Here we are in the X-Plane forum discussing our preferences/likes with XP-12 and sure, we comment on our opinions between it and MSFS.  However, there will always be the MSFS lovers coming in (almost troll like - I said almost) trying to defend their beloved MSFS 2020/24.  We aren't posting in the MSFS forum, so ease up, chill out and let us return to our discussion(s).

25 minutes ago, beechcaptain said:

here will always be the MSFS lovers coming in (almost troll like - I said almost) trying to defend their beloved MSFS 2020/24.

And they are willing to show patients and understanding of the circumstances dealing with MS2024. I would only wish they would extend that consideration to X-Plane as well while it has been going through its own improvement strategy.  

18 hours ago, pscharff said:

In my opinion X-Plane looks really great with the native textures in combination with Simheaven.

For me, the default ground textures are one of X-Plane's biggest weakness. Actually, not the textures themselves but the entire underlying land classification data, which just does not match up with the up to date OSM and vegetation data used by X-World and Global Forests. Everything looks like two distinct entities sandwiched over another.

My solution is O4XP using Sentinel-2 ZL14 orthos (on Sonny's LIDAR mesh) - cloudless and consistently colored, while lightweight (CONUS ~350 GB, EU ~300 GB). With the right detail map, their low resolution isn't an issue. I use them both for high and very low altitude flying and they actually excel at the latter. It's a good stop gap until Laminar updates their base terrain.

 

Default ground textures with X-World + Global Forests:

 

ZL14 with X-World + Global Forests:

@Bjoern I think everyone agrees with the fact that the base scenery has to be improved. But in my opinion you did exactly chose an example where XP‘s base scenery is pretty good (in mountainous areas). This is also what Ben mentionned. I can barely notice any difference in both of your examples. And orthos add the most value in my opinion from higher altitude over flat terrain. I see nothing on your second example that really would change something when flying. Because what adds a lot here to the experience/immersion is the scenic topography, the water and clouds and the lighting. Not some very small colour differences appearing on the ground. One of the best example on how good the default scenery can look in some particular places is when stationing your aircraft at LESU during sunrise or sunset. It looks amazing. So the bad side of XP‘s scenery appear way more in flat areas rather than in places shown on your example.

4 hours ago, Bjoern said:

Para mí, las texturas del terreno predeterminadas son una de las mayores debilidades de X-Plane. En realidad, no las texturas en sí, sino todos los datos de clasificación del terreno subyacentes, que simplemente no coinciden con los datos actualizados de OSM y de vegetación que utilizan X-World y Global Forests. Todo parece como dos entidades distintas superpuestas.

Mi solución es O4XP con ortofotos Sentinel-2 ZL14 (en la malla LIDAR de Sonny), sin nubes y con colores uniformes, a la vez que ligero (CONUS ~350 GB, EU ~300 GB). Con el mapa de detalles adecuado, su baja resolución no es un problema. Los uso tanto para vuelos a gran altitud como a muy baja altitud y, de hecho, se destacan en este último aspecto. Es una buena solución provisional hasta que Laminar actualice su terreno base.

 

Texturas de suelo predeterminadas con X-World + Global Forests:

 

ZL14 con X-World + Bosques Globales:

I am interested in what you have done is there a quick tutorial or something ? I know how to use Ortho4xp in a basic way but the sony mesh and the rest I have no idea how to use.

Well, my New Year’s resolution to stay all default lasted a few hours tops!? 😂

Inspired by @jcomm , I installed both AutoOrtho and SimHeaven, plus Global Forests I’d purchased previously.  The end result was more or less like MSFS….it worked, and it did look great (though heavier on frames and with longer loading times).

I decided to have the best of both worlds and keep that version of XP12 with AutoOrtho installed, but I also created via copy and paste with a lot of deleting afterwards a “plain vanilla”, all-default version of XP12. 

Still running default, find no reason to change.

8 hours ago, Republic DC9 said:

but I also created via copy and paste with a lot of deleting afterwards a “plain vanilla”, all-default version of XP12

The best in such cases is to simply create a new version with the installer first and then copy your addons. Then you also don’t run in the problem of copying corrupt files that may have appeared after 1-2 years of implementing many plugins and addons (was often the cases on my side). That’s at least what I prefer to do and is just a small advice 😊

4 hours ago, mjrhealth said:

Still running default, find no reason to change.

Default is what I use for more accurate flight dynamics, like when "training" helicopters because I set flight models per frame to no less than 10. 

Sometimes also for pure airline "trainning".

Edited January 1, 20251 yr by jcomm

On 12/31/2024 at 4:49 PM, Franz007 said:

But in my opinion you did exactly chose an example where XP‘s base scenery is pretty good (in mountainous areas). This is also what Ben mentionned. I can barely notice any difference in both of your examples. And orthos add the most value in my opinion from higher altitude over flat terrain. I see nothing on your second example that really would change something when flying. Because what adds a lot here to the experience/immersion is the scenic topography, the water and clouds and the lighting. Not some very small colour differences appearing on the ground. One of the best example on how good the default scenery can look in some particular places is when stationing your aircraft at LESU during sunrise or sunset. It looks amazing. So the bad side of XP‘s scenery appear way more in flat areas rather than in places shown on your example.

While there are surely better areas to show off othos vs default ground textures, I just picked the area where I finished my last flight.

 

21 hours ago, Aglos77 said:

I am interested in what you have done is there a quick tutorial or something ? I know how to use Ortho4xp in a basic way but the sony mesh and the rest I have no idea how to use.

There is no tutorial, but here's all the ingredients, which require Ortho4XP 1.4:

Provider: https://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/forums/topic/317612-eox-provider-new-url/

Settings: https://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/forums/topic/268914-updating-existing-ortho-for-xp12/&page=19#comment-2732608

Decal: https://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/files/file/89497-decal-for-low-res-orthophoto/

Thank you all for your important contributions to this thread !

I welcome them all, including those bringing FS 2024 to the discussion because I am also a big fan and a user of FS 2024, and even if for different reasons, I can say I like it as much as I do X-Plane 12.

There are times I play FS 2024 more, like for instance yesterday when trying FSHUD with AI Traffic provided by the free FSLTL package, but then there are times when I choose X-Plane 12 like when going to fly the A32N Toliss, fly an helicopter, the Zibo 738, ..., and now too with what I am starting to consider probably my best purchase of the year for X-plane 12 - xEnviro  !!!

During years I kept away from xEnviro, and with XP12 and it's new and much more detailed weather system, I stayed with default weather only, not even using ASXP12. But near Christmas I started reading about the latest update of xEnviro and decided to give it a go with the promotional sale. I am glad I did so !

On Monday I also purchased Global Traffic, and am glad with it's traffic injection so far !

The X-Aviation CJ 525 is probably the purchase I have used the less, not because I don't like it from the couple of test flights I did, quite on the contrary, but because i didn't yet have the time to learn it ...

Now, I just have to decide if I buy the Xp11 version of the TBM and wait for the Xp12 upgrade or the FF 777 🙂

I will keep looking fwd for the day that default ATC becomes aware of externally injected traffic 😃

 

Edited January 2, 20251 yr by jcomm

@jcomm - I would love to hear your opinion & views of the new CJ525 once you have had ample time with it.

Happy New Year to all!

 

2 minutes ago, beechcaptain said:

@jcomm - I would love to hear your opinion & views of the new CJ525 once you have had ample time with it.

Happy New Year to all!

 

Roger that Glenn, although it may take a while for e to find the time to study the manuals...

On 12/30/2024 at 2:26 PM, Sims Smith said:

I am minority here 😀.  I disabled Simheaven, Ortho, xEnviro,  reShade, and every graphics enhancements.  I am planning to enjoy vanilla X-Plane for 30 days.  It is day 10 today so far I am loving it.  It is a different experience. 

I've also removed Simheaven, Ortho, xEnviro and the rest, but I did keep reShade... I just adds so much to night flying! For the most part (unless testing) I fly 2020 during day flight (pmdg 737) and XP12 (zibomod) for night flying... I believe I get the best from both platforms.

22 hours ago, jcomm said:

I will keep looking fwd for the day that default ATC becomes aware of externally injected traffic 😃

It already is. I get traffic advisories with aircraft injected by LiveTraffic.