I have been flying in X-Plane 12 "even after beta 1" came out and I think the biggest problem for x-plane 12 is the people and their expectations. I think LR did a great job with XP12. What did people want in XP11? I dunno, xEnviro, UltraWeather XP, xVision, cloudart need I go on? LR delivered on weather system and visuals and explicitly said not to expect ground scenery like MSFS and people still expected MSFS level scenery. So I think that is the problem and it is still beta so in due time the glitches we see now will be fixed and the performance will also be looked at (with my rig the performance is already really good and I run everything at max settings). However, your point about the aircraft might be right. Not per se THE BIG REASON to come back, but in general a reason to enjoy both sims. What I am curious about now is how will all flight sims go forward? Nobody is talking about p3d, but they still might have a solid user base even though the visuals are the worst from all the sims. Are the puddles and trees just the start of sometning bigger in xp12? Will SU10 indeed improve performance/stability of MSFS 2 years after release? Let's look forward!
Well said. X-Plane will never die because the flight physics, addons and community are exactly what serious simmers are looking for. Many people don't even understand that the changes in XP 12 actually ARE big changes. Weather is super complex. And it is a good foundation for scenery improvements which will come in the next versions, as LR said.
@@maltimoto I don't think you have flown a real plane in your life. I had the chance to fly multiple planes in XP11 as I do in real life, and they felt nothing like the real thing. ....same as MSFS. These simulators are only good for instrument training/procedures, and nothing else.
@@windshearahead7012 You are right of course. But certainly a Boeing 737 does not fly like a Cessna and the nose wheel of a 737 does not center in 0.00001 seconds once I center the controller after turning off the runway. These are things that everyone can observe, not only pilots.
I still update MSFS2020 and “try” to make it work but I’m keeping mainly with X-Plane 12 (this writing is August 2023). X-plane 12.6b6. It is a fantastic sim, Felis 747-200, Rotate MD-11, Tolis A340-600 are all fantastic. Also DCS World ‘s planes are fantastic. And the sim looks good. Developers say - even Adobo says that MSFS 2020 can’t get any better technically, that’s why their making a complete new sim MSFS2024. So maybe in 5-6 years MSFS will have the planes I’m used to. I’ll be dead by then and can’t wait for that. Oh yea, MSFS looks beautiful (beyond anything I expected in 1987 with FS 4.0) but I’m the only one looking at my monitor and really don’t care - if the plane performance isn’t there it’s a waste of my time. If I want to see beautiful scenery, I can look out my window. Since I’ve been doing 3D animation (Amiga 2000) since 1987, no one loves great graphics like me. I can appreciate the time and effort that goes into all games and Sims. It’s just good for us all to have competition and pushing everything to the bleeding edge. Everyone wins.
I try to avoid the XP 12/MSFS food fights. I'll continue to fly in both sims. Neither is perfect, but neither sim has enough drawbacks to make me want to choose one over the other.
I must admit that sometimes, mostly in the air, XP12 looks better and more ralistic than MSFS2020 + the realistic physics... I gotta admit that XP12 is getting better and better every time
For me, flying to see different parts of the world for fun, I would hop on an MSFS plane and have a blast. However, when I want to experience the dynamics, and physics of a flying aircraft, x-Plane is where I find my query. In short with all due respect to the MSFS fans out there, Microsoft creation feels like a fun game, whereas x-plane feels like a flight sim, and version 12 further emphasizes the point. Have fun You all.
@@DrunkenGuitarGuy Haha yep. So many X-Plane videos full of people like this guy who think MSFS "feeling" like a game to them is enough to nullify the fact it has flight dynamics/physics beyond what X-Plane will ever have. And they are either ignorant of that or can't accept it. CFD flight modelling (MSFS) makes Blade Element (X Plane) look like outdated tech. They think because XP has the "serious sim" reputation, then it _must_ be the serious sim with "serious" physics, all I can say is lol. And a BIG LOL to that guy saying the PMDG in MSFS flies like a Cessna, some real hard self-convincing there. These guys are so threatened by MSFS existence with the breathtaking graphics, scenery, and advanced physics all in one package. While X-Plane only has physics going for it, and they're not even the best anymore.
@@JohnDoeWasntTaken If what you say is true, then why does the FAA allow flight hours in X-Plane count toward actual in-flight hours, but not with MSFS? Why is X-Plane used in FAA investigations and not MSFS?
@@davincis1 learn how to configure your hardware! just because you can't configure your hardware and are putting up with that, doesn't mean anyone else is!
Real pilot here, I agree with everything except the statement that there is no such thing as study level in any sim. I have used some of the higher end aircraft addons to supplement my real life flight training. The seemingly minor differences between high fidelity addons make a huge difference. It's the difference between the CDU and systems doing what you want them to do or not. It's you successfully mimic all of your airline flows vs having to pause, wonder for a second and then say "oh it's probably a sim thing". Many addons might be fun to fly for the avarage sim hobbyist. Not many are good enough for real pilots to simulate real life procedures to the letter. PMDG is definitely study level.
I think that if the FAA can certify a sim, then it is considered study level. If they consider flight time in a sim to count toward any license, then that sim is study level. There are sims with the appropriate hardware to actually be certified by the FAA that use X-plane as the software component. I do believe they are mainly for GA pilots going for IFR.
I like XP 12 but it still has some flaws in the clouds. They will fix it. Scenery I will mod anyway with Orthos and Simheaven. Sure MSFS looks good but the taxi und flight physics are not so good. So in 3-6 months, I will step up from XP 11 to XP 12 and enjoy my virtual pilot life with excellent airliners, flight physics and addons.
I have a feeling that MSFS is more for people who like planes and wanna fly with friends in a visually pleasing scenario, but if you’re more into realism in terms of physics and how the plane actually reacts to multiple aspects in the world, XPlane 12 is a better choice
I think your mom was right, a little of both is great! If everyone had unlimited amounts of storage on their computers and the money for all the payable stuff, I think the only contingency is, fly whatever sim based on whatever plane available for that sim at the time. The streamers go back and forth between the two sims alot because of this. And pretty much many 3rd party software like Vatsim supports both platforms! Simple as that!
I flew FS9 for years. the hardest part for people going to X-Plane is the scenery. it requires time and money to make orthos and get custom scenery into the sim. once you do that however, you can fly practically any airliner in mainstream circulation, not to mention the Flight Factor 777 and 787 coming out soon. this really tips the scale towards XP12 for me over MSFS simply for the ability to use the addons I paid money to fly in X-Plane 11.
This "vastly superior flight model" is slowly coming to a close. Aircraft will come to FS2020. It's just a matter of time. There is a place for both sims. Bottomline, fly the one you are most happy with :)
I think you are being too optimistic. The reason people jumped on XP11 bandwagon towards the end was because the FSX and the P3D cult got fed up with those sims not progressing enough. MSFS changed all that and more…especially how much cheaper add ons are now since it has gone mainstream with Xbox. Even the aircraft for MSFS are reasonable in cost. XP is still consider and always will be a niche flight sim with addons costing much more. But nonetheless, XP is a awesome sim and I will always find the time to use it myself.
I just literally just want MSFS scenery in xplane. In xplane I like the menu system, weather, camera system, night lighting, better default airports and the plethora of awesome addon aircraft.
I'm a Mac user so I'm also a Xplane user. I guess 'mI a bit of an odd flight simmer. I enjoy flying but I also enjoy tweaking the sim. I have tons of orthos and other adons that are mostly free. I think XP12 is a winner, and competition is a good thing.
Good review, very informative. I do believe the biggest difference between the two is the aircraft attention to detail and flying characteristics. I also believe the only reason msfs came back was because of all the whining when they just up and left the scene. I will be adding XP12 very soon. XPlane is in it for the long haul. Just my opinion here. I know eeeeeeverybodys got one. You asked and I stated mine. Keep up the good work here and also on the other blog.
I have both XP11 and MSFS. Love them both. I'm currently using the XP12 demo and do plan to buy it soon. I love the improvements. I'm not a serious/hardcore sim guy at all. I fly mostly GA and love exploring and using smaller airports. My preference has been and from what I've seen will still be XP. On my older PC, XP12 boots fast, and everything maxed I get 30-40 fps. For me that's perfect and the experience is smooth. I get even higher fps in MSFS with high settings. But, I just enjoy my time in XP more. It's one of those things where you 'just' like something. I think we are so lucky to have the options. People forget the long stretch where Aces had been shut down and we had XP9/10, FSX/FS9, and P3D. Only XP and P3D were in development, and P3D was FSX+. New and awesome is a great thing. 2 great sims being developed and supported.
In terms of simulation and "study level (or high fidelity)" airliners, X-Plane 12 is the best. I also think that the X-Plane 12 community would be furious if planes like the CaptainSIm C-130- this is because MSFS2020 is targeted towards more "casual" audience (the fancy graphics).
I've been flying sims since the very first MS Flight Sim in 1982 and although even that crude iteration blew me away, seeing something like MSFS 2020 really took simming to a whole new level! Everything was fine for me UNTIL World Update 5 and ever since then, I've had nearly constant crashes to desktop and most of them being on final approach. I keep waiting for the next update to fix this bug but it has not happened for me and many others. Nothing is more frustrating than to set up a flight from cold and dark, fly for an hour and a half and then get bounced to desktop at decision height. THIS is the reason I've purchased XPlane 12 and despite some lukewarm reviews, I feel like it's a breath of fresh air to finally be able to complete my flights. Does XPlane look better than MSFS2020? No! Are the flight models better? Absolutely! For me, having a beautiful sim to look at is great but not at the expense of stability. For now, I'm going to enjoy my time in Xplane and hoping the devs keep their heads in the game to make it every bit as good as the competition.
A year to late to the party but yeah..I went back to xplane, I played XP11 and bought 12 at launch, had a lot of issues with it at start so I left it in my Steam library. Played a bit P3D and eventually bought msfs2020.. Then comes the day where I have to reinstall windows and wanted to download msfs again only to see the download never go above 40mb/s..and on top of that it stops at 45% downloaded and goes into an endless download loop, I tried every single method from the forums and Zendesk to fix it with no luck, so I installed X-plane12 again and I'm very happy with it. I also had download speed of 300 mb/s instead of 30.. MSFS2020 can be as pretty as it wants but with ongoing issues with updates and other downloads it's just not worth it.
X-plane is used in FAA certified sim setups. It requires not only having 3rd party aircraft that has taken the time to simulate all the systems involved (including functioning circuit breakers) but also requires the hardware that is used to be FAA certified as well. It isn't something that most people at home would set up do to price involved. Unless Asobo gets an FAA certified sim market, I think X-plane will continue to be able to claim they have a better flight model (whether it is actual truth or not).
As some mention - msfs requires internet connection and some tiles of my country look like dog s... With ortho you can store as much as you want and what you want. No to mention how much Azure would cost to host as of MSFS
For me the Zibo 737 is like 60% of why I choose xplane everytime. The PMDG 73 feels like a plastic toy while the Zibo actually has incredible depth to it and feels like it has actual weight.
I've been playing MSFS and X-Plane12 There are things I like about X-Plane Compared to MSFS vice versa. MSFS aircraft look a hell lot better than X-Plane12 that's for sure. The only aircraft I fly in X-Plane 12 is the Citation X and the Cirrus Vision Jet the only 2 aircraft worth flying in the sim/game.
I really wanted to love XP12... Been a fan of it since XP10. In fact, my full-size B-1900D sim used the Carenado 1900D flight model. It was awesome. However, with nearly every 3rd party developer flocking to 2020, the writing is on the wall. The 2020 scenery is just too compelling to ignore. Carenado won't update their XP product line to XP12, and several other 3rd-party developers aren't updating their offerings as well. (XPUIPC in particular, is the 'glue' that marries my 7 computers together to work in unison with X-Plane. It won't be updated) So... that leaves me with a dead sim. I started the conversion effort to 2020 about 6 months ago and am still working on it. There are several shortcomings to be sure, but overall, we are seeing more developers release products for us cockpit builders that allow better integration with 2020. Laminar Research really screwed the pooch here. When 2020 was first released, LR pretty much sat back and laughed. Now... Asobo is eating their lunch. Laminar can't afford the level of scenery that 2020 has out of the box, and they don't have the development chops that Asobo has. When Microsoft pulled the plug on FSX I vowed to never go back and went all-in with X-Plane. Weird how the reverse is now true. I know that I'm an outlier with a full-size sim and hardware that rivals some procedure trainers. However LR has stated that they are going for the commercial sim market (again) but... I just don't see that happening given the disappointing release of XP12.
superior flight feeling and habtics (interaction with the sim) are indispensible, that is what x-plane has been delivering for years. X-plane has done everything it can to the point of where the one missing element comes into the race and that is the world design. Assemble all feature elements of a sim, and you find the only thing that need to catch up are: Better Cloud Design, Housing and Vegetation. x-plane12 has not achieved expections for these 3 key visuals, the rest besides of these is better than in the other sims. much much better. so laminar: my proposal is to simply focus on a solution for these 3 modules and you will multiply sales. if you wanna top even these, you can tackle a better graphics engine and a first person gameability known from other game engines. that would top out everything and finally end debates and critics.
The downside is, addon aircraft for X-Plane are quite expensive. For me the key for X-Plane currently besides the airliners i already own is the camera system and replay. That is just on another level...
things have changed now, back a few years ago the addon developers were making addons for multiple sims because one didn't stand out in playerbase or quality! now msfs is a quality product out of the box with a massive playerbase! who do you think they are going to spend the bulk of their resources to make addons for?? i don't think this version of xplane is going to do well, not that many that are foolish enough with their money to invest a bunch of money into 2 sims! i know there are some but they are rare!
what isn't mentioned - and that will be decisive - is the community of xplane . Projects like ortho and the Zibo were , and still are , why it was the goto sim . We already know about a lot of community driven stuff coming ( if I recall correctly a "zibo - quality " adaptation for the default Airbus is already in the works ) . It's not the payware which will shift the balance , no : the freeware stuff will do that. Every time some youtuber or forum post mentioned some problem a simmer encountered in Xplane 11 someone else would make an addon to remedy said problem . Because of the rather closed "marketplace " scheme MSFS has that's a huge bonus xplane has right from the start
The closed market place? FBW project is the best freeware team in any sim. Not on the market place Two aircraft A320 and A380 being developed to payware study level at the same time. Fenix the best A320 in any sim ever, not on the market place.
I bought X-Plane 12 at beta 1, a day after release, and didn't expect much knowing how LR makes gradual improvements. I know they've got more up their sleeve.
Let's not forget all the helicopters already ported over, whereas MSFS is still waiting for native helicopters. Plus even from XP11, the flight physics is better.
MSFS is GORGEOUS, and is doing the aviation industry a favor by attracting young people to aviation with its x-box offering. X-Plane has it's place in RW flight training and education. The flight model is MUCH better, as a RW pilot. That said, either will do if you use them correctly to help with proficiency, ESPECIALLY with online ATC like PilotEdge or Vatsim, and used for IFR approaches with updated Nav databases...
I think is a matter of perspective. “Visually” yea MSFS2020 does a better job on most cases. However, X-Plane in general has better flight models and high fidelity airliners. I’m more incline to MSFS, for me I only flight the Fenix, FBW320 and PMDG, not really interested on other type of aircrafts. But again, it’s a matter of perspective. The biggest issue with MSFS was the FPS drop and flight dynamics and both have been improved tremendously, specially now with the upcoming SimUp10 with DLSS. But X-Plane is a better “Flight Simulation.”
Personally I always say FS2020 as a game because of Microsoft’s history as a game developer. I am not going to deny the quality of FS2020 is good, but for me, X-Plane 12 reigns supreme because of the much, much, much better community behind it, at least in my time. With FS2020, any questions I had always led me to some stupid MS Answers website that was often unhelpful. X-Plane always kept me in because of the ability to easily mod it without issue, and mixed with generally higher fidelity systems and physics, along with a better UI, X-Plane is always my sim of choice.
It’s definitely long term. XP12 has been an impressive experience, although not visually yet, the flight physics and responses got me. Even minute details on flight models have made a difference. The big question is, when are we gonna see this complete? That would happen soon enough and with a good growth over two weeks with more than a dozen models come in, it looks promising, plus, a better version to put it for flight models from XP11 to 12 which makes it more convenient as well. Hopefully a healthy competition between both the sims giving us something more. Nice video! 👍🏻
i fly x-plane since version 10, there’s a reason why real pilots much prefer XP compared to MSFS. first of all msfs is a full blown consumer oriented software, it’s only good trick is graphics and satellite 3d scenery, xplane has outstanding physics, calculated in real time, with proper modding can also be used for level C and almost level D sims
1) Too many add on, too pricy and not out of the box 2) I’m a real bus pilot, so only reason I’m coming back is for ToLiss bus line up, do not buy the Flight Factor as it’s a blatant scam.
A scam? I don’t understand that. The Fenix is the best A320 in any sim. Last 12 hours had a major update to even higher standards. Getting IAE engines and sharklets for free when completed. All for less than $70.
@@johnmaguire2185 He was talking about FF, they are charging top dollar for something that's not the value, not to mention upgrade fees, Xplane fanboys are mad.
@@johnmaguire2185 the Fenix is not the most realistic aircraft. In terms of systems the fslabs a320 is by far the most realistic. Otherwise the toliss and the Fenix are o the same level. I’ve been on the level d sim and I know what I’m talking about. I own the Fenix, fslabs on P3d v5 and the aerosoft 320 and also the toliss and ff 321. The most realistic in systems is fslabs, the most realistic handelign one is toliss. If you want best of both worlds it will be Fenix or toliss
It looks the same. It isn't worth spending $60 U.S. dollars on, unless someone with a highly trained eye _really_ wants to give sixty bucks away. And whatever happened to the radio controlled plane from older versions of X-Plane? I used to fly that on highways, right next to moving traffic. Is it possible to download an older version of it to use in X-Plane 12? Or is there paid DLC for an even more recent, better quality one?
Without sounding _too_ entitled, I would've thought that _someone_ would have made a mod by now to give the zibo treatment to the default A330. Kinda disappointed. And I hate to say it, but ToLiss and Flightfactor just can't seem to get their models right. Something is always off about them visually and it puts me off (though I'm sure their systems modelling is fantastic). Besides them, X-Plane is looking pretty dormant in the payware aircraft scene, much less active than MSFS, not to mention all the resources microsoft is pouring into improving default/official aircraft hiring the likes of Inibuilds and Working Title (I doubt Laminar has that kind of money to just splash around).
W T F are you talking about? We are two years into msfs and we have the best 737 AND A320. X plane has been around for what? That’s way faster of a development than x plane.
Toliss 321 and 320 is o n the same level as the Fenix. The flight model is better on the zibo but the systems for pmdg. On xplane there’s the torque sim sr 22 airfoillabs c172 hotastart rbm and the one and only most realistic plane in flight simulation history the take command challenger 650.
@@majoraviatior1611 The Toliss looks like it was modeled in 2012, that plane probably has less polygons in the entire plane than the Fenix has in one wing.
I'd say XP12 is in it for the short game and MSFS is playing the long game. Porting over XP11 airplanes quickly into XP12 with XP11 modeling sounds like a quick buck, whereas MSFS requires devs to build airplanes from scratch in terms of systems, flight modeling and visuals which will look and feel fresh much farther into the future. Also, XPs flight model is not vastly superior to MSFS. That is 2019 talk. There are videos out there comparing the two (with more added all the time) that show the gap between them is marginal at best. Also-also, you didn't mention the Leonardo MD80 as a choice for MSFS airliners currently available, DC-6 or B247... all of which are gems in terms of visuals and complexity and not available in XP12 currently.
He also forgot about the salty mod for the b747 and the crj by aerosoft or the Concorde. They're all very ok to fly looking from a normal procedures standpoint.
Or the CRJ series. It's just X-Plane fanboys talking down on MSFS. I like both sims, but every time an X-Plane fanboys comes with the "XPlane flies better and it used for real pilot training (it isn't, you have to actually use a real flight simulator with a proper cabin) I just point out how the graphics look from 20 years ago. Straight lines in the cost line. Everything everywhere looks the same. Not even shadows. What the actual F*CK?
@@777FreakyD Yep. And we have a study level 737 for just 35 bucks. You can't see those prices with X-Plane. The only thing left for X-Plane are airliners and IFR. They could add Ortho in the launcher so that it doesn't look so terrible, but no. Even the original DCS Caucasus map looks better.
I think people forget that the roots of X-plane and MSFS had, and still have, different goals. MSFS has always been about bringing flight to the masses, but X-plane started out as a way of getting accurate simulation so Austin could practice in support of his license. You can see the differences in approaches even now. MSFS did come out with the wow factor of looks, but did not necessarily have as good a flight model as they do now with Sim update 9 and 10 under their belt. However, for X-plane when it comes to simulating error conditions in the cockpit, pilots should be focused far more on having the situation simulated correctly than visuals or what they "think" should happen. Unless Asobo decides to go for FAA certification, I think X-plane will be able to claim a more accurate flight model, whether deserved or not. X-plane previous commercial versions are used in flight schools for FAA certification and I am sure there will be sims upgrading to X-plane 12 when it is released and has most of the bugs ironed out because it will be an incremental improvement in not only looks but the flight model. And that is the reason porting from 11 to 12 can be done relatively quickly in X-plane because their flight model is mostly a refinement of what already has been proven. But the more complex 3rd party offerings that model planes in far more detail will take more time to port over because of their complexity and the edge cases that those refinements can bring to light. Asobo doesn't have that luxury because they have changed their flight model to be more like X-plane (not going to get into an argument of blade theory versus boundary element when both probably use highly modified versions with a smattering of CFD thrown in) but that means having models that have accurate airfoil and body design instead of "looking right" and letting the spreadsheet make up the difference. I think people will find that it will become harder for amateur modelers to make realistic designs in MSFS but for the professionals it might end up being easier for them to release aircraft that "just work" for both sims.
XP12 still uses Blade elements theory simulation which is old and outdated. "Feels good" no longer valid as an excuse for more accurate flight dynamics. Mathematically and scientifically Boundary Layer theory simulation and CFD is more accurate that is being used in MSFS. So, XP is more better flight dynamic is just a myth. It maybe relevant years waxago but not anymore. XP is always bragging about their myth flight physics is better. Flight physics arguments and this is just one of the variables involved: World and weather simulation in XP- Imagine you are inside a closed room and you throw a paper airplane in the air, it will fly stable and predictable. MSFS world and weather simulation: Now, Imagine going outside with weather and winds and you threw that same paper airplane. It will fly differently, less stable, and less predictable. Now, imagine calling XP flight dynamic is better and calling msfs flight dynamic unrealistic. This is the current flight physics arguments between XP and MSFS atm.. One variable is that XPlane world and weather simulation are lacking.
First, your claim about BET being old and outdated doesn't work either because it is still widely used in physics simulations today, and it can have good accuracy compared to models that use CFD but it depends highly on how much resolution both models are using. That means that boundary layer and/or CFD are not necessarily better than X-plane's approach (which I highly doubt is "purely" blade element theory anymore) because both simulations depend on the resolution of the simulation and so it depends on how fine the resolution is within both which also depends on how performant each simulation aspect is in regards to each element that simulation is performed on. As for XP bragging about their flight physics, I think it isn't just the flight physics that they are bragging about. Unless and until Asobo tries to go for FAA certification, then XP can hold that above MSFS. X-plane is used in commercial sims as part of an FAA certified sim setup and can be used to get qualified flight time towards a license. We, whether gamers or flight sim enthusiasts, are not necessarily Laminar's primary customers. Selling the software as well as service for it towards commercial sims might be their primary market. There is good evidence toward that due to Austin's reluctance to focus on visual improvements to X-plane but his constant work to refine the flight model they have developed. For people who want to not just fly aircraft, but also test flying in scenarios that include malfunctioning instruments and other aspects of flight that might not be safe to practice in an actual aircraft, X-plane offers them something that I doubt Microsoft and Asobo ever will. That is why some consider the X-plane flight model to be better.
@@Tsudico what difference does "faa certified" mean in practice?? nothing, you just keep repeating so it makes you feel better for being a fanboy for an inferior sim!
@@DrunkenGuitarGuy To you it means nothing, but for people who want to keep their skills honed at home with a simulator that gives as realistic emergency situations as possible, then wouldn't you pick one that you know can be FAA certified? Does MSFS even allow emergency conditions like vacuum pumps failing or the static ports clogging? As far as I can tell, it is very limited in that regard. At least not to the extent that X-Plane allows because there are add-ons for MSFS to improve its ability to do so. For people who just want to play around with flying planes, MSFS is the better choice. But for people who actually use a flight simulator at home to hone their real life skills, X-Plane is the better option.
Xplane flight model is better. I own a plane as-well. Blackbox711 also said it as-well and he is a 320 captain. Msfs is still good but xplane is more for pilots practicing procedures. It is not a myth, as a matter of fact I let a instructor try both and he said xplane is more realistic in terms of flight model and avionics. It’s not personal preference or a myth. It is a fact.
Yeah absolutely nobody is coming back to X-Plane 12 for the A320 by FlightFactor. I don't know what drugs they were on or what the intention was but that X-Plane 12 upgrade which costs 20 bucks is such a mojor downgrade from X-Plane 11. They should really be ashamed of theirselfs.
Honestly bruh for your average flight simmer MSFS is for me...After experiencing the amazing visuals of MSFS I can't go back to XP's horrible ground scenery and anti-aliasing.
The flight model is vastly superior to msfs? X-Plane fanboy detected. Not, it is not, in fact, msfs model already has some things that are better than X-Plane, like the wind gusts added in SU10. Not to mention that they are upgrading to CFD, which, this one, yes, it's VASTLY superior to the simple math used in X-Plane. I have bought X-Plane 12. I have found NOTHING superior in its flight model. Yes, I'm not a pilot, but they differences right now are pretty minor. And the rest is so superior in MSFS that it isn't even a contest. Just out of the box, the autogen is so awful that War Thunder looks a lot better. At least they don't have coast lines that are fucking straight lines for god's sake!.
When it comes to CFD and Blade Theory it depends far more on how quantized the simulation is (how fine the resolution of the simulated elements). The question is whether the CFD approach that Asobo is switching to will have the resolution to make it better than what X-plane offers (which probably isn't "just" blade theory by now and actually has some CFD as well given the various graphic outputs that show airflow around the craft). But the flight model "accuracy" is only part of the equation. The thing most people don't understand....is that X-plane isn't just about flying an aircraft. It has a commercial version that can be used in FAA certified sim environments so that people going for their licenses can use sim time as flight time and test emergency procedures in a safe way. In those cases, it isn't just about having a realistic flight model, but a realistic simulation of the aircraft (usually by a 3rd party) and what happens if the static air ports get clogged or iced over so the instruments lose accuracy. In some respects, we as consumers are not the primary market for X-plane but the secondary market. And that is what most people don't keep in mind. When it comes to testing actual pilot response to procedures and emergencies, there is far less concern with the quality of the scenery but the response of the aircraft to anything the pilot does to address it. X-plane will always focus on sim accuracy first, visuals second (although having better visuals can improve sim accuracy in ways). MSFS on the other hand focuses first on making people want to play the game, if that means visuals get priority, they will. If they think people want a more accurate flight model, they will do that too. What I don't see Microsoft/Asobo caring about is getting their sim to the same accuracy level for all the needed components to have an FAA certified setup.
I have both X-Plane 12 and MSFS2020 and have to say I much prefer the latter. I don’t find the difference in flight model to be that noticeable and the scenery in MSFS is on a whole new level. I can’t see X-Plane catching up any time soon. I will continue use and support both as I like choice and competition
Xplane model is slightly more realistic. On the airfoil labs c172 it feels a lot more realistic then the black box c172 analog. I have tried them both. I’m also a private pilot on the 172. 737 talk, the zibo feels much more realistic no doubt about it! Even though the pmdg does have a good flight model it doesn’t come close to the zibo, however the pmdg does have more in depth systems. Also if your on the sr 22, challenger 650 or looking for a really realistic general aviation experience xplane feels much more better. As there is carenado, just flight, aurfoillabs, hotstart, torque sim and xplane is overall far superior for general aviation. Msfs is still great though. What I’m basicly saying is xplane overall does feel a bit more realistic and a lot more realistic on the ground. Msfs is continually getting tweaked physics so who knows one day it might catch apart. Apart from the physics and in depth planes msfs is the better general sim for sure.
@@astromatt75 with default planes it’s pretty bad in xplane. But if you start to invest in study levels or tho and some good scenery and really can be a better sim in some aspects! :)
XPlane make look less awesome, but MSFS starts looking REALLY STINKO as soon as you have an internet glitch. The whole city can turn into a melted pointy hellscape, really fast, whenever your internet glitches, or microsoft's global infrastructure has a bad hair day. Helicopters? 2022 and we are still waiting for helis to land in MSFS.
Well, not everyone wants to use Windoze as an OS. So they will sim with X-Plane. No-one is bitching that MSFS is Windoze-only, whereas XP is multi-platform. Why would I (or anyone) downgrade a computer and OS just to run a flight-sim?
From own experience I'd rather wait for MSFS airliners than investing in XPL12 again! Reasons: Not all XPL11 Airplanes work in XPL12, "Minor tweaks and changes" have to be paid by the customers! --> FF A320 charges 20 Bucks for a Beta upgrade (Beta A320 in a Beta XPL12), Toliss 10 Bucks upgrade, iniBuilds A300 Series wont be able to run in XPL12 at all. XPL12 charges you a full price for a BETA(!!!) Commonly, early access and beta access is usually granted for a lower price! But Laminar chose to charge full price because you get a XPL11 key! What a nonsense but hey its their marketing. Beta means bugs! --> And XPL12 is full of it! Completely unoptimized, full of stuff beeing broken and in development and very far from being a finished and comparable Simulator! At the moment there is hardly any fair price vs feature relation in XPL12 and thus my XPL11 will still be used together with MSFS.
There is the most realistic plane in flight sim history the hot start challenger 650 meanwhile in msfs you can takeoff the pmdg 737 backwards…………………………..Yeah.
I will tell you a big downside to FS 2020 are the mega updates that it takes to fix that sim. It has had nothing but fixes since it came out. And it still has bugs. A real poor program in many ways fix this fix that or we messed that up on the last update lets repair that.
[Edit, My X-Plane 12 cockpits are way darker than yours. Wonder what I'm doing wrong?] I am embarrassed to admit how many aircraft I have purchased for X-Plane 10 and 11 (plus now the small dollar upgrade for the ToLiss planes for 12) and how lazy I've been trying to make MSFgame usable for me - So, obviously I'm a LR fan in a big way - But the version 12 airliner interiors are so dark, they're practically unusable! There must be a better way, but so far my only solution has been to add a couple of thick cloud layers to sorta neutralize the black shadows - Pls tell me what I'm missing?
you shouldn't use the word fanboy because thats exactly what you sound like! fly / play what you want but one product is far superior! and sorry, where do you think developers are going to spend the resources developing?? this really popular one that looks great out of the box?, or this one that looks like crap and has more of a cult following?? you are going to be disappointed! and no, most people have more sense than to have a need for more than 1 sim and for the vast majority its going to msfs!
"Long game" - 😅😅🤣🤣 They've been playing long game with XP9 (ca 2009) graphics All these aircraft for MSFS coming out and devs leaving XPlane it's more like they are losing in the long run. I am not sure what you are talking about, make sure do you research correctly. And these payware ports to XP12 look bad, XP11 copy paste,- but XP fanboys dish out money for these because they are desparate. Ortho4 XP takes lots of space/time and still looks pretty bad with discolorations. Cities look just awful, and trees are from a hunting game. Long game you said?
Go wash your brain with ActiveX :) Not everything is "scenery" in a flight simulator lmao. X-Plane is preferred for it's flight realism and for flight training.
@@hakanr339b Tell that to INI, PMDG, etc major publishers LOL Reality check, fanboy, it's over 🤣🤣🤣🤣 You must be mad because you just had to pay for FF again which looks/functions exactly like in XP11. Or you are traumatized by the XP12 = XP11.6 ahahaha
@@Tsudico Like you have an FAA certified sim at home 🤣🤣🤣 Sadly, you don't even know what that means. I can have a polygon sim FAA certified and train on it.
@@FSXflyerdavidmf well that surprises me! Maybe u shall reword it. If you invest into study level planes and ortho then you might disagree with yourself. Trust me the airfoilabs 172, torque sim sr22 hotstart challenger 650 is surpassing msfs general aviation aircraft. If you were actually training I don’t know why you would say it sucks. Look at the level d sims, they don’t have good scenery! It’s all about the realism
@@majoraviatior1611 to me it's about scenery and what's there and really not there that's just a small portion plus when you land 172 in X-Plane 12 vs msfs I don't hear the tires squealing when tapping the breaks like X-Plane 12
I have done flightsim for over 30 years and there were always several sims around. This will most likely not change. XP will stay in the market because there is a demand for it. MSFS has better graphics, but in every other area, XP is way superior.
MSFS is also a dog to install & update. Mega hours of downloads into mystery folders all over the shop. X-Plane 12 just downloads in a few hours even if you have a slow connection, and it's all there in one folder that you can easily move from drive to drive. Try that with MSFS and you will end up in shit.
![[MSFS vs XP12] Thoughts after the six flights I did](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Bd5hnl3WBBs/mqdefault.jpg)
The universe can accommodate both. It's great to have those two simulators around. People just like to complain and be whiny.
I have been flying in X-Plane 12 "even after beta 1" came out and I think the biggest problem for x-plane 12 is the people and their expectations. I think LR did a great job with XP12. What did people want in XP11? I dunno, xEnviro, UltraWeather XP, xVision, cloudart need I go on? LR delivered on weather system and visuals and explicitly said not to expect ground scenery like MSFS and people still expected MSFS level scenery. So I think that is the problem and it is still beta so in due time the glitches we see now will be fixed and the performance will also be looked at (with my rig the performance is already really good and I run everything at max settings). However, your point about the aircraft might be right. Not per se THE BIG REASON to come back, but in general a reason to enjoy both sims. What I am curious about now is how will all flight sims go forward? Nobody is talking about p3d, but they still might have a solid user base even though the visuals are the worst from all the sims. Are the puddles and trees just the start of sometning bigger in xp12? Will SU10 indeed improve performance/stability of MSFS 2 years after release? Let's look forward!
Well said. X-Plane will never die because the flight physics, addons and community are exactly what serious simmers are looking for. Many people don't even understand that the changes in XP 12 actually ARE big changes. Weather is super complex. And it is a good foundation for scenery improvements which will come in the next versions, as LR said.
@@maltimoto I don't think you have flown a real plane in your life. I had the chance to fly multiple planes in XP11 as I do in real life, and they felt nothing like the real thing. ....same as MSFS. These simulators are only good for instrument training/procedures, and nothing else.
@@windshearahead7012 You are right of course. But certainly a Boeing 737 does not fly like a Cessna and the nose wheel of a 737 does not center in 0.00001 seconds once I center the controller after turning off the runway. These are things that everyone can observe, not only pilots.
I just want XP12 to be optimized with native support for M1 Macs like they said it would have. But XP12 on M1 Macs just runs like absolute crap.
I want to fly in XP12 but all the textures are blurry because of vulkan so its unflyable for me.
I still update MSFS2020 and “try” to make it work but I’m keeping mainly with X-Plane 12 (this writing is August 2023). X-plane 12.6b6. It is a fantastic sim, Felis 747-200, Rotate MD-11, Tolis A340-600 are all fantastic. Also DCS World ‘s planes are fantastic. And the sim looks good.
Developers say - even Adobo says that MSFS 2020 can’t get any better technically, that’s why their making a complete new sim MSFS2024. So maybe in 5-6 years MSFS will have the planes I’m used to. I’ll be dead by then and can’t wait for that.
Oh yea, MSFS looks beautiful (beyond anything I expected in 1987 with FS 4.0) but I’m the only one looking at my monitor and really don’t care - if the plane performance isn’t there it’s a waste of my time. If I want to see beautiful scenery, I can look out my window.
Since I’ve been doing 3D animation (Amiga 2000) since 1987, no one loves great graphics like me. I can appreciate the time and effort that goes into all games and Sims.
It’s just good for us all to have competition and pushing everything to the bleeding edge. Everyone wins.
I try to avoid the XP 12/MSFS food fights. I'll continue to fly in both sims. Neither is perfect, but neither sim has enough drawbacks to make me want to choose one over the other.
Totally agree. I like Xplane 12 not because the way it looks but the way I can fly an airplane. Besides the variaty of Airlines airplanes available.
I must admit that sometimes, mostly in the air, XP12 looks better and more ralistic than MSFS2020 + the realistic physics... I gotta admit that XP12 is getting better and better every time
For me, flying to see different parts of the world for fun, I would hop on an MSFS plane and have a blast. However, when I want to experience the dynamics, and physics of a flying aircraft, x-Plane is where I find my query. In short with all due respect to the MSFS fans out there, Microsoft creation feels like a fun game, whereas x-plane feels like a flight sim, and version 12 further emphasizes the point. Have fun You all.
Yes. I have the PMDG 737 and it flies like a Cessna. Like a toy plane. When I fly the Zibo, it feels way better, also on the ground when taxiing.
I have the same impression…
you can convince yourself of whatever you want if you try hard enough!
@@DrunkenGuitarGuy Haha yep. So many X-Plane videos full of people like this guy who think MSFS "feeling" like a game to them is enough to nullify the fact it has flight dynamics/physics beyond what X-Plane will ever have. And they are either ignorant of that or can't accept it. CFD flight modelling (MSFS) makes Blade Element (X Plane) look like outdated tech. They think because XP has the "serious sim" reputation, then it _must_ be the serious sim with "serious" physics, all I can say is lol. And a BIG LOL to that guy saying the PMDG in MSFS flies like a Cessna, some real hard self-convincing there. These guys are so threatened by MSFS existence with the breathtaking graphics, scenery, and advanced physics all in one package. While X-Plane only has physics going for it, and they're not even the best anymore.
@@JohnDoeWasntTaken If what you say is true, then why does the FAA allow flight hours in X-Plane count toward actual in-flight hours, but not with MSFS? Why is X-Plane used in FAA investigations and not MSFS?
I have both sims, my personal preference is X-Plane. I really enjoy the realistic flight models. MSFS looks nice, but I still go the X-Plane roiute.
The organic flight model in XP is much more fun to fly with and challenge yourself with.
@@NicOz42 most definetley and also seaplanes are so much and a challenger at time lot better than mfs .
MSFS is crash to desktop simulator. Every flight near landing it CTDs
@@davincis1 learn how to configure your hardware! just because you can't configure your hardware and are putting up with that, doesn't mean anyone else is!
once they have dash 8 q400 and a300 and phenom compatible to xp12, i will fly xp12 more
looking foward to see Xplane13. LOL 😆😆
Well the rain effects and the ATC are better, if they could step up the terrain, it could be serious competition.
Real pilot here, I agree with everything except the statement that there is no such thing as study level in any sim. I have used some of the higher end aircraft addons to supplement my real life flight training. The seemingly minor differences between high fidelity addons make a huge difference. It's the difference between the CDU and systems doing what you want them to do or not. It's you successfully mimic all of your airline flows vs having to pause, wonder for a second and then say "oh it's probably a sim thing".
Many addons might be fun to fly for the avarage sim hobbyist. Not many are good enough for real pilots to simulate real life procedures to the letter. PMDG is definitely study level.
I think that if the FAA can certify a sim, then it is considered study level. If they consider flight time in a sim to count toward any license, then that sim is study level. There are sims with the appropriate hardware to actually be certified by the FAA that use X-plane as the software component. I do believe they are mainly for GA pilots going for IFR.
@@Tsudico the FAA does, but it has nothing to do with what us simmers define as Study Level addons.
I like XP 12 but it still has some flaws in the clouds. They will fix it. Scenery I will mod anyway with Orthos and Simheaven. Sure MSFS looks good but the taxi und flight physics are not so good. So in 3-6 months, I will step up from XP 11 to XP 12 and enjoy my virtual pilot life with excellent airliners, flight physics and addons.
I have Both.. I wish MSFS had a replay system like X plane.
I have a feeling that MSFS is more for people who like planes and wanna fly with friends in a visually pleasing scenario, but if you’re more into realism in terms of physics and how the plane actually reacts to multiple aspects in the world, XPlane 12 is a better choice
Agreed
Agree 100%
I dont get why all the MFS fans are crying in the comments that their sim is better, if you think its better then go play it instead of complaining.
I think your mom was right, a little of both is great! If everyone had unlimited amounts of storage on their computers and the money for all the payable stuff, I think the only contingency is, fly whatever sim based on whatever plane available for that sim at the time. The streamers go back and forth between the two sims alot because of this. And pretty much many 3rd party software like Vatsim supports both platforms! Simple as that!
I flew FS9 for years. the hardest part for people going to X-Plane is the scenery. it requires time and money to make orthos and get custom scenery into the sim. once you do that however, you can fly practically any airliner in mainstream circulation, not to mention the Flight Factor 777 and 787 coming out soon. this really tips the scale towards XP12 for me over MSFS simply for the ability to use the addons I paid money to fly in X-Plane 11.
Autoortho fixes that problem
This "vastly superior flight model" is slowly coming to a close. Aircraft will come to FS2020. It's just a matter of time. There is a place for both sims. Bottomline, fly the one you are most happy with :)
99% of the people commenting on the "flight model" have never flown and are just parroting what they heard!
@@DrunkenGuitarGuy We dont need to fly a real plane to see that the MFS flight model sucks.
@@DrunkenGuitarGuy I am a cirrus owner. Xplane has the edge in terms of flight model. Msfs is very close though.
I bought it simply to ensure some competition. They have done a decent job of it. Looking forward to the future of Flight simming!
Exactly competition is good ! Even tho I prefee msfs I still want Xplane to be toe to toe. Its a win win for us.
I think you are being too optimistic. The reason people jumped on XP11 bandwagon towards the end was because the FSX and the P3D cult got fed up with those sims not progressing enough. MSFS changed all that and more…especially how much cheaper add ons are now since it has gone mainstream with Xbox. Even the aircraft for MSFS are reasonable in cost. XP is still consider and always will be a niche flight sim with addons costing much more. But nonetheless, XP is a awesome sim and I will always find the time to use it myself.
I just literally just want MSFS scenery in xplane. In xplane I like the menu system, weather, camera system, night lighting, better default airports and the plethora of awesome addon aircraft.
Nope the main gripe with MSFS isn't the lack of airliners, it's the ATC
lol! for dummies maybe!
I'm a Mac user so I'm also a Xplane user. I guess 'mI a bit of an odd flight simmer. I enjoy flying but I also enjoy tweaking the sim. I have tons of orthos and other adons that are mostly free. I think XP12 is a winner, and competition is a good thing.
Good review, very informative. I do believe the biggest difference between the two is the aircraft attention to detail and flying characteristics. I also believe the only reason msfs came back was because of all the whining when they just up and left the scene. I will be adding XP12 very soon. XPlane is in it for the long haul. Just my opinion here. I know eeeeeeverybodys got one. You asked and I stated mine. Keep up the good work here and also on the other blog.
Can’t believe it’s you Matt and you ain’t talking bout cruise ships sooo funny never knew your a fly boy to.
I have both XP11 and MSFS. Love them both. I'm currently using the XP12 demo and do plan to buy it soon. I love the improvements. I'm not a serious/hardcore sim guy at all. I fly mostly GA and love exploring and using smaller airports. My preference has been and from what I've seen will still be XP. On my older PC, XP12 boots fast, and everything maxed I get 30-40 fps. For me that's perfect and the experience is smooth. I get even higher fps in MSFS with high settings. But, I just enjoy my time in XP more. It's one of those things where you 'just' like something. I think we are so lucky to have the options. People forget the long stretch where Aces had been shut down and we had XP9/10, FSX/FS9, and P3D. Only XP and P3D were in development, and P3D was FSX+. New and awesome is a great thing. 2 great sims being developed and supported.
After how MS treated us FSX users and disappeared from the market, I swopped to XP and I'm determined to stick with it!
And make no mistake, the moment sales of MSFS drop, MS will abandon the sim again…just like last time.
Exactly,ill always stick with the small dev team,because they care
@beachz101
In terms of simulation and "study level (or high fidelity)" airliners, X-Plane 12 is the best. I also think that the X-Plane 12 community would be furious if planes like the CaptainSIm C-130- this is because MSFS2020 is targeted towards more "casual" audience (the fancy graphics).
every aircraft you wished for there is coming to the sim also what about the crj?
The flight model…’nough said
I've been flying sims since the very first MS Flight Sim in 1982 and although even that crude iteration blew me away, seeing something like MSFS 2020 really took simming to a whole new level! Everything was fine for me UNTIL World Update 5 and ever since then, I've had nearly constant crashes to desktop and most of them being on final approach. I keep waiting for the next update to fix this bug but it has not happened for me and many others. Nothing is more frustrating than to set up a flight from cold and dark, fly for an hour and a half and then get bounced to desktop at decision height. THIS is the reason I've purchased XPlane 12 and despite some lukewarm reviews, I feel like it's a breath of fresh air to finally be able to complete my flights. Does XPlane look better than MSFS2020? No! Are the flight models better? Absolutely! For me, having a beautiful sim to look at is great but not at the expense of stability. For now, I'm going to enjoy my time in Xplane and hoping the devs keep their heads in the game to make it every bit as good as the competition.
Just add Auto Ortho and Sim Heaven to XP12 and then see about who has the good scenery.
lol. MSFS should be sued for false advertising. All that hype and build up 2 years ago was the biggest let down of bait & switch I have ever seen.
A year to late to the party but yeah..I went back to xplane, I played XP11 and bought 12 at launch, had a lot of issues with it at start so I left it in my Steam library. Played a bit P3D and eventually bought msfs2020.. Then comes the day where I have to reinstall windows and wanted to download msfs again only to see the download never go above 40mb/s..and on top of that it stops at 45% downloaded and goes into an endless download loop, I tried every single method from the forums and Zendesk to fix it with no luck, so I installed X-plane12 again and I'm very happy with it. I also had download speed of 300 mb/s instead of 30.. MSFS2020 can be as pretty as it wants but with ongoing issues with updates and other downloads it's just not worth it.
How are flight dynamics better?
Are we comparing the default, or 3rd party aircraft?
There is a reason why X-Plane is used for pilot training. Sim's owner himself is pilot too.
X-plane is used in FAA certified sim setups. It requires not only having 3rd party aircraft that has taken the time to simulate all the systems involved (including functioning circuit breakers) but also requires the hardware that is used to be FAA certified as well. It isn't something that most people at home would set up do to price involved.
Unless Asobo gets an FAA certified sim market, I think X-plane will continue to be able to claim they have a better flight model (whether it is actual truth or not).
@@hakanr339b you can convince yourself of anything if you try hard enough! i bet 99% of the people making this claim have never flown in their lives!
@@DrunkenGuitarGuy It's not a claim, it's a real thing, companies like Gleim Aviation, Bridger Aerospace and much more use X-Plane :)
@@hakanr339b which proves what?? it only proves how gullible you are!
The HotStart Challenger 650 is being worked on to work in XP12.... man I can't wait!
i fly msfs for vfr. xplane airliner have more friendly frame rate in my system
As some mention - msfs requires internet connection and some tiles of my country look like dog s... With ortho you can store as much as you want and what you want. No to mention how much Azure would cost to host as of MSFS
For me the Zibo 737 is like 60% of why I choose xplane everytime. The PMDG 73 feels like a plastic toy while the Zibo actually has incredible depth to it and feels like it has actual weight.
Bullshit lol
I've been playing MSFS and X-Plane12 There are things I like about X-Plane Compared to MSFS vice versa.
MSFS aircraft look a hell lot better than X-Plane12 that's for sure.
The only aircraft I fly in X-Plane 12 is the Citation X and the Cirrus Vision Jet the only 2 aircraft worth flying in the sim/game.
I really wanted to love XP12... Been a fan of it since XP10. In fact, my full-size B-1900D sim used the Carenado 1900D flight model. It was awesome. However, with nearly every 3rd party developer flocking to 2020, the writing is on the wall. The 2020 scenery is just too compelling to ignore. Carenado won't update their XP product line to XP12, and several other 3rd-party developers aren't updating their offerings as well. (XPUIPC in particular, is the 'glue' that marries my 7 computers together to work in unison with X-Plane. It won't be updated)
So... that leaves me with a dead sim. I started the conversion effort to 2020 about 6 months ago and am still working on it. There are several shortcomings to be sure, but overall, we are seeing more developers release products for us cockpit builders that allow better integration with 2020.
Laminar Research really screwed the pooch here. When 2020 was first released, LR pretty much sat back and laughed. Now... Asobo is eating their lunch. Laminar can't afford the level of scenery that 2020 has out of the box, and they don't have the development chops that Asobo has.
When Microsoft pulled the plug on FSX I vowed to never go back and went all-in with X-Plane. Weird how the reverse is now true.
I know that I'm an outlier with a full-size sim and hardware that rivals some procedure trainers. However LR has stated that they are going for the commercial sim market (again) but... I just don't see that happening given the disappointing release of XP12.
Xlane is great simulator. MSFS is a GAME.
I wouldn’t say that snymore
Gaymsfs
You: “FREE MSFS!” **explosive** 🤡
superior flight feeling and habtics (interaction with the sim) are indispensible, that is what x-plane has been delivering for years.
X-plane has done everything it can to the point of where the one missing element comes into the race and that is the world design.
Assemble all feature elements of a sim, and you find the only thing that need to catch up are: Better Cloud Design, Housing and Vegetation.
x-plane12 has not achieved expections for these 3 key visuals, the rest besides of these is better than in the other sims. much much better.
so laminar: my proposal is to simply focus on a solution for these 3 modules and you will multiply sales. if you wanna top even these, you
can tackle a better graphics engine and a first person gameability known from other game engines. that would top out everything and finally end
debates and critics.
volumetric lighting now:)
Airplane physics matter if you are interesting in flying. real or simulation
The downside is, addon aircraft for X-Plane are quite expensive. For me the key for X-Plane currently besides the airliners i already own is the camera system and replay. That is just on another level...
things have changed now, back a few years ago the addon developers were making addons for multiple sims because one didn't stand out in playerbase or quality! now msfs is a quality product out of the box with a massive playerbase! who do you think they are going to spend the bulk of their resources to make addons for?? i don't think this version of xplane is going to do well, not that many that are foolish enough with their money to invest a bunch of money into 2 sims! i know there are some but they are rare!
what isn't mentioned - and that will be decisive - is the community of xplane . Projects like ortho and the Zibo were , and still are , why it was the goto sim . We already know about a lot of community driven stuff coming ( if I recall correctly a "zibo - quality " adaptation for the default Airbus is already in the works ) . It's not the payware which will shift the balance , no : the freeware stuff will do that. Every time some youtuber or forum post mentioned some problem a simmer encountered in Xplane 11 someone else would make an addon to remedy said problem . Because of the rather closed "marketplace " scheme MSFS has that's a huge bonus xplane has right from the start
The closed market place? FBW project is the best freeware team in any sim. Not on the market place Two aircraft A320 and A380 being developed to payware study level at the same time. Fenix the best A320 in any sim ever, not on the market place.
I bought X-Plane 12 at beta 1, a day after release, and didn't expect much knowing how LR makes gradual improvements. I know they've got more up their sleeve.
I think the hot start challenger is study level lol
TBM 730?
sooo, the gliders are coming to FS 2020, nothing else matters :)
1:25 It should be the physics
Only thing that will bring me back is Pilot2ATC like ATC.
Let's not forget all the helicopters already ported over, whereas MSFS is still waiting for native helicopters. Plus even from XP11, the flight physics is better.
MSFS is GORGEOUS, and is doing the aviation industry a favor by attracting young people to aviation with its x-box offering. X-Plane has it's place in RW flight training and education. The flight model is MUCH better, as a RW pilot. That said, either will do if you use them correctly to help with proficiency, ESPECIALLY with online ATC like PilotEdge or Vatsim, and used for IFR approaches with updated Nav databases...
I think is a matter of perspective. “Visually” yea MSFS2020 does a better job on most cases. However, X-Plane in general has better flight models and high fidelity airliners. I’m more incline to MSFS, for me I only flight the Fenix, FBW320 and PMDG, not really interested on other type of aircrafts. But again, it’s a matter of perspective. The biggest issue with MSFS was the FPS drop and flight dynamics and both have been improved tremendously, specially now with the upcoming SimUp10 with DLSS. But X-Plane is a better “Flight Simulation.”
Personally I always say FS2020 as a game because of Microsoft’s history as a game developer. I am not going to deny the quality of FS2020 is good, but for me, X-Plane 12 reigns supreme because of the much, much, much better community behind it, at least in my time. With FS2020, any questions I had always led me to some stupid MS Answers website that was often unhelpful. X-Plane always kept me in because of the ability to easily mod it without issue, and mixed with generally higher fidelity systems and physics, along with a better UI, X-Plane is always my sim of choice.
I fly both MSFS and XP12 BECAUSE IT IS REFRESHING!
It’s definitely long term. XP12 has been an impressive experience, although not visually yet, the flight physics and responses got me. Even minute details on flight models have made a difference. The big question is, when are we gonna see this complete? That would happen soon enough and with a good growth over two weeks with more than a dozen models come in, it looks promising, plus, a better version to put it for flight models from XP11 to 12 which makes it more convenient as well. Hopefully a healthy competition between both the sims giving us something more. Nice video! 👍🏻
Aircraft and instant replay are the main reason I fly in xplane over msfs.
yes, but why does hawks poop in his washing machine?
i fly x-plane since version 10, there’s a reason why real pilots much prefer XP compared to MSFS. first of all msfs is a full blown consumer oriented software, it’s only good trick is graphics and satellite 3d scenery, xplane has outstanding physics, calculated in real time, with proper modding can also be used for level C and almost level D sims
Have both can’t lose !
1) Too many add on, too pricy and not out of the box
2) I’m a real bus pilot, so only reason I’m coming back is for ToLiss bus line up, do not buy the Flight Factor as it’s a blatant scam.
A scam? I don’t understand that.
The Fenix is the best A320 in any sim. Last 12 hours had a major update to even higher standards. Getting IAE engines and sharklets for free when completed. All for less than $70.
@@johnmaguire2185 He was talking about FF, they are charging top dollar for something that's not the value, not to mention upgrade fees, Xplane fanboys are mad.
I agree it’s just a crap ? Which airline u r into ?
@@johnmaguire2185 the Fenix is not the most realistic aircraft. In terms of systems the fslabs a320 is by far the most realistic. Otherwise the toliss and the Fenix are o the same level. I’ve been on the level d sim and I know what I’m talking about. I own the Fenix, fslabs on P3d v5 and the aerosoft 320 and also the toliss and ff 321. The most realistic in systems is fslabs, the most realistic handelign one is toliss. If you want best of both worlds it will be Fenix or toliss
It looks the same. It isn't worth spending $60 U.S. dollars on, unless someone with a highly trained eye _really_ wants to give sixty bucks away.
And whatever happened to the radio controlled plane from older versions of X-Plane? I used to fly that on highways, right next to moving traffic. Is it possible to download an older version of it to use in X-Plane 12? Or is there paid DLC for an even more recent, better quality one?
I fly x plane because of air manager. They need to get more GA Garmin avionics that are current.
Air manager is compatible with MSFS.
Without sounding _too_ entitled, I would've thought that _someone_ would have made a mod by now to give the zibo treatment to the default A330. Kinda disappointed.
And I hate to say it, but ToLiss and Flightfactor just can't seem to get their models right. Something is always off about them visually and it puts me off (though I'm sure their systems modelling is fantastic). Besides them, X-Plane is looking pretty dormant in the payware aircraft scene, much less active than MSFS, not to mention all the resources microsoft is pouring into improving default/official aircraft hiring the likes of Inibuilds and Working Title (I doubt Laminar has that kind of money to just splash around).
W T F are you talking about? We are two years into msfs and we have the best 737 AND A320. X plane has been around for what? That’s way faster of a development than x plane.
Toliss 321 and 320 is o n the same level as the Fenix. The flight model is better on the zibo but the systems for pmdg. On xplane there’s the torque sim sr 22 airfoillabs c172 hotastart rbm and the one and only most realistic plane in flight simulation history the take command challenger 650.
@@majoraviatior1611 The Toliss looks like it was modeled in 2012, that plane probably has less polygons in the entire plane than the Fenix has in one wing.
@@simulacrae it’s been updated in xplane 12
@@majoraviatior1611 really? Because I watched V1 and 320simpilots streams and they had the bad model.
@@simulacrae they updated it since then.
I'd say XP12 is in it for the short game and MSFS is playing the long game. Porting over XP11 airplanes quickly into XP12 with XP11 modeling sounds like a quick buck, whereas MSFS requires devs to build airplanes from scratch in terms of systems, flight modeling and visuals which will look and feel fresh much farther into the future.
Also, XPs flight model is not vastly superior to MSFS. That is 2019 talk. There are videos out there comparing the two (with more added all the time) that show the gap between them is marginal at best.
Also-also, you didn't mention the Leonardo MD80 as a choice for MSFS airliners currently available, DC-6 or B247... all of which are gems in terms of visuals and complexity and not available in XP12 currently.
He also forgot about the salty mod for the b747 and the crj by aerosoft or the Concorde. They're all very ok to fly looking from a normal procedures standpoint.
Or the CRJ series. It's just X-Plane fanboys talking down on MSFS. I like both sims, but every time an X-Plane fanboys comes with the "XPlane flies better and it used for real pilot training (it isn't, you have to actually use a real flight simulator with a proper cabin) I just point out how the graphics look from 20 years ago. Straight lines in the cost line. Everything everywhere looks the same. Not even shadows. What the actual F*CK?
I also forgot about the BAE146 for that matter too.
@@777FreakyD Yep. And we have a study level 737 for just 35 bucks. You can't see those prices with X-Plane.
The only thing left for X-Plane are airliners and IFR.
They could add Ortho in the launcher so that it doesn't look so terrible, but no. Even the original DCS Caucasus map looks better.
I think people forget that the roots of X-plane and MSFS had, and still have, different goals. MSFS has always been about bringing flight to the masses, but X-plane started out as a way of getting accurate simulation so Austin could practice in support of his license. You can see the differences in approaches even now. MSFS did come out with the wow factor of looks, but did not necessarily have as good a flight model as they do now with Sim update 9 and 10 under their belt. However, for X-plane when it comes to simulating error conditions in the cockpit, pilots should be focused far more on having the situation simulated correctly than visuals or what they "think" should happen. Unless Asobo decides to go for FAA certification, I think X-plane will be able to claim a more accurate flight model, whether deserved or not. X-plane previous commercial versions are used in flight schools for FAA certification and I am sure there will be sims upgrading to X-plane 12 when it is released and has most of the bugs ironed out because it will be an incremental improvement in not only looks but the flight model.
And that is the reason porting from 11 to 12 can be done relatively quickly in X-plane because their flight model is mostly a refinement of what already has been proven. But the more complex 3rd party offerings that model planes in far more detail will take more time to port over because of their complexity and the edge cases that those refinements can bring to light.
Asobo doesn't have that luxury because they have changed their flight model to be more like X-plane (not going to get into an argument of blade theory versus boundary element when both probably use highly modified versions with a smattering of CFD thrown in) but that means having models that have accurate airfoil and body design instead of "looking right" and letting the spreadsheet make up the difference. I think people will find that it will become harder for amateur modelers to make realistic designs in MSFS but for the professionals it might end up being easier for them to release aircraft that "just work" for both sims.
X-Plane 12 single engine planes do not have working VOR's as did X-Plane 11,FIX IT. X-Plane 12 is a early release and in Beta.
The biggest problem with X Plane 12 is Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 exists 😭 lol
XP12 still uses Blade elements theory simulation which is old and outdated. "Feels good" no longer valid as an excuse for more accurate flight dynamics.
Mathematically and scientifically Boundary Layer theory simulation and CFD is more accurate that is being used in MSFS. So, XP is more better flight dynamic is just a myth. It maybe relevant years waxago but not anymore.
XP is always bragging about their myth flight physics is better.
Flight physics arguments and this is just one of the variables involved:
World and weather simulation in XP- Imagine you are inside a closed room and you throw a paper airplane in the air, it will fly stable and predictable. MSFS world and weather simulation: Now, Imagine going outside with weather and winds and you threw that same paper airplane. It will fly differently, less stable, and less predictable.
Now, imagine calling XP flight dynamic is better and calling msfs flight dynamic unrealistic. This is the current flight physics arguments between XP and MSFS atm..
One variable is that XPlane world and weather simulation are lacking.
First, your claim about BET being old and outdated doesn't work either because it is still widely used in physics simulations today, and it can have good accuracy compared to models that use CFD but it depends highly on how much resolution both models are using. That means that boundary layer and/or CFD are not necessarily better than X-plane's approach (which I highly doubt is "purely" blade element theory anymore) because both simulations depend on the resolution of the simulation and so it depends on how fine the resolution is within both which also depends on how performant each simulation aspect is in regards to each element that simulation is performed on.
As for XP bragging about their flight physics, I think it isn't just the flight physics that they are bragging about. Unless and until Asobo tries to go for FAA certification, then XP can hold that above MSFS. X-plane is used in commercial sims as part of an FAA certified sim setup and can be used to get qualified flight time towards a license. We, whether gamers or flight sim enthusiasts, are not necessarily Laminar's primary customers. Selling the software as well as service for it towards commercial sims might be their primary market. There is good evidence toward that due to Austin's reluctance to focus on visual improvements to X-plane but his constant work to refine the flight model they have developed.
For people who want to not just fly aircraft, but also test flying in scenarios that include malfunctioning instruments and other aspects of flight that might not be safe to practice in an actual aircraft, X-plane offers them something that I doubt Microsoft and Asobo ever will. That is why some consider the X-plane flight model to be better.
@@Tsudico what difference does "faa certified" mean in practice?? nothing, you just keep repeating so it makes you feel better for being a fanboy for an inferior sim!
@@DrunkenGuitarGuy To you it means nothing, but for people who want to keep their skills honed at home with a simulator that gives as realistic emergency situations as possible, then wouldn't you pick one that you know can be FAA certified? Does MSFS even allow emergency conditions like vacuum pumps failing or the static ports clogging? As far as I can tell, it is very limited in that regard. At least not to the extent that X-Plane allows because there are add-ons for MSFS to improve its ability to do so.
For people who just want to play around with flying planes, MSFS is the better choice. But for people who actually use a flight simulator at home to hone their real life skills, X-Plane is the better option.
@@Tsudico go play your crappy sim fanboy! all your comments prove is that you are a sucker for marketing!
Xplane flight model is better. I own a plane as-well. Blackbox711 also said it as-well and he is a 320 captain. Msfs is still good but xplane is more for pilots practicing procedures. It is not a myth, as a matter of fact I let a instructor try both and he said xplane is more realistic in terms of flight model and avionics. It’s not personal preference or a myth. It is a fact.
Yeah absolutely nobody is coming back to X-Plane 12 for the A320 by FlightFactor. I don't know what drugs they were on or what the intention was but that X-Plane 12 upgrade which costs 20 bucks is such a mojor downgrade from X-Plane 11. They should really be ashamed of theirselfs.
Honestly bruh for your average flight simmer MSFS is for me...After experiencing the amazing visuals of MSFS I can't go back to XP's horrible ground scenery and anti-aliasing.
The flight model is vastly superior to msfs?
X-Plane fanboy detected.
Not, it is not, in fact, msfs model already has some things that are better than X-Plane, like the wind gusts added in SU10. Not to mention that they are upgrading to CFD, which, this one, yes, it's VASTLY superior to the simple math used in X-Plane.
I have bought X-Plane 12. I have found NOTHING superior in its flight model. Yes, I'm not a pilot, but they differences right now are pretty minor. And the rest is so superior in MSFS that it isn't even a contest.
Just out of the box, the autogen is so awful that War Thunder looks a lot better. At least they don't have coast lines that are fucking straight lines for god's sake!.
When it comes to CFD and Blade Theory it depends far more on how quantized the simulation is (how fine the resolution of the simulated elements). The question is whether the CFD approach that Asobo is switching to will have the resolution to make it better than what X-plane offers (which probably isn't "just" blade theory by now and actually has some CFD as well given the various graphic outputs that show airflow around the craft). But the flight model "accuracy" is only part of the equation.
The thing most people don't understand....is that X-plane isn't just about flying an aircraft. It has a commercial version that can be used in FAA certified sim environments so that people going for their licenses can use sim time as flight time and test emergency procedures in a safe way. In those cases, it isn't just about having a realistic flight model, but a realistic simulation of the aircraft (usually by a 3rd party) and what happens if the static air ports get clogged or iced over so the instruments lose accuracy. In some respects, we as consumers are not the primary market for X-plane but the secondary market. And that is what most people don't keep in mind. When it comes to testing actual pilot response to procedures and emergencies, there is far less concern with the quality of the scenery but the response of the aircraft to anything the pilot does to address it.
X-plane will always focus on sim accuracy first, visuals second (although having better visuals can improve sim accuracy in ways). MSFS on the other hand focuses first on making people want to play the game, if that means visuals get priority, they will. If they think people want a more accurate flight model, they will do that too. What I don't see Microsoft/Asobo caring about is getting their sim to the same accuracy level for all the needed components to have an FAA certified setup.
@@Tsudico man you really are a hardcore fanboy! take a break from the forums and go play your crappy sim!
I have both X-Plane 12 and MSFS2020 and have to say I much prefer the latter. I don’t find the difference in flight model to be that noticeable and the scenery in MSFS is on a whole new level. I can’t see X-Plane catching up any time soon. I will continue use and support both as I like choice and competition
Xplane model is slightly more realistic. On the airfoil labs c172 it feels a lot more realistic then the black box c172 analog. I have tried them both. I’m also a private pilot on the 172. 737 talk, the zibo feels much more realistic no doubt about it! Even though the pmdg does have a good flight model it doesn’t come close to the zibo, however the pmdg does have more in depth systems. Also if your on the sr 22, challenger 650 or looking for a really realistic general aviation experience xplane feels much more better. As there is carenado, just flight, aurfoillabs, hotstart, torque sim and xplane is overall far superior for general aviation. Msfs is still great though. What I’m basicly saying is xplane overall does feel a bit more realistic and a lot more realistic on the ground. Msfs is continually getting tweaked physics so who knows one day it might catch apart. Apart from the physics and in depth planes msfs is the better general sim for sure.
@@astromatt75 with default planes it’s pretty bad in xplane. But if you start to invest in study levels or tho and some good scenery and really can be a better sim in some aspects! :)
XPlane make look less awesome, but MSFS starts looking REALLY STINKO as soon as you have an internet glitch. The whole city can turn into a melted pointy hellscape, really fast, whenever your internet glitches, or microsoft's global infrastructure has a bad hair day.
Helicopters? 2022 and we are still waiting for helis to land in MSFS.
XP 12 will become obsolete in the next 2 years. Buying XP 12 is like buying a Blackberry after the IPhone came out.
Well, not everyone wants to use Windoze as an OS. So they will sim with X-Plane. No-one is bitching that MSFS is Windoze-only, whereas XP is multi-platform. Why would I (or anyone) downgrade a computer and OS just to run a flight-sim?
@@mauricegold9377windoze 💀 & i use msfs on Linux. There's a way to get it working, but if you're too lazy, you can purchase XP for $80 (now $50) 💀
From own experience I'd rather wait for MSFS airliners than investing in XPL12 again!
Reasons:
Not all XPL11 Airplanes work in XPL12,
"Minor tweaks and changes" have to be paid by the customers! --> FF A320 charges 20 Bucks for a Beta upgrade (Beta A320 in a Beta XPL12), Toliss 10 Bucks upgrade, iniBuilds A300 Series wont be able to run in XPL12 at all.
XPL12 charges you a full price for a BETA(!!!)
Commonly, early access and beta access is usually granted for a lower price! But Laminar chose to charge full price because you get a XPL11 key! What a nonsense but hey its their marketing.
Beta means bugs! --> And XPL12 is full of it! Completely unoptimized, full of stuff beeing broken and in development and very far from being a finished and comparable Simulator!
At the moment there is hardly any fair price vs feature relation in XPL12 and thus my XPL11 will still be used together with MSFS.
777 is coming from PMDG, meanwhile XP has a 330 with a Boeing FMS………………………………. Yeah.
There is the most realistic plane in flight sim history the hot start challenger 650 meanwhile in msfs you can takeoff the pmdg 737 backwards…………………………..Yeah.
I will tell you a big downside to FS 2020 are the mega updates that it takes to fix that sim. It has had nothing but fixes since it came out. And it still has bugs. A real poor program in many ways fix this fix that or we messed that up on the last update lets repair that.
The flight modeling in x-plane is flawed and isn’t as advanced to flight simulator. X-plane will never get my money again
[Edit, My X-Plane 12 cockpits are way darker than yours. Wonder what I'm doing wrong?]
I am embarrassed to admit how many aircraft I have purchased for X-Plane 10 and 11 (plus now the small dollar upgrade for the ToLiss planes for 12) and how lazy I've been trying to make MSFgame usable for me - So, obviously I'm a LR fan in a big way - But the version 12 airliner interiors are so dark, they're practically unusable! There must be a better way, but so far my only solution has been to add a couple of thick cloud layers to sorta neutralize the black shadows - Pls tell me what I'm missing?
you shouldn't use the word fanboy because thats exactly what you sound like! fly / play what you want but one product is far superior! and sorry, where do you think developers are going to spend the resources developing?? this really popular one that looks great out of the box?, or this one that looks like crap and has more of a cult following?? you are going to be disappointed! and no, most people have more sense than to have a need for more than 1 sim and for the vast majority its going to msfs!
Been flying on XP11 and P3D for ages. Will soon be flying XP12 and P3D. MSFS is a joke!
Iam real pilot and everybody is saying that x plane is better if you wanr more real flying NOPE 😃 its not fucking real
"Long game" - 😅😅🤣🤣 They've been playing long game with XP9 (ca 2009) graphics
All these aircraft for MSFS coming out and devs leaving XPlane it's more like they are losing in the long run. I am not sure what you are talking about, make sure do you research correctly.
And these payware ports to XP12 look bad, XP11 copy paste,- but XP fanboys dish out money for these because they are desparate.
Ortho4 XP takes lots of space/time and still looks pretty bad with discolorations. Cities look just awful, and trees are from a hunting game. Long game you said?
Go wash your brain with ActiveX :)
Not everything is "scenery" in a flight simulator lmao.
X-Plane is preferred for it's flight realism and for flight training.
@@hakanr339b Tell that to INI, PMDG, etc major publishers LOL
Reality check, fanboy, it's over 🤣🤣🤣🤣
You must be mad because you just had to pay for FF again which looks/functions exactly like in XP11. Or you are traumatized by the XP12 = XP11.6 ahahaha
@@hakanr339b Just for you:
ruclips.net/video/F25Rl2io4BY/видео.html&ab_channel=Easyjetsimpilot
@@activex7327 When Asobo gets FAA certification, I'll start thinking X-plane might have to worry about their future.
@@Tsudico Like you have an FAA certified sim at home 🤣🤣🤣
Sadly, you don't even know what that means. I can have a polygon sim FAA certified and train on it.
Xplane 12 sucks.... I'll definitely will stick with msfs so no you're wrong
If you have actually flown a real plane and felt the control surfaces you would completely disagree with yourself
@@majoraviatior1611 I did learn how to fly when I was 16 in a real airplane, don't make assumptions about people you don't know 😉
@@FSXflyerdavidmf well that surprises me! Maybe u shall reword it. If you invest into study level planes and ortho then you might disagree with yourself. Trust me the airfoilabs 172, torque sim sr22 hotstart challenger 650 is surpassing msfs general aviation aircraft. If you were actually training I don’t know why you would say it sucks. Look at the level d sims, they don’t have good scenery! It’s all about the realism
@@majoraviatior1611 to me it's about scenery and what's there and really not there that's just a small portion plus when you land 172 in X-Plane 12 vs msfs I don't hear the tires squealing when tapping the breaks like X-Plane 12
@@FSXflyerdavidmfif you want scenery...GO OUTSIDE GOD DAWG
Naaa sorry man Xplane is dead, Austin had his moment.
Yep. Played xplane 9, 10, and 11 over the years and it's safe to say I'm not looking back.
I have done flightsim for over 30 years and there were always several sims around. This will most likely not change. XP will stay in the market because there is a demand for it. MSFS has better graphics, but in every other area, XP is way superior.
You really seem confused („Confused Dad“)
agreed 👍👍
Just because you don't use it does not mean it is dead. Oh btw, may be you misspelled your name, 'confused dead' would be the correct one.
Aircraft will come for MSFS. If X-Plane doesn't get the world graphics model after the real world, X-Plane will die! That's fact!
This is not an accurate take......
Nobody plays Xplane 12...
Yeah, it’s so sad to hear of that. 😢
This debate is very simple, X-Plane can be FAA certified as a proper simulator that will let you log hours, MSFS can't.
Still haven’t gone back. You were wrong
MSFS is also a dog to install & update. Mega hours of downloads into mystery folders all over the shop. X-Plane 12 just downloads in a few hours even if you have a slow connection, and it's all there in one folder that you can easily move from drive to drive. Try that with MSFS and you will end up in shit.