFS 2020, and look fwd into MFS 2024 because of the extraordinary scenery and functionality, and now even more because I can use it for the visuals of Aerowinx PSX, but XP12 is always at the grab of an external HD backup :-)

4 hours ago, jason74 said:

but when cruising at higher levels its not far behind when using Auto ortho

At higher level it shouldn’t only be « not far behind » but at least the same, if you’re using Bing-maps as a source with AO.

I recently am just having a break from FS2020, and been flying XP12 more and more….it does have that feeling of being close to reality for sure…just can’t put my finger on it but even taxing around feels more real than FS2020. I’m flying Toliss A319 and the challenger 650…completely different feeling to flying in Microsoft. I will go back to Microsoft though …got the Fenix, PMDG etc….they’re great….but taking off and landing in the Toliss A319 compared to the Fenix feels far far better to me…and that’s what’s keeping me in XP12….it’s the flight dynamics isn’t it if the sim…feels “just right” 😄🛫….and the Challenger….bloodyhell…..that thing is something else …in a leave of its own for sure! 😄👍

oh yes agree entirely, XP12 is my main sim now having been on MSFS for a few years...the best thing is, it's only going to get better 👍

 

Edited August 21, 20232 yr by UKflyer

yup but we need a move to more emphasis on legit ortho with overlays. I have too many massive 16 TB HDs of ortho data.

From a visual point of view the trees really put me off XPlane.....they seem to stand out everywhere like a sore thumb. 

On 8/21/2023 at 12:26 PM, jason74 said:

there is something about XP that still make it a awesome enjoyable  sim.

I can pinpoint what it is exactly. 🙂

1. All default airports are way more detailed and precise than MSFS ones, as they are custom made. But soon Asobo will introduce scenery gateway also, so not long until MSFS catch up in that area too.
2. Physics are incredibly smooth. On top of the smoothness of aircraft movements on the ground and in the air, in XP we have something that is called INTERTIA. In MSFS that part of elementary grade physics is non-existent. Also, in crosswinds, rudder input is all wrong in MSFS.
3. XP is incredibly snappy! On view changes, camera movements, clicks, I mean generally user experience in that regard is top notch. From buttons, switches, FMC programming, etc, all commands react instantly. In MSFS there is some kind of annoying lag in everything you do, especially if vsync is on.
4. Cockpit displays and all analog gauges are working 1:1 with sim FPS. If oyu are pushing XP at 120fps, gauges and displays will be at 120fps too. In most cases it's 60/60fps, incredibly satisfying to look at. In MSFS, displays and gauges work at 18fps or so, even on high setting.
5. Terrain and autogen LOD in XP is brutally good. No terrain mesh morphing whatsoever, no loading of textures, it's just sharp all around. You can even see the building for tenths of kilometers in front of the aircraft if you dare to put object LOD value to 0. In MSFS, again, terrain is blurry at LOD below 300, and we know that values above 200 eat FPS. Also, terrain mesh morphing in MSFS is a huge immersion killer for me, if I fly near the mountains. Not in XP. Also, building LOD is not the best in MSFS, especially if you start to notice them popping in. The only thing I dislike in XP about terrain is that doesn't use mesh smoothing. All mountain tops are pyramids.
6. ZIBO, Toliss, HotStart. I will say no more. 🙂 
7. VR performance. It's up to debate, but for me XP VR performance when using SteamVR is closer to AeroflyFS2/4, really smooth. MSFS not so much, but when using Virtual Desktop it's closer. Still a bit jittery though. Usage of hand controllers is much much better than in MSFS.
8. UI and drop down menus. I very much prefer drop down menus than clumsy top bar like in MSFS.
9. Camera control. Is just awful in MSFS.

I can write more, but 9 points are well enough. 🙂

2 hours ago, Pe11e said:

I can write more, but 9 points are well enough

I agree with some of what you said, but you forgot:

10. strange/ugly clouds  

11. primitive default GPS

12. missing modern Garmins like G3000/G5000/G1000 NXi 

13. bad anti-aliasing

14. simple water, repetitive texture patterns

15. no walk around camera

16. lots of terrain cracks

17. most xp11 aircraft incompatible/not updated

18. missing snow/ice accumulation effects on surfaces

I can write more, but 9 points are well enough. 😃

Edited October 10, 20232 yr by turbomax

10 minutes ago, turbomax said:

I agree with some of what you said, but you forgot:

10. strange/ugly clouds  

11. primitive default GPS

12. missing modern Garmins like G3000/G5000/G1000 NXi 

13. bad anti-aliasing

14. simple water, repetitive texture patterns

15. no walk around camera

16. lots of terrain cracks

17. most xp11 aircraft incompatible/not updated

18. missing snow/ice effects on surfaces

I can write more, but 9 points are well enough. 😃

You took this 9 point game way too serious I see. 😄

But yeah, your points are valid, but again, I was filling in what is better in XP comparing to MSFS. All in all, my points are related to flying exclusively. I can live with default GPS and missing modern Garmins. 🙂

27 minutes ago, Pe11e said:

I can live with default GPS and missing modern Garmins.

good for you!

19. advanced 3rd party aircraft nearly twice as expensive as comparable offerings in other simulators.

if you are happy with what you have, that's all that counts. looking forward to seeing your contrails in the x-plane skies if/once they get their clouds act together.

take care.

Edited October 10, 20232 yr by turbomax

16 minutes ago, turbomax said:

good for you!

19. added missing CFD bonus: air currents not affected by buildings nor terrain.

XP12 has modeled updrafts and downdrafts, especially affected by terrain. I don't care about buildings, I'm usually at least 1000ft away. 🙂

1 minute ago, Pe11e said:

XP12 has modeled updrafts and downdrafts, especially affected by terrain.

thanks for the heads up, didn't know that. have edited my list accordingly.

4 minutes ago, Pe11e said:

I don't care about buildings, I'm usually at least 1000ft away.

good idea. 😊

is Pelle not a danish name? I vaguely remember a movie called "Pelle the conquerer".

2 hours ago, turbomax said:

good idea. 😊

is Pelle not a danish name? I vaguely remember a movie called "Pelle the conquerer".

No, just derived from the nickname Pele, how my friends called me in my childhood. 🙂