Absolutely agree, 100%! XP 12 graphics are worse than MSFS, and the FPS are worse too!
Usually, if the graphics are better, the FPS is lower. But XP 12 has worse graphics and worse FPS than MSFS, it’s just a mess right now for XP 12.
That’s what a forum is for. Different views.
Although I would suggest that you maybe missed some of the posts that have been quite negative about XP and it’s limitations. Or biased positively toward it.
I just think that discussion on a product, where that is discussed should be taking place on XP forums and not here.
As long as the topic is regarding comparisons between the two products it looks like its allowed.
If you aren’t interested in that topic of discussion you have the option to ignore this thread so it doesn’t appear in your list of unread messages. You can find that at the bottom of the page, changing “Tracking” to “Muted”.
5 Likes
I’m confused why negative or biased comments towards XP12 aren’t “different views” as you mention in the prior sentence? For the most part, this thread is full of honest comparisons.
5 Likes
I tested the stalling characteristics in the XP12 demo Cessna 172 yesterday and ended up in a spin which was difficult to recover from without the correct control inputs (as in real life).
I did the same in the MSFS 172 and just spent several minutes gently mushing down through the (blurred cumulus) clouds with the stick fully back. This is not realistic.
XP12 is for professional Pilot training.
MSFS is a game.
2 Likes
Well I wasn’t clear you are right. I meant different views with respect others opinions.
As a differentiator to potentially libelling another platform through biased or unfounded criticism, or at other end of scale, free advertising another’s products
This forum is afterall paid for by MS.
That’s why I was confused why the post, the way it was worded was permitted to stand.
However, that being said some good comments did come out mostly, interspersed… So yes, well done to the moderators for letting it stay.
Anyway other comment mentioned muting. Now muted so won’t see this thread. Lol.
One question, the 172 had the same weight of fuel and passengers, because by default the xplane and the Asobo have different weights?
Good shout, i hadnt thought of that. Still chunky numbers though
1 Like
X-Plane 12 is not as far-ahead with regard flight physics and advanced aircraft as you might have been led to think. And this perception that X-Plane is lightyears ahead of MSFS flight physics will, over time, diminish as MSFS improves towards full maturity, which it still is not at (hell, it still hasn’t got the weather radar working in the airliners).
MSFS has very little to worry about from X-Plane. And that’s not me having a dig at Laminar, I’ve always loved X-Plane, I will have both sims running in due course.
1 Like
I don’t see the point about more advanced physics. With CFD I would say MSFS is at least on par with X Plane and almost certainly well ahead when it comes to props.
1 Like
The other point I would add is how each camp sees the others flight model, or at least some.
Those on the MSFS side would defend it as an unfinished product, being only two years old, even though it is built on the back of FSX.
The devs of XP12 appear to doing the same, as well as their users, with the defence that it has been completely re-written, even though it is based on a product from 2017, and 2011 the version before that.
Both sides of the “argument” are using the same defence, to a degree.
If there was an upgrade fee, say £20, to go from 11 to 12 I would probably do that. But $60 is far too much for what I see as a marginal upgrade. I would rather spend that on either a one or two MSFS planes, or perhaps put it towards some new hardware.
1 Like
From what I have seen and heard so far in regards to XP12, MSFS will not have any competition.
3 Likes
I have now used XP12 for a couple of days non-stop.
How will MSFS compete ? I don’t know. Frankly, I also currently don’t really care any more.
Believe it or not, MSFS has been de-installed. I will monitor the update news of MSFS and once all the stuff that has been annoying me with it for two years, is solved, I will be back using it.
How will MSFS compete ? well for the many users, it’s propaly that they do not have to compete. I think most people would not care about the things that XP12 does much better. (imo)
2 Likes
There is only 1 Flight Simulation market.
They directly compete.
@darshonaut darshonaut
Meanwhile I found XP12 was “just another incremental update that strokes Austins ego” and it’s nothing that special. Will be keeping MSFS as it’s operationally functional - as a real pilot it does everything I need and then some.
@CaptainMooreLBC You are talking about stalling a default 172 and then bring up ‘professional pilots’ - which is it? Because a professional pilot is not going to load up XP12 to work on stalls. If you are using your sim to work on physics based maneuvers you should probably book some time in the real plane as neither sim will react appropriately.
4 Likes
The lovely thing about computer ‘games’ is the ability to find ways to make real-world training fun. MATHBLASTER as an old example.
MSFS has made learning to use the clock/timer for VFR nav interesting and fun.
While old, it seems using the E6B is still required. Finding someone super-creative to come up with ways to incorporate it into flight planning and in-flight scenarios would be quite and achievement.
It’s so exciting to think of all the ways MSFS could deliver more training, visualizations and fun.
MS FLIGHT had wonderful training missions as did Flight Sim World (by Dovetail) and Flight School (Dovetail). Absolutely wonderful.
Again, it is my belief that the BIGGER money for MSFS is in getting Flight Schools to recognize it as an invaluable and fun training software.
Thank you for your reply on the matter.
2 Likes
Problem easily solved, Get BOTH Simulators. You can fly more than one simulator. I use DCS for military and Aerofly is great for VR, and Orbiter for space flight. There is no one simulator that does everything.
I did get both and refunded XP 12. After some 2,000 hours in XP 11 I just wasn’t that impressed with XP 12. I just see little use in XP 12 these days with MSFS being out there. XP 11 and P3Dv4 / v5 will remain on my PC for the time being pretty much only because of the addons I have collected over so many years. A time will come though where I will ditch them. Quality addons for MSFS are coming quite fast. Again I’m really excited for the A2A Piper Comanche.
1 Like
Both sims are awesome, MSFS has most of it out of the box (including that small incentive of the entire world streamed to your PC in glorious detail), XP12 you have to work at it quite a bit.
Here’s about as good as I can make XP12 look using Ortho - without buying a Data Center worth of storage:
The pain is generating Ortho and having to buy an 8TB+ old spinner to store it on and crossing fingers daily it doesn’t break.
There is no doubt that MSFS is the clear leader here due to the reduced effort required, but don’t doubt X-Plane can look good too, it just takes a lot of faff.
2 Likes
I beg to differ, minecraft RTX looks BETTER actually…LOL!
I can assure you a 2 occupant 172 at half tanks (the default asobo state) will happily mush into the ground with the traditional stall entry of applying gradual back pressure until you run out of elevator. This is one of the first stall demonstrations I was given to drive home the point that a stall condition is the wing’s loss of ability to generate lift, not the nose dropping.