the word also means more then one anything can be outstanding for the computer pilot it can be MSFS or FSX, MSFS, Prepar3d, SubLogic Flight Simulator II the list goes on and on, do I market anything? absolutely not MSFS is “also a outstanding simulator”
None of them really simulate the actual real world experience of flight at all well, FAA approved or not. Most of the rest are fantastic procedure and button pushing simulators but really do not simulate the actual experience of jumping into a real aircraft and flying it at all well. They simulate the procedures, and checklist, and what buttons to press when, amazingly well but you never actually feel like you are in an aircraft rather than on a computer.
MSFS is closer and may get there if they sort out the FM issues and bugs - but the rest are hopeless in terms of recreating the actual experience of getting in an aircraft on a cold frosty morning and taking off through the lingering mist, they likely will forever mainly appeal to people wanting to practice IFR and procedures in tubeliners.
Sure there are people out there that get great pleasure out of learning the intricacies of the latest Garmin and doing an IFR landing after a long flight on autopilot but the elitist obsession with complex procedures and “study level” aircraft in the other games is what was slowly killing off civilian flight simming as a hobby.
Well for starters I would say for a $100 buckaroos MSFS does a surprisingly good job of simulating flight. The accuracy of maximum fidelity in visuals with terrain and weather represent real world flying over the entire world on a global scale. This is the first consumer flight simulator to reach this level of precision. So right off the bat you have achieved the almost realistic part and feeling of flying when you look out the window of your aircraft. I have flown in small planes and helicopters countless times; this is the most important thing believe it or not. Tricking the mind with accurate visuals. The flight model is good enough, the cockpit fidelity is good enough, and these will get better. We are all in pursuit of the perfect balance. When you combine all of this, this is the only consumer sim that really simulates true flight.
yeah, don’t get me wrong - I’m not a MSFS fan boy and not an XP hater. I’ve got all 3 sims + DCS - they all have pros and cons.
I would argue that MSFS is pretty incredible out of the box with no other addons. Flight models for a lot of the planes needs a lot of work, and there are definitely bugs that must be fixed which affect the flight feel / physics / control.
If people hate the MSFS flight model - they should provide specific details and constructive feedback, so problems can actually be addressed and fixed. Anything else is just useless whining.
FAA CAA or EASA Approved or not even NASA the only person I would trust to teach me to fly is a real person..with 1000s of hours flight time..not a sim. Just enjoy the simming world..but its not the real thing..Maybe I am a wannabe. Wheher its XP MSFS or the others mentioned.
Well obviously you are not going to learn to fly in XP, its just FAA approved with the right hardware as an aid to use alongside proper real world training by trained instructors in a real aircraft, a way to get a bit more practice at home, nothing more than that. Nobody including Laminar are pretending you can learn to sly in the sim.
I’m a real world pilot and have been for a long time I can tell you Sublogic flight simulator helped me out alot before I even went for my first flying lesson saved me money at my flight school too
Actually there are a number of posts that very specifically cover the noted issues/problems/concerns with the flight model. These appear to have been well researched and documented (several by commercial/ATP pilots). I would think it would heed MS & Asobo to pay attention to these.
I believe the objective of many here is not to learn how to fly a real aircraft by using a simulator, but to learn to fly a realistic simulation of a real world aircraft, not just learn to ‘fly’ and look at pretty scenery in an unrealistic game. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not going to go so far as to say this is an unrealistic game - certainly not since I believe it has a lot of potential and some of the simpler GA stuff isn’t too bad realism-wise - but I believe it still has a good ways to go to get more realistic.
yeah, I agree… I’ve got 15+ pages of notes on things that should be improved, fixed, added, tweaked etc… and that’s without looking for problems specifically 
I think there probably are some people that will use this for VFR/IFR (eventually) training, or to figure out if they want to learn to fly IRL.
For me - it’s being able to do ‘reasonably realistic’ flights, when I’m not able to IRL. Or to pre-fly a route that I’m planning IRL, so I’ll be familiar with landmarks, airspace, etc.
Finally, there’s the fantasy of learning to fly planes that I probably won’t have the opportunity to IRL, or fly in places / countries that I might not have the opportunity to. Or maybe check out places that I might decide to go IRL.
With XP and P3D, I wouldn’t bother at looking at anyplace that I hadn’t already bought or d/l specific scenery for, since the procedural / vector stuff didn’t look realistic at all, and that was distracting. What MSFS does so well, right now, is the environment - I actually want to explore the world, and I’m checking out places I never would have thought about before, as there’s a pretty realistic depiction of them in game.
For some reason, no one notices that while X-Plane absolutely wins over MSFS in water. Archimedes’ law operates, hydrodynamics works, the waves are real and depend on the wind in the water of X-Plane . MSFS has none of this, it has no water, there is only a mirage of water like in the desert. Therefore, there are no seaplanes in the MSFS. They will not be until real water appears in the MSFS.
Absolutely… MSFS being the only PC Entertainment Civilian Simulator with such a (streaming) true to life world and graphic technology, it delivers a global immersive experience, no other simulator provides. Easy equation… So It’s the only simulator that is clearly made in this year…
No one’s gotten seaplanes right
As a GA Pilot myself, I much prefer flying in MSFS over X-Plane. Most of the X-Plane aircraft I’ve tried (yes, I have a copy and keep it up to date, unlike most authors of aircraft for X-Plane), just feels exceedingly fake to me compared to actual flying. Granted perhaps I’m missing some addons, but, overall, MSFS (and FSX before it with products like A2A and Orbx), were my preferred sim. I spent several hundred dollars on addons for X-plane, and most of the planes I downloaded were not close to worth it, and over all, the feeling of the sim wasn’t worth it.
I keep seeing people saying how “realistic” X-plane is, and I wonder where that feeling comes from, other than listening to marketing.
My cousin did his GA license + other licenses in the late 90s here in the province of Quebec / Canada.
He used to come to my place back then to enjoy some FS98 sessions over the same area where his flight school was. So I created for him some landmarks and scenery improvements + his flight school airport with the tech FS98 had for scenery creation…
I also used to fly with him when he had to build his hours… He became a commercial pilot for a while, kept visiting me when in town to enjoy FS2000 and 2002, then he switched to a management career in aviation… Then he moved to the US…
When I purchased MSFS last September, the first thing I did is to replicate the same flights he used to do following the same routes and it was amazingly real…
So I sent him screenshots and short videos and he could not believe, this is the default MSFS… He would have loved to have this amount of realism and immersion back when he was working on his licenses…
In 2021, the accurate numbers on the virtual gauges and the performance of a virtual model are not enough to make PC flight simulators enjoyable and immersive.
Austin really shows his enthusiasm for the flight model. I get the impression that the MS lead gets more excited by the visuals and world updates. I think that shows in the respective products.
FS 2020 isn’t what I’d call “superb” at low-level VFR. It’s prettier than XP, but that’s all it has.
What ruins FS 2020 for me is the lack of proper multi-monitor support. In XP, I can set my FOV so I can still read the panel while also setting the other monitors to reflect the view I want. It’s not just a stretched out view like in FS 2020. VR makes up for this weakness in FS 2020 but I can only deal with VR for about 2 hours or so. My eyes get too dry. 
If I could do in FS 2020 (with multi-monitors) what I can in XP 11, that would make FS 2020 the clear winner for me.
Just two points in reply really:
Whatever the software used, no simulator - from the best, articulated, commercial trainers to the humblest of home set ups - is ever going to deliver an experience that can truly rival the real thing.
Looking even into the future, and measured by any metric of fidelity we might care to, this will not
change. Why? Because no matter how good the graphics, the flight dynamics, the systems and procedures, no one [short of a heart attack or some such] is going to die in a simulator!
Knowing then that death is a real [albeit fairly remote] component of RW aviation does make all the silliness regarding the ‘is it a game or is it a sim’ debate look a bit lame doesn’t it!
We could now even perhaps all agree to conclude that if it can’t kill you, IT’S A GAME.
This feeds nicely into my second point.
A corollary of the game/sim debate is the equally trite ‘I am a gamer, no, I am a simmer’ debacle.
MSFS 2020 should aspire to be not just good enough, but excellent enough to be able to be
all things to all men [and women]. Then no matter what our own perceptions of self are, it
would to all intents and purposes cease to matter.
Regards.
Depends on what you like and what you want really. Been a GA pilot since 1983, Instrument rated since 1986. If the weather is VFR, I load up MSFS. If it’s IFR, X-Plane is my go to sim or game if you want to call it that. Vatsim makes either choice a win, win for me. Just my opinion, but X-Plane is more realistic to me as far as flight dynamics. When I’m IMC I can’t see the ground and don’t miss the eye candy.
Cheers!
I missed seaplanes and real water so much that I downloaded the free Catalina in X-Plane and brought it to version X-Plane 11-53. It now flies perfectly and maneuvers perfectly in the water, although it does not have a water rudder. I made a feathering of the propellers in X-Plane, and this is quite enough for maneuvering in real X-Plane water. So there are correct seaplanes, but only in X-Plane.