I think that xplane 12 being so similar to xplane 11 in terms of structure of files and other things like that is really important since it means a lot of plugins or modifications are compatible from the start without being forced to wait for everything to become compatible
As a real pilot who uses my sim mostly for IFR practice, the weather in XP 11 always annoyed me because it was never accurate from a visibility or ceiling perspective. But since XP 11 was so much more realistic and accurate from a G1000 systems perspective, MSFS never did it for me. The weather and cloud updates were the one thing I was really hoping for in XP 12 and am really glad they made significant improvements to the weather. Thanks for the review!
What do think about the new G1000 Nxi from working title that is being added to the base sim in Sim Update 10? Seems to have more features than the xplane 11 version. Have you tried it yet?
MFS2020 is not really a simulator at all it's a game... For me it's X-Plane forever but since my bad GPU I have to still on X-Plane 11. Btw for small VFR flight it's true MFS2020 can be nice.... even if flight physic is kinda trash..
@@torusx8564 hahah. I had a good chuckle at your ridiculous statement about MSFS not being a simulator. But if it makes you feel better you are entitled to your opinion, regardless of how silly. As far as I'm concern, xplane 11 and MSFS are both good simulators. For me MSFS is hands down the most immersive simulator on the market and will continue to be for the foreseeable future. It is great that xplane is trying to keep things interesting with competition but they have a long way to go with xplane 12 to make it good.
@@ryanwright3965 Bruh... I dont like saying MFS is a sim mainly because only gamers play it. It was created for amusement and not to simulate a real aircraft for pilot training instead of X-Plane known as a real flight simulator for professional. Flight physic is much better in X-Plane than MFS2020. MFS is only graphics you dont have a lot option like in X-Plane. Btw the way u say people are silly without knowing them show your incompetence in this field. I hold there arguement from a real pilot "father dane" on UA-cam. Graphics are really not important for a flight sim.
@@torusx8564 So when you fly in the real world you dont see nothing from the time you start the aircraft to the time you park all you do is look at instruments? Do you know xplane without hardware and an instructor is not faa certified right? How long XP has been out vs MSFS? A lot of developers are ditching xp and p3d and guess where they going. To say MSFS is only used by gamers is so stupid. I guess Fenix, PMdG are fake. I guess the new crosswind in msfs is fake too. So tired of these chair simmers thinking they know it all.
Agreed with some comments in the sense that currently it is not enough of an upgrade from XP 11. Will probably be worth taking a look at in a year time.
Yeah really had to tell at this first beta.... I was looking for the big picture and overlooking the smaller issues I assume they will work out. Time will tell.
I like your Videos Russ! As you, (obviously) I have logged a couple of hours as a commercial and AF pilot. Right now and even more so with XP12 I believe we are truly on the edge of a new era of flight training. Currently, I am rated on the Challenger 650 and when I look at X-Aviation’s Challenger Simulation for XP11 I must say it is really stunning, unbelievable …
What an exciting time to be alive. Thanks for the video and sharing your thoughts on the current state of the sims. I will continue to support both platforms !
2 роки тому+9
Wow the graphics make me recall my FSX time in my old laptop, so outdated!
exactly thats the main issue. and while graphics arnt everything i think one of the big draws is realism thats what made ms flight sim 2020 so popular and 2024 is really going to give xplane a run for its money. .
I was excited for this game; but it's just not enough of an upgrade from XP11 to justify buying it. It just seems like a slight graphics upgrade with a few more default planes for 60 dollars. Compared to FS2020, I would barely open this game, especially considering I'm seeing reports that the CFD simulation on the Cessna 172 is highly realistic, and more realistic than XP11. Along with that, products like the Fenix just set a new bar for flight simulation addons. I think they dropped the ball with this one. I don't see where the development time has gone into. PBR textures, HDR lighting? We had HDR lighting starting with Half-Life 2: Lost coast. That came out in 2005! PBR textures are great, but the game still looks undersaturated in some parts. It's also very heavily aliased. It just seems like they didn't hire enough people who know what they're doing when it comes to visuals. The clouds are also a nice addition, but they're very low resolution. They stick out. So we've got very little improvement across the board. When it comes to graphics, in every single metric, FS2020 has Xp12 beat, from a technical and aesthetic standpoint. When it comes to physics, stock, Xp11 / 12 beats fs2020; with mods, Fs2020 is tied with XP, beats it, or lags slightly behind it, depending on the category. In scenery, FS2020 beats xplane. In weather, FS2020 beats xplane. It's simply a more advanced simulation. Couple that with the just absolute flood of updates we've been getting with FS2020, the storm of addons, and the sheer visual quality difference, I just don't see a reason to get xp12, other than to maybe train on a specific aircraft, or unless you need one specific plane, or if you like long-haul flights specifically. I'm disappointed. The community at large seems disappointed. I'm glad they released it. But I'm not happy with what they released. This sort of stuff would literally constitute two or three FREE Sim Updates in fs2020, and yet they're selling it for 60 dollars? There's also the 40th anniversary update for FS2020 adding even MORE free planes. It's ridiculous how much Microsoft and Asobo are spoiling us with this game. Anyway, rant over. I really, really hope they get their act together in a few more updates, because this is just disappointing. I was hoping for so much more than this, I was hoping for competition between Laminar and Microsoft. It's just not happening. Nice video, though!
I understand that they completely revamped a lot of stuff under the hood, and that they will continually improve the sim now that they have the base stuff in place. But yeah for now the full price isn't justified. Maybe if they had some discount for the early adopters. Do note that Laminar doesn't have the resources that Asobo and MS have, so you can't compare the speed of development. In some regards, MSFS is still lacking some features that they don't seem to care about.
@concodroid I agree with almost everything you say. The only thing XP does nicely is the "feel" of flying. I too cannot see where all the dev time has gone. "Under the hood"? Lets not forget, the last 2 years of XP11 leading up to .5 was "under the hood" conversion into Vulcan. This just feels like XP11.6. Some of the clouds and rain graphics are truly awful. The scenery looks like something from a chap video game from the '90s. It's such a shame. I used XP11 a lot with tons of addons and was really hoping that Laminar had managed to pull off something improved given the long years they have had in development, but no. Laminar seems too dependent on Austin, who, as brilliant as he is, can't do it all. They missed their shot and I , much to my chagrin, won't be buying XP12 unless something changes.
MFS has a very bad flight model and its addons are highly unrealistic, the fenix is a pretty bad addon, flight factor a320 is better in every way, and the graphics of mfs 2020 are good but unrealistic. Over saturated graphics, with blurry ground textures, and bad airport models, Xplane still wins in the realism category.
I REALLY appreciated your real world insights and very detailed analysis of the updates etc. I'm in IT and your notes on consistency of the pop outs (which ones pop out and which do not), using a Ctrl or Alt click to pop them out and from a UX perspective, these are quite big things for them to add. This is early access so hopefully they can bring that consistency in before the full/final (what's final these days) release. For that same reason (IT experience), I disagree with your perspective that the Interface is too similar. The most painful thing I have to do everytime Microsoft brings a new version of Windows or Office is to re-learn how to find some bread and butter things, and how to help various users (professional and family) to figure out how to do the stuff they always "used to" be able to do. I want to fly a sim. I don't want to have to learn a new interface. You mentioned this in passing that the X-Plane interface is good so perhaps that's why they kept it. I would say that's huge! Make improvements where needed, but don't overhaul something just for the shine. For me, the X-Plane 11 interface was a lot nicer than 9 and 10 before, so I am THRILLED that the interface has had so little change. Regardless, your analysis and reasoning is brilliant and extremely helpful and made me think about things in ways that I perhaps would not have. Have a great day!
Thanks Russ. Your review was honest and fair. I have had MSFS since the DOS days, but had to drop it when it required a Playstation account, and for you to sign in every time you wanted to run the simulator. I waited and got XPlane, and found clicking a desktop icon to start refreshing, and I don't have to fiddle with it nearly as much, not to mention having to reinstall MSFS per start up. MSFS got really nasty.
Yes, $65 for MSFS plus an monthly fee to use it adds up to over $120 a year every year just to fly it. No thanks. Have X Plane 11 and enjoy that very much and it is on my hard drive so it is mine. Looking at reviews of X Plane 12 and so far it is good. The only thing that bothered me in X Plane 11 is the trees, but that is only up close not flying at altitude. This review has helped a lot.
I have been flying around in the demo version, essentially I am a newcomer to Xplane entirely. I am not at all convinced by all this talk of the flight model, to me this feels like flying on rails. Perhaps the demo is somehow running in an easy mode, turns and rudder feel extremely smooth.. like flying in a perfectly stable air mass. In the real world at low VFR altitudes during the day, you are mostly going to experience pockets of warmer air causing some turbulance and disturbance. MSFS models this pretty well I have to say. It does not appear that Xplane does. MSFS feels closer to reality when flying around VFR, and obviously the visuals are not even close. So my initial impression is that Xplane 12 is great for easy flying with that super stable air, but it appears to me that people rave about the flight model because it is very simplistic comparatively to MSFS. I have more real world flying hours than simulator hours incidentally, so take my opinion for what it is, just my initial impression.
nope... that's default aircraft for ya... when people talk about flight model, it depends on the effort the developer puts in to make it good... really doesn't matter the simulator anymore. It just appears that because of the longer period of time, X Plane has produced more flight model favoured aircraft (Like air foil labs C172) It'll come to MSFS, it'll take time.
@@starflexthe2nd I am very ready to admit I am wrong, I guess I am posting my initial impressions with a touch of disappointment. Perhaps I do need to look at the addon aircraft to see if that changes my mind. I have not yet purchased Xplane but probably will.
5:05 I was expecting a much more beautiful setting, a more lifelike landscape, this is very "plastic"! Oylan, it's like X-plne 11 has been a bit jazzed up, but that's it! For me the feeling is important, not just the technical simulation precision!
Flew into KMSP last night in the pmdg 737 on MSFS and it was damn near real looking. ILS aproach and the runway appeared right at minimums. I just can get over how this still looks like it was from 2017 compared to msfs. Yes I paid 60 bucks for the 737 but that is probably as close to a real Boeing sim there is so it makes the whole thing super realistic.
Right now VR in x-plane 12 is truly horrible! I am sure it will improve but, for now, what a disappointment... The crystal clarity of the Varjo Aero merely serves to highlight how truly outdated and dreadful the graphics are....
@@Drmerlin604 XP12 VR on my Aero is really bad. the tracking is not smooth jumping at times and with black areas at the sides at times. What is your experience?
Couldn't have said it any better myself! Hopefully the community comes together instead of jumping on either the MSFS train or XPlane train. Looking forward to the xplane VR review soon.
MSFS FOREVER - JK had to throw that in there to mess with you. Xplane 12 looks stunning. My pc can run 11 at decent medium settings 😅 but there’s no chance my pic could run MSFS2020. Not sure if it could run xplane 12 either 😢
It's kind of unfortunate that it'll always be a tug of war between the two, even back with FSX and XP8/9. Both have their ups and downs, but both also have their right to exist. Like many hobbies, flight simming is a subjective one. Two people won't like the same for the same reasons. But what irks me the most is the fact that neither can accept the other, so it always results in arguments about which is better, and why.
The problem is that affording both sims is practically impossible, especially with those $100 addons Those bandwagons are divided strong and it will stay that way as long as it’s hard to have both sims as the common man
I might wait a few months but I’ll definitely pick up XP12. I echo other peoples sentiments that I’d be happy using both XP12 and MSFS. I honestly don’t see them as naturals competitors anymore because they appeal to different crowds of people who look for different things in sims. It’s nice to have a choice, people! There is nothing wrong with that!
@@masflow09 Not sure where you got that from. MSFS has an extremely realistic flight model no matter what X-Plane fanboys say. A lot of MSFS _planes_ don't have realistic flight models, that is where people get the assumption that MSFS itself is unrealistic.
@@masflow09 I got you bro. It's really annoying how many X Plane fanboys act like MSFS isn't a "serious" flight sim just because it has better graphics. It's like they can't process a sim having good graphics and simulation at the same time.
Thanks for this nice early looks at XP-12. I think I'll wait a little while before jumping in on this. Really good review though, good to see the features and the weather generation. Nicely done!
Had this come out in 2019 this would have been a much bigger deal, but in 2022 it misses the mark. That being said, it's still an improvement over XP11.
X-Plane gives me what I want from a simulator and this beta is a nice evolution. I bought it without hesitation. There are issues of course but that's to be expected for early access. Nice video!
I've owned every flight sim for the last 35 years and am always excited for the release of any of them. I prefer not to get involved in the this or that between them all but since MSFS release I've been pretty exclusively using MSFS & DCS while XP11 took a back seat (really back seat I guess, haven't played it in over a year). "XP12 is like an old friend" is very telling in describing a product that has just been released. I think what the Laminar Research team has done with XP over the years is incredible (for such a small team) but I think it will be difficult for them going forward to compete with the likes of Microsoft and the resources available to them.
people seem to prefer xplane physics or other games compare to microsoft flight sim, even if its a smaller company they might get more and more people coming from microsoft flight sim
@@supernova4760 Which planes do you fly in XP12? I was quite excited about XP12 to start with but I'm really disappointed with the add-ons like FF, Magknight, SGS etc. they don't seem to care about fixing their bugs once they've got the money. In my opinion there are only Toliss and Laminar airliners that are flyable. I have flown the A350 a bit but it's just hit and miss whether it follows the flight plan. It's a shame because the simulator itself is very good. It takes the fun out of it when things don't work.
Very good review... I'm building a sim now. Ive always used MSFS (since the early 90's)... But those helping me build my sim are suggesting XP12. Which is a hard choice for me, mainly bc I have so much admiration for MSFS. This said, he also suggested that I can run them both? (2) and chose between them at will... I'm a student pilot with 70 hours, just about to complete my private, so predominantly my sim will be for practice and IFR training. Thanks again for the great review. This is very helpful to someone juggling to decide.
I've been an Xplane user since ver 4 or 5 (when it came with a paper booklet) all the way up to 11. MSFS user since the early days (mid 1980s). Love them both in different ways, but no way will I be paying 60 bucks for XP12. Looks like a minor upgrade to XP11 based on the few videos I've seen.
It's realllly disappointing. I've been waiting for XP12 for so long, and it feels like Laminar has just been twiddling their thumbs if this is all we got. I know it's early access but I hope Laminar doesn't think that's a free pass to trickle in the improvements at a slower pace now that some cash is flowing. I dunno, this is the first time I've ever seen a flight sim in early access.
You can't honestly say xp12 has better systems than MSFS and then show the A330 with a Boeing fmc 2 minutes later. At least the default A320 in MSFS has an Airbus FMGC in it... For other planes MSFS will get the G1000 NXi by default which is pretty much a 1:1 of the real G1000 and it will be available in every default plane using the G1000. For third-party there are very high fidelity aircraft available such as PMDG 737 and Fenix A320. The Fenix A320 is on par with FlightFactor A320, and you get all the graphics benefits of MSFS on top. I'm not saying XP12 is a bad sim, but don't say things that just isn't true as people blindly repeat it over and over even if there is no facts backing it.
The problem Xeno is a lot of folks are stuck in the past. They see X-Plane 10 or 11 say as always having better system modeling than FSX. The truth is MSFS has shown itself to be a capable platform to support study level aircraft as good as anything you'll see in DCS World and X-Plane and with the introduction of iniBuilds adding study level default aircraft and Working Title updating the default systems you really can't say MSFS is left wanting when it comes to system modelling.
MSFS G1000 isn't realidtic at all. It can't even replicate same collors. Xplane has better physics, i bet it is more stable. FS2020 has a bad interface, has some bugs yet that exists since launch day.
With more than 1000 hours logged with real NXi, MSFS’s G1000 is not real and for some control parts, X-Plane is even still better and more real than MSFS… plus the map and reposition functions, X-Plane is still way more closer to training level sim than MSFS, it’s a good game but talking about sim not really :/
@@apreaze he's talking about g1000 nxi addon u definitely haven't tried it tho that's for sure cause from what u r saying I don't even know if u have tried the sim at least not any time close
Thanks for this overview, Russ. I'm actually delighted that Laminar didn't go off the rails redesigning everything. I tried the demo last night and I really appreciate the sense of continuity. I liked that I could just get on with it. I was blown away by the new lighting, the variety in weather depiction and the crispness of textures considering my middle-of-the-road graphics card. The forests are lush and everything sits much better in the landscape. I did get a laugh on Reddit yesterday when some posted a picture of default Vancouver in MSFS and X-plane 12. There is no competition there, but I've never really flown any sim right out of the box. I'm an aftermarket addon guy through and through. The multidisciplinary nature of creating a sim makes it impossible to devote resources to creating high fidelity planes AND a good sim. I just need Laminar to do what they always have. Focus on the underlying platform, in essence the flight model and leaving things nice and open for third parties to offer various possibilities, paid or otherwise. Enjoy your flights!
Perhaps that models real life more realistically? Small ariplanes can be quite hard to control. I bought the full copy and was very impressed by the handling of the J3. I also bought the M7 Maule and that handles very well too. In a real taildragger you get the tail up and then stay on the main wheels using the rudder for directional control until flying speed is reached. This is pretty good in XP12, so far. The challenge will be to see how the Stinson performs, it is terrible in XP11.
It is you and the equipment used, planes don't drive straight down runway, physics pulls it in one direction or other. XP models that properly, MSFS does not if the plane maker doesn't force it into the lookups. So if you aren't used to that and with the lack of force feed back on cheaper gear, you will have a hard time.
Excellent review. I agree with your opinions here. I bought it to support Laminar Research but was left a bit underwhelmed. Don't get me wrong, it is definitely improving on XP11 but visually it is not much better. Especially scenery. That said, I don't like MSFS, as to me it feels wrong.
Excellent video, Russ! Liked and Subscribed. I concur with your summary suggestions for X-Plane window pop-outs, as well as your assessment of terminal area weather. I disagree with your comment about "learning the landmarks of a certain area" in Microsoft Flight Simulator," but not for anything having to do with one flight simulator over another. I "held" roughly 230 hours in MSFS before joining the Air Force in the late 1980s. Indeed, the sim helped familiarize me with procedures required in flight, primarily the details of various SIDs, STARs and IAPs. Rather, with 2,500 hours of flight time in two USAF aircraft, including roughly a thousand hours of low-level, visual navigation, I understand all too well the importance of keeping a running mental DR of one's position and attitude. Flight simulators can lead one into a false sense confidence and/or security that rapidly disappears in the real world when landmarks are different than expected or obscured by weather in ways that are not depicted in a flight simulator. Even the real world can change enough from one day to the next to be misleading and/or disorienting! For this reason, I always encourage newly minted pilots to continue their training by working towards their instrument rating, not as a way of "pushing the weather envelope," but rather, as a way of conducting all flights in a safer, more methodical, well-practiced and reliable manner.
Thank you for this. I only got into flight simming with MSFS (I did do a little in XPlane 11, but own little 3rd party scenery for it). I fly in VR and have seen the useability of VR in MSFS decline since about SU8, things like toolbar windows opening half size, and their positions not being remembered, really affect the experience for me. Therefore, reading the SU10 Beta VR forum is making me wonder if SU10 is actually going to break VR further, and fix nothing, and if XPlane 12 might be the way forward for me.
I used to be BIG into X-Plane 11, but when MSFS 2020 came out, that completely changed my perspective in flight simulators. X-Plane 12 is cool, and definetly a big upgrade from X-Plane 11, but for me it still doesn't even come close to being compared to MSFS 2020
Trees and weather are good but xp 12 needs more polish. I like the flight physics. But I think in the age of Google Maps in 2 or 5 years XP will have a very hard time without satellite scenery. Currently using MSFS and XP, cant decide.
I know a good flight game is NOT just about scenery eye candy but its just impossible for me to ignore that aspect after MSFS. XP11 gave me many happy years and I still use it alongside MSFS now and then. The issue I have (again i speak for myself only) is that this feels like a huge XP11 upgrade and not a brand new title in the series. Kinda like what Euro Truck Simulator did - they did a huge upgrade to the game engine, graphics, lighting etc. This is what XP12 feels like to me. It just looks the same as 11. For sure there are improvements but Im looking at it as a whole and it just feels so same-y. I have XP11 modded and looking great. I also hardly use it so will pass on XP12. Great video thanks!
msfs feels like it's going to be the go to simulator for the next 10 years while xplane 12 just feels like it has a lifespan of maybe 4 years until they release xp13
@@StreagleEagle depends it has more elements for arcade style gamers but it is a very professional software when you turn the realism settings up. Especially with pmdg 737 and the fenix a320. Graphics are beautiful as well.
Thanks for the great review. I have not flown X-plane, and am considering dumping MSFS due to Asobo's lack of recognizing user knowledge and ignoring bug reports. Asobo only addresses issues by vote count, leaving unsolved bugs for users to fix themselves. There are just too many "bugs" to call it a released product. But, I absolutely love the planes with Garmin Avionics. As you know, it is mostly still usable.
Thank you Russ for a considered review. I get a bit annoyed with some comments on various fora bagging either X-Plane or MSFS. I would like to hope that most simmers can enjoy both. Let's face it, if you have a computer that will run one of them it will probably run the other, and the cost of the product, at least in base form, should not be prohibitive for most simmers. I can drink Coke OR Pepsi (in moderation of course!)
Something people don’t talk about is with a lot of addons, MSFS can take 20 mins to load and randomly crash. Xpane loads in 5 seconds and is very stable. I run Xplane on my Linux PC and MSFS on Windows.
Hilarious! That skidding sound hasn’t changed all that much since my old X-Plane 7 days. I’ve always thought the weather was superior in X-Plane. I’m glad to see the autogen scenery has improved and makes suburbs look more like suburbs. I remember in X-Plane 7 the area around San Bernardino airport looking like farmland during the Renaissance Period. I’d imagine it’s much better these days.
Yes but as a firmer x-plane fanboy they have a loooong way to go to compete with MSFS’s scenery . I usually clone the sound file for wet skid and rename it for the default dry skid to stop that infernal noise. I have been flying over 60 years have never heard the nose wheel screeching at all. I have skidded it on a snow covered runway but no sounds.
Just don't expect the scenery to hold up doing bush flying along rivers and coastlines. X-Plane scenery where land meets water is STILL all angles and straight lines, making unrealistic rivers and beaches everywhere. Same goes for roads. When Austin announced that XP12 wouldn't use real world scenery but would have improved autogen - I was at least expecting that they'd work on a better way of modelling coastlines, rivers and roads. This is probably part of the reason people say X-Plane 12 feels more like X-Plane 11.60 There's absolutely no way I'm paying for a half arsed upgrade.
I have MSFS2020, and I would love for Xplane to do well, but I think this is the end unfortunately, they no longer have better flight models and the scenery really is MSFS holy grail and as much as people love planes they love scenery as well
the whole point of x-plane is the flight model.. i tried msfs, tried with several different scenarios, different flight models, different everything, it just feels more consumer grade.. i fly real planes, xp feels more realistic physics wise
I have used MSFS a few times but not this. One thing that stood out to me watching this video is that the pilot's view from the cockpit seems much better in X-Plane 12 than i seem to get in MSFS. Unless this is to do with my lack of experience with the settings in MSFS? But the view straight ahead out the windscreen seem so much better in this.
The only reason you'd buy this over MSFS 20 is loyalty, its like me buying AMD over Intel, its because I know more about AMD well and will stay loyal to AMD!
I disagree. Some people, mainly serious sim pilots, or real pilots, will buy X-Plane because of the physics that are built in and the superior flight modelling. Others will buy MSFS because of the fantastic scenery and not be so concerned about accurate handling. Some people will have both and maybe some others as well. It all depends what you want from the sim. I don't have the time or money to invest in 2 or 3 sims + addons so I will stick with X-Plane. If I had thought that MSFS would be better than buying XP12 then I would have considered it but the reviews I have read would suggest otherwise. But, that is only my opinion, of course. YMMV 🙂
IMO the real crux is this, XPlane is more focused on the simulation physics itself and then generates generic world objects for the most part (probably a cost cutter as a partnership with satellite imagery isn’t cheap I’m sure) but the objects it generates are high def and look good right up close albeit not always accurate. MSFS is gorgeous out of the box but a lot up close doesn’t look good and seems to have spread out there efforts all over the simulation and some (usually real world pilots) say it’s flight physics aren’t quite there. I enjoy both but I’m not a real pilot so I do prefer the real world of MSFS, it encourages exploration. I can look at a real map, see something and fly there, very cool.
One thing to keep in mind is most of us have been flying 11 with add-ons. Many will be comparing out of the box 12 to hundreds of dollars of add-ons in 11. If 12 is marginally better in beta with no 3rd party add-ons, that’s valuable to me and well worth the $50 or whatever it costs. That’s less than the price of some of my favorite aircraft.
What kinds of add ons are you referring to? I have stock XP11 and also msfs2020 but I haven’t purchased any add ons for x plane. What kind of stuff is out there?
I strongly believe that its a reskinned XP11. I think Laminar was caught behind the 8-ball with MSFS taking over. UI is almost identical with XP12. I get this is pre-alpha but this is just bad. More of an update as opposed to a new sim.
Thanks Russ. I agree with all your observations. One item I have discovered so far is the FPS with 3 monitors is poor to terrible depending on the airplane, clouds saturation vs XP11 Vulcan.
I found the same thing to be true with my setup. I have a 3 year old i7, with a GTX 1060 graphics card, and I get 8 fps or so, whereas with XP11 I can get 25 or better. What specs do you have?
@@ShadowAlmighty I have an I7700k with a GTX 1080TI and 11 gbs o the card. I moved my overclock up to 4.6 ghz and that made the situation much better. I am getting around 20 22 fps average now with it going to 27 when not in the most challenging senery.
@@jewhipp98 Thanks for the reply. Unfortunately my computer is not capable of overclocking, but I'm glad to know that faster processor speed means better frame rates. It really seems like both MSFS and XP12 are just too much for current computers. It always seems that way. Build a better computer and new software will outreach it!
Fix for Nav 2 VOR obs knob. "Issue with VOR 2 OBS not turning can be fixed two ways. 1. Replace the vor2_ag.obj file with the same file from XP 11, or just go into the file with Notepad and at the bottom replace all the words "copilot" with "pilot" and save. Desktop\X-Plane 12\Aircraft\Laminar Research\Cessna 172 SP\objects\instruments\vor_glideslope_adf\vor2_ag.obj"
It sucks unless you have a real high end computer, FS2020 is way better. X plane 12 is an upgrade to X plane 11, not really a big deal, save your money.
My biggest problem with MSFS2020 is that, in VR, the cockpit has a lot of stutter as I look around (I'm running a pretty beefy system with an 10th gen i7, 32 GB of RAM, and an RTX 3090). Not only is this immersion breaking, but it's extremely distracting. I'm hoping that X-Plane 12 will offer a better experience, especially since it is regarded as the better platform to use to augment flight training.
Tnx Russ ..what about AP & Runways curvature, and I'm wondering how long it will take for our oddons, plugin, & Hardware to be migrated to the new XP12 ????
I really enjoyed this video. Looking to try xplane for my first time ever in just a few weeks. Starting with xp12. As I want to use it for flight training fun.
To me x-plane 12 upgrade haven't suprised me, the hazy sky is still bothers me like the older versions, the frame rates are dropped more, syneries are not much changed, but there are more aircraft added, which it isn't cheered me up because I have a homemade simulator wich is cessna 172 , which I stocked with, there are not instruments popups added, outdoor view options are still as it was before, front view still doesn't show the "hood, and prop only", and side views don't show "wings only" , I'm just thinking if upgrading to x-plane 12 has worth for me. I wish they could at last followed the interest of x-plane users. Hopefully x-plane 12 will add more updates in future to satisfy x-plane lovers than I will buy more x-plane products.😉👍
This was the public beta over a year ago. Slowly they have worked out the bugs and I understand that version 12.1 soon to be released has solved the blocky shadows and anti-aliasing issues and it looks really good. Still not the MSFS scenery realism but a great, more serious training simulator. No music and explosions and no forced updates. I am due for a follow on review.
Hey, Russ! Thanks for the video. At about 11:20, you make the comment, "For pilot training and certified simulation, XPLANE has a real leg up (over MSFS)." Are you still referring to the weather features? or something else? Are you comparing it to the latest version of MS Flight Simulator? I'm a student pilot and almost daily I here an experienced pilot say, "If you want pretty graphics, choose MSFS, but if you want realism, choose XPlane." (I would argue that realistic graphics is part of realism). Having more than 200 hours in MSFS in parallel with my real training and a few hours in XPlane, I'm not sure what they mean. However, I just invested heavily in an XPlane 12 simulator for my flying club, and I really want to be an XPlane fan like the other guys. Please help me out and tell me specifically why it's superior for flight training. Thanks again - I really appreciate your time.
wondering the same thing. I am not a real world pilot but I wonder if X-plane early in their development got a partnership with the FAA/certified flying schools and those have remained today. despite some glaring unrealistic aspects? MSFS if far superior in how realistic it sounds and looks for VFR. In addition X-plane has all kinds of flickering issues including night lighting, and oddly placed autogen and unrealistic lighting placement which I wouldn't see as helpful for learning to fly IRL.
Nice quick video. I have mixed feelings as well. I find the ground handling pretty bad w/o serious adjustment curves especially on the brakes, I reduced the highest brake power to 50%, and the rudder functions need softening as well. This is especially true on the 172. It will be interesting when we get some upgrades from 3rd parties. I think the planes look good both inside and outside, but scenery is hard to take once you are used to FS2020. I see myself using XP12 for IFR training and probably basic skills like stick and rudder proficiency. But as far as GA VFR I don't think I will use XP12, spoiled by FS2020. I did install a few ORBX True Earth regions and airports, and my frame rates really took a beating down low, and even with those additions FS2020 still is way superior IMHO. I like paying LR as I would hate for XP to die, competition is great, and I am sure XP12 will mature and it still has a significant advantage as a real training platform and for cockpit builders. Thanks keep your vids coming...
Hmm. Since I change from xp11 to MSFS maybe I just miss the physics and "feel" of the physics of X-Plane even tho I like the physics of MSFS and it's continued evolution. I will love some of the features like the more precise weather configuration for training. Even tho, it's a welcome competition and will keep both sims moving forward
HI Russ great video as usual. About your monitors can you confirm that it is 3 televisions ? If it is what refresh rate is it setup to ? Thanks for an answer
And also if you can give us what brand and model of television. Finally do you know if we can find something to avoid most of the reflection between the screens ? thanks
I got MFS and love it, but it made me miss the accessibility and big customization of xp11. Sometimes mfs doesn’t let you do a certain thing or it’s UI is confusing, but it’s graphics and scenery are amazing. Another thing is MFS is 100% payware as where in xp you can download pretty much anything for free and have fun. I hope Xplane improves, I would love if MFS and xp had a baby
Good and honest review as always ... from the online reviews I've seen, I can't say I'm overly impressed with version 12 so far. The weather effects do look great but the scenery is still Meh, the saving grace of X-Plane is it's superior flight modeling. Time to put my X-Plane "fanboyism" aside and give MSFS a good whirl, hopefully the initial teething problems are pretty much over with that sim.
Maybe it feels more realistic for you, but technically the msfs flight model is far more realistic in pretty much every way. Opinions of professional pilots are divided on how good both replicate real life feelings, but on paper msfs is superior for sure.
Does this have a in-built around the world scenery or like x-plane 11 jus a few miles around certain airports .. I purchased X-plane 11 which had a ridiculous price and was shocked to see that it dint have those around the world sceneries like MSFS.. it was left to the user to download from 3rd party programs.. With in a week I dumped 11.. hope that's not the case here.. ???
Not sure what you mean by around the world scenery but both XP11 and XP12 have scenery coverage for the entire world. You only need to run the installer found in the X-Plane folder and select “add scenery”. Then you click the regions on a map that contain the areas you want to include. Since it can take a while to download scenery the demo only contains a small area of scenery. While the XP scenery is much improved and has a few features that are better than MSFS, it is not photo realistic and can’t compare visually. Of course XP is aimed more at serious pilot training so scenery is designed to be plausible but not exact. You can add photo scenery to XP using Ortho4XP which is free but it takes a very large hard drive and lots of downloading to cover extended regions. But XP does include worldwide scenery coverage and has since at least XP9 when I started using it
Is it me or do others find the cockpit controls and display graphics a little blurry - not sharp enough until you zoom in or use pop outs when they are there?
Hi Russ, I started watching your channel a few months ago. I got back in to flight sim again with the Xbox. Well I picked up a new computer last week to try out X-Plane 12. I am having issues with my joy stick and the flight controls. Only the hat switch works for moving around the view. Can you make a video about calibrating a joy stick for X- plane 12? Thank you so much!! I have not been able to find much on line for help with X-Plane 12. I am an MTC guy with a Major airline and I do love planes. Thank you.
X-Plane has always excelled in the most realistic flight model, best for real world training, based on airfoil, weight and balance to the real world specifications, and Microsoft has always had the best eye candy, outside of the Microsoft eye candy, the ATC in fs9 and fsx was a coding genius, controlling AI and player, I was really hoping that it would have been ported over to the newest version, but I believe X-Plane and Microsoft deserve support, both are good and I own every version of both ever released.
Microsoft needs to purchase the night lighting effects engine from Laminar and call it a day. There’s no room for more than one consumer based flight sim.
Thanks for the video. What 3rd party enhancements that bring MSFS closer to X-Plane as a simulation were you referring to here, do you maybe have another video on that?
![[MSFS vs XP12] Thoughts after the six flights I did](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Bd5hnl3WBBs/mqdefault.jpg)
![[MSFS vs XP12] Thoughts after the six flights I did](/img/tr.png)
I think that xplane 12 being so similar to xplane 11 in terms of structure of files and other things like that is really important since it means a lot of plugins or modifications are compatible from the start without being forced to wait for everything to become compatible
As a real pilot who uses my sim mostly for IFR practice, the weather in XP 11 always annoyed me because it was never accurate from a visibility or ceiling perspective. But since XP 11 was so much more realistic and accurate from a G1000 systems perspective, MSFS never did it for me. The weather and cloud updates were the one thing I was really hoping for in XP 12 and am really glad they made significant improvements to the weather. Thanks for the review!
What do think about the new G1000 Nxi from working title that is being added to the base sim in Sim Update 10? Seems to have more features than the xplane 11 version. Have you tried it yet?
MFS2020 is not really a simulator at all it's a game... For me it's X-Plane forever but since my bad GPU I have to still on X-Plane 11. Btw for small VFR flight it's true MFS2020 can be nice.... even if flight physic is kinda trash..
@@torusx8564 hahah. I had a good chuckle at your ridiculous statement about MSFS not being a simulator. But if it makes you feel better you are entitled to your opinion, regardless of how silly. As far as I'm concern, xplane 11 and MSFS are both good simulators. For me MSFS is hands down the most immersive simulator on the market and will continue to be for the foreseeable future. It is great that xplane is trying to keep things interesting with competition but they have a long way to go with xplane 12 to make it good.
@@ryanwright3965 Bruh... I dont like saying MFS is a sim mainly because only gamers play it. It was created for amusement and not to simulate a real aircraft for pilot training instead of X-Plane known as a real flight simulator for professional. Flight physic is much better in X-Plane than MFS2020. MFS is only graphics you dont have a lot option like in X-Plane. Btw the way u say people are silly without knowing them show your incompetence in this field. I hold there arguement from a real pilot "father dane" on UA-cam. Graphics are really not important for a flight sim.
@@torusx8564 So when you fly in the real world you dont see nothing from the time you start the aircraft to the time you park all you do is look at instruments? Do you know xplane without hardware and an instructor is not faa certified right? How long XP has been out vs MSFS? A lot of developers are ditching xp and p3d and guess where they going. To say MSFS is only used by gamers is so stupid. I guess Fenix, PMdG are fake. I guess the new crosswind in msfs is fake too. So tired of these chair simmers thinking they know it all.
Agreed with some comments in the sense that currently it is not enough of an upgrade from XP 11. Will probably be worth taking a look at in a year time.
Yeah really had to tell at this first beta.... I was looking for the big picture and overlooking the smaller issues I assume they will work out. Time will tell.
I like your Videos Russ! As you, (obviously) I have logged a couple of hours as a commercial and AF pilot. Right now and even more so with XP12 I believe we are truly on the edge of a new era of flight training. Currently, I am rated on the Challenger 650 and when I look at X-Aviation’s Challenger Simulation for XP11 I must say it is really stunning, unbelievable …
What an exciting time to be alive. Thanks for the video and sharing your thoughts on the current state of the sims. I will continue to support both platforms !
Wow the graphics make me recall my FSX time in my old laptop, so outdated!
exactly thats the main issue. and while graphics arnt everything i think one of the big draws is realism thats what made ms flight sim 2020 so popular and 2024 is really going to give xplane a run for its money. .
I was excited for this game; but it's just not enough of an upgrade from XP11 to justify buying it. It just seems like a slight graphics upgrade with a few more default planes for 60 dollars. Compared to FS2020, I would barely open this game, especially considering I'm seeing reports that the CFD simulation on the Cessna 172 is highly realistic, and more realistic than XP11. Along with that, products like the Fenix just set a new bar for flight simulation addons.
I think they dropped the ball with this one. I don't see where the development time has gone into. PBR textures, HDR lighting? We had HDR lighting starting with Half-Life 2: Lost coast. That came out in 2005!
PBR textures are great, but the game still looks undersaturated in some parts. It's also very heavily aliased.
It just seems like they didn't hire enough people who know what they're doing when it comes to visuals.
The clouds are also a nice addition, but they're very low resolution. They stick out.
So we've got very little improvement across the board. When it comes to graphics, in every single metric, FS2020 has Xp12 beat, from a technical and aesthetic standpoint. When it comes to physics, stock, Xp11 / 12 beats fs2020; with mods, Fs2020 is tied with XP, beats it, or lags slightly behind it, depending on the category. In scenery, FS2020 beats xplane. In weather, FS2020 beats xplane. It's simply a more advanced simulation.
Couple that with the just absolute flood of updates we've been getting with FS2020, the storm of addons, and the sheer visual quality difference, I just don't see a reason to get xp12, other than to maybe train on a specific aircraft, or unless you need one specific plane, or if you like long-haul flights specifically.
I'm disappointed. The community at large seems disappointed. I'm glad they released it. But I'm not happy with what they released. This sort of stuff would literally constitute two or three FREE Sim Updates in fs2020, and yet they're selling it for 60 dollars?
There's also the 40th anniversary update for FS2020 adding even MORE free planes. It's ridiculous how much Microsoft and Asobo are spoiling us with this game.
Anyway, rant over. I really, really hope they get their act together in a few more updates, because this is just disappointing. I was hoping for so much more than this, I was hoping for competition between Laminar and Microsoft. It's just not happening.
Nice video, though!
I understand that they completely revamped a lot of stuff under the hood, and that they will continually improve the sim now that they have the base stuff in place. But yeah for now the full price isn't justified. Maybe if they had some discount for the early adopters. Do note that Laminar doesn't have the resources that Asobo and MS have, so you can't compare the speed of development. In some regards, MSFS is still lacking some features that they don't seem to care about.
@concodroid I agree with almost everything you say. The only thing XP does nicely is the "feel" of flying.
I too cannot see where all the dev time has gone. "Under the hood"? Lets not forget, the last 2 years of XP11 leading up to .5 was "under the hood" conversion into Vulcan. This just feels like XP11.6. Some of the clouds and rain graphics are truly awful. The scenery looks like something from a chap video game from the '90s.
It's such a shame. I used XP11 a lot with tons of addons and was really hoping that Laminar had managed to pull off something improved given the long years they have had in development, but no. Laminar seems too dependent on Austin, who, as brilliant as he is, can't do it all. They missed their shot and I , much to my chagrin, won't be buying XP12 unless something changes.
i dont see any proper hdr here, there are no tone/exposure mapping, luminance bloom, and ldr ... which should be basic for hdr lighting
MFS has a very bad flight model and its addons are highly unrealistic, the fenix is a pretty bad addon, flight factor a320 is better in every way, and the graphics of mfs 2020 are good but unrealistic. Over saturated graphics, with blurry ground textures, and bad airport models, Xplane still wins in the realism category.
I agree
My MSFS does not have "blobs" for scenery when I get close. It only does that if you have slow internet.
I REALLY appreciated your real world insights and very detailed analysis of the updates etc. I'm in IT and your notes on consistency of the pop outs (which ones pop out and which do not), using a Ctrl or Alt click to pop them out and from a UX perspective, these are quite big things for them to add. This is early access so hopefully they can bring that consistency in before the full/final (what's final these days) release.
For that same reason (IT experience), I disagree with your perspective that the Interface is too similar. The most painful thing I have to do everytime Microsoft brings a new version of Windows or Office is to re-learn how to find some bread and butter things, and how to help various users (professional and family) to figure out how to do the stuff they always "used to" be able to do. I want to fly a sim. I don't want to have to learn a new interface. You mentioned this in passing that the X-Plane interface is good so perhaps that's why they kept it. I would say that's huge! Make improvements where needed, but don't overhaul something just for the shine. For me, the X-Plane 11 interface was a lot nicer than 9 and 10 before, so I am THRILLED that the interface has had so little change.
Regardless, your analysis and reasoning is brilliant and extremely helpful and made me think about things in ways that I perhaps would not have. Have a great day!
Thanks Russ. Your review was honest and fair. I have had MSFS since the DOS days, but had to drop it when it required a Playstation account, and for you to sign in every time you wanted to run the simulator. I waited and got XPlane, and found clicking a desktop icon to start refreshing, and I don't have to fiddle with it nearly as much, not to mention having to reinstall MSFS per start up. MSFS got really nasty.
Yes, $65 for MSFS plus an monthly fee to use it adds up to over $120 a year every year just to fly it. No thanks. Have X Plane 11 and enjoy that very much and it is on my hard drive so it is mine. Looking at reviews of X Plane 12 and so far it is good. The only thing that bothered me in X Plane 11 is the trees, but that is only up close not flying at altitude. This review has helped a lot.
I have been flying around in the demo version, essentially I am a newcomer to Xplane entirely. I am not at all convinced by all this talk of the flight model, to me this feels like flying on rails. Perhaps the demo is somehow running in an easy mode, turns and rudder feel extremely smooth.. like flying in a perfectly stable air mass. In the real world at low VFR altitudes during the day, you are mostly going to experience pockets of warmer air causing some turbulance and disturbance. MSFS models this pretty well I have to say. It does not appear that Xplane does. MSFS feels closer to reality when flying around VFR, and obviously the visuals are not even close. So my initial impression is that Xplane 12 is great for easy flying with that super stable air, but it appears to me that people rave about the flight model because it is very simplistic comparatively to MSFS. I have more real world flying hours than simulator hours incidentally, so take my opinion for what it is, just my initial impression.
nope... that's default aircraft for ya...
when people talk about flight model, it depends on the effort the developer puts in to make it good... really doesn't matter the simulator anymore.
It just appears that because of the longer period of time, X Plane has produced more flight model favoured aircraft (Like air foil labs C172)
It'll come to MSFS, it'll take time.
In VR, turbulence is the devil and causes poor framerates.
@@starflexthe2nd I am very ready to admit I am wrong, I guess I am posting my initial impressions with a touch of disappointment. Perhaps I do need to look at the addon aircraft to see if that changes my mind. I have not yet purchased Xplane but probably will.
@@wingandaprayer883 You are probably not wrong! The selling point is the flight model, why would the developer let someone else do the modeling?
You are right but brace for getting a lot of rant from X-Plane fanboys.
5:05 I was expecting a much more beautiful setting, a more lifelike landscape, this is very "plastic"! Oylan, it's like X-plne 11 has been a bit jazzed up, but that's it! For me the feeling is important, not just the technical simulation precision!
You state it well,”plastic”. It just feels a bit artificial looking compared to MSFS.
If you watch other reviews, on max settings it barely renders shadows correctly. Disappointing.
Flew into KMSP last night in the pmdg 737 on MSFS and it was damn near real looking. ILS aproach and the runway appeared right at minimums. I just can get over how this still looks like it was from 2017 compared to msfs. Yes I paid 60 bucks for the 737 but that is probably as close to a real Boeing sim there is so it makes the whole thing super realistic.
great stuff russ! im getting back into x plane after having taken a break from it after my multi engine checkride! cant wait for this to be complete!
I will use both, just like I did with 11 and MSFS. Although I like flying VFR, overall I have always preferred X-Plane.
Right now VR in x-plane 12 is truly horrible! I am sure it will improve but, for now, what a disappointment... The crystal clarity of the Varjo Aero merely serves to highlight how truly outdated and dreadful the graphics are....
@@Drmerlin604 XP12 VR on my Aero is really bad. the tracking is not smooth jumping at times and with black areas at the sides at times. What is your experience?
Couldn't have said it any better myself! Hopefully the community comes together instead of jumping on either the MSFS train or XPlane train. Looking forward to the xplane VR review soon.
MSFS FOREVER - JK had to throw that in there to mess with you.
Xplane 12 looks stunning. My pc can run 11 at decent medium settings 😅 but there’s no chance my pic could run MSFS2020.
Not sure if it could run xplane 12 either 😢
@@HotTakeHQ actually i ran both at similar settings, and XP12 ran much worse, and looked much worse at the same quality settings
@@ravenn22 hmmmmm 😬 interesting
It's kind of unfortunate that it'll always be a tug of war between the two, even back with FSX and XP8/9. Both have their ups and downs, but both also have their right to exist. Like many hobbies, flight simming is a subjective one. Two people won't like the same for the same reasons. But what irks me the most is the fact that neither can accept the other, so it always results in arguments about which is better, and why.
The problem is that affording both sims is practically impossible, especially with those $100 addons
Those bandwagons are divided strong and it will stay that way as long as it’s hard to have both sims as the common man
I might wait a few months but I’ll definitely pick up XP12. I echo other peoples sentiments that I’d be happy using both XP12 and MSFS. I honestly don’t see them as naturals competitors anymore because they appeal to different crowds of people who look for different things in sims. It’s nice to have a choice, people! There is nothing wrong with that!
so you saying by that MSFS is not for real pilots or for IFR?
@@masflow09 Not sure where you got that from. MSFS has an extremely realistic flight model no matter what X-Plane fanboys say. A lot of MSFS _planes_ don't have realistic flight models, that is where people get the assumption that MSFS itself is unrealistic.
@@JohnDoeWasntTaken i asked Joe J a question lol im not the one saying it is fake.
@@masflow09 I got you bro. It's really annoying how many X Plane fanboys act like MSFS isn't a "serious" flight sim just because it has better graphics. It's like they can't process a sim having good graphics and simulation at the same time.
@@JohnDoeWasntTaken they dont have that immersion in XP so that is why lol
Thanks for this nice early looks at XP-12. I think I'll wait a little while before jumping in on this.
Really good review though, good to see the features and the weather generation. Nicely done!
Had this come out in 2019 this would have been a much bigger deal, but in 2022 it misses the mark. That being said, it's still an improvement over XP11.
Well, as a professional pilot, I’d never use MSFS - XP11/12 however is fantastic!
@@matthiaskalt7041 what makes xp11/12 better than the fenix a320 or msfs in general?
@@LetsAaron nothing.
X-Plane gives me what I want from a simulator and this beta is a nice evolution. I bought it without hesitation. There are issues of course but that's to be expected for early access. Nice video!
Some people forget this is the first beta and have written off XP 12. Still a long way to go before the product is officially released.
When I saw that Russ posted a video on X-Plane 12 I knew I wanted to watch it immediately. Thank you Russ.
I'm working on my instrument rating and your comments about being able to set precise ceilings and visibilities plus the video does it for me
I've owned every flight sim for the last 35 years and am always excited for the release of any of them. I prefer not to get involved in the this or that between them all but since MSFS release I've been pretty exclusively using MSFS & DCS while XP11 took a back seat (really back seat I guess, haven't played it in over a year). "XP12 is like an old friend" is very telling in describing a product that has just been released. I think what the Laminar Research team has done with XP over the years is incredible (for such a small team) but I think it will be difficult for them going forward to compete with the likes of Microsoft and the resources available to them.
people seem to prefer xplane physics or other games compare to microsoft flight sim, even if its a smaller company they might get more and more people coming from microsoft flight sim
@@votpavel That was a long time ago. Its just not the case anymore IMO.
@@trevoC132 I prefer X-plane 12 over MSFS
@@supernova4760 Which planes do you fly in XP12? I was quite excited about XP12 to start with but I'm really disappointed with the add-ons like FF, Magknight, SGS etc. they don't seem to care about fixing their bugs once they've got the money. In my opinion there are only Toliss and Laminar airliners that are flyable. I have flown the A350 a bit but it's just hit and miss whether it follows the flight plan. It's a shame because the simulator itself is very good. It takes the fun out of it when things don't work.
Very good review... I'm building a sim now. Ive always used MSFS (since the early 90's)... But those helping me build my sim are suggesting XP12. Which is a hard choice for me, mainly bc I have so much admiration for MSFS. This said, he also suggested that I can run them both? (2) and chose between them at will... I'm a student pilot with 70 hours, just about to complete my private, so predominantly my sim will be for practice and IFR training. Thanks again for the great review. This is very helpful to someone juggling to decide.
they are both just computer games you could easily install and try them
Ugly It’s 2022 not 2002 I think I saw a stick man fueling a plane in the background
That's what I use MSFS for, sightseeing.... and tweaking being a retired Navy AT and engineer that's retired ; )
O7
I've been an Xplane user since ver 4 or 5 (when it came with a paper booklet) all the way up to 11. MSFS user since the early days (mid 1980s). Love them both in different ways, but no way will I be paying 60 bucks for XP12. Looks like a minor upgrade to XP11 based on the few videos I've seen.
Yeah, was expeecting something that really makes it stand out, but it looks the same.
It's realllly disappointing. I've been waiting for XP12 for so long, and it feels like Laminar has just been twiddling their thumbs if this is all we got. I know it's early access but I hope Laminar doesn't think that's a free pass to trickle in the improvements at a slower pace now that some cash is flowing. I dunno, this is the first time I've ever seen a flight sim in early access.
+1
Cant wait for VR review in XPlane12
You can't honestly say xp12 has better systems than MSFS and then show the A330 with a Boeing fmc 2 minutes later. At least the default A320 in MSFS has an Airbus FMGC in it...
For other planes MSFS will get the G1000 NXi by default which is pretty much a 1:1 of the real G1000 and it will be available in every default plane using the G1000.
For third-party there are very high fidelity aircraft available such as PMDG 737 and Fenix A320. The Fenix A320 is on par with FlightFactor A320, and you get all the graphics benefits of MSFS on top.
I'm not saying XP12 is a bad sim, but don't say things that just isn't true as people blindly repeat it over and over even if there is no facts backing it.
The problem Xeno is a lot of folks are stuck in the past. They see X-Plane 10 or 11 say as always having better system modeling than FSX. The truth is MSFS has shown itself to be a capable platform to support study level aircraft as good as anything you'll see in DCS World and X-Plane and with the introduction of iniBuilds adding study level default aircraft and Working Title updating the default systems you really can't say MSFS is left wanting when it comes to system modelling.
MSFS G1000 isn't realidtic at all. It can't even replicate same collors.
Xplane has better physics, i bet it is more stable.
FS2020 has a bad interface, has some bugs yet that exists since launch day.
With more than 1000 hours logged with real NXi, MSFS’s G1000 is not real and for some control parts, X-Plane is even still better and more real than MSFS… plus the map and reposition functions, X-Plane is still way more closer to training level sim than MSFS, it’s a good game but talking about sim not really :/
You two are not talking about the same G1000 implementaton as I am. You currently have to download it from the marketplace
@@apreaze he's talking about g1000 nxi addon u definitely haven't tried it tho that's for sure cause from what u r saying I don't even know if u have tried the sim at least not any time close
Thanks for this overview, Russ. I'm actually delighted that Laminar didn't go off the rails redesigning everything. I tried the demo last night and I really appreciate the sense of continuity. I liked that I could just get on with it. I was blown away by the new lighting, the variety in weather depiction and the crispness of textures considering my middle-of-the-road graphics card. The forests are lush and everything sits much better in the landscape. I did get a laugh on Reddit yesterday when some posted a picture of default Vancouver in MSFS and X-plane 12. There is no competition there, but I've never really flown any sim right out of the box. I'm an aftermarket addon guy through and through. The multidisciplinary nature of creating a sim makes it impossible to devote resources to creating high fidelity planes AND a good sim. I just need Laminar to do what they always have. Focus on the underlying platform, in essence the flight model and leaving things nice and open for third parties to offer various possibilities, paid or otherwise. Enjoy your flights!
Another good video, the adverse weather examples takes me back (real world)!
Thanks for mentioning about X-Plane 11 being hard to keep the plane on the centerline. I thought it was me.
Perhaps that models real life more realistically? Small ariplanes can be quite hard to control. I bought the full copy and was very impressed by the handling of the J3. I also bought the M7 Maule and that handles very well too. In a real taildragger you get the tail up and then stay on the main wheels using the rudder for directional control until flying speed is reached. This is pretty good in XP12, so far. The challenge will be to see how the Stinson performs, it is terrible in XP11.
It is you and the equipment used, planes don't drive straight down runway, physics pulls it in one direction or other. XP models that properly, MSFS does not if the plane maker doesn't force it into the lookups. So if you aren't used to that and with the lack of force feed back on cheaper gear, you will have a hard time.
@@hiddenmonkeyofdoom I haven't flown in a while, but I don't remember it being so difficult to stay on centerline with any plane that I flew. Thanks.
even the rain in speed is coming at the plane instead just falling down like i've seen in many recent titles
Excellent review. I agree with your opinions here. I bought it to support Laminar Research but was left a bit underwhelmed. Don't get me wrong, it is definitely improving on XP11 but visually it is not much better. Especially scenery. That said, I don't like MSFS, as to me it feels wrong.
Excellent video, Russ! Liked and Subscribed. I concur with your summary suggestions for X-Plane window pop-outs, as well as your assessment of terminal area weather.
I disagree with your comment about "learning the landmarks of a certain area" in Microsoft Flight Simulator," but not for anything having to do with one flight simulator over another. I "held" roughly 230 hours in MSFS before joining the Air Force in the late 1980s. Indeed, the sim helped familiarize me with procedures required in flight, primarily the details of various SIDs, STARs and IAPs.
Rather, with 2,500 hours of flight time in two USAF aircraft, including roughly a thousand hours of low-level, visual navigation, I understand all too well the importance of keeping a running mental DR of one's position and attitude. Flight simulators can lead one into a false sense confidence and/or security that rapidly disappears in the real world when landmarks are different than expected or obscured by weather in ways that are not depicted in a flight simulator.
Even the real world can change enough from one day to the next to be misleading and/or disorienting!
For this reason, I always encourage newly minted pilots to continue their training by working towards their instrument rating, not as a way of "pushing the weather envelope," but rather, as a way of conducting all flights in a safer, more methodical, well-practiced and reliable manner.
Thank you for this. I only got into flight simming with MSFS (I did do a little in XPlane 11, but own little 3rd party scenery for it). I fly in VR and have seen the useability of VR in MSFS decline since about SU8, things like toolbar windows opening half size, and their positions not being remembered, really affect the experience for me. Therefore, reading the SU10 Beta VR forum is making me wonder if SU10 is actually going to break VR further, and fix nothing, and if XPlane 12 might be the way forward for me.
I agree XP12 is not yet ready for serious use...lots of bugs remain and it worries me they call these Release Candidates
I used to be BIG into X-Plane 11, but when MSFS 2020 came out, that completely changed my perspective in flight simulators. X-Plane 12 is cool, and definetly a big upgrade from X-Plane 11, but for me it still doesn't even come close to being compared to MSFS 2020
You prefer a game over a simulation, not surprising ... everyone has different tastes.
@@supernova4760and there’s nothing wrong with that.
Trees and weather are good but xp 12 needs more polish. I like the flight physics. But I think in the age of Google Maps in 2 or 5 years XP will have a very hard time without satellite scenery.
Currently using MSFS and XP, cant decide.
Keep using both. It's not a crime!
@@Mercwerx2unfortunately not everyone sees it like that.
Is there an add on where the IPad window mount falls of on takeoff and approach at the most in opportune time? That would be great, thanks.
I know a good flight game is NOT just about scenery eye candy but its just impossible for me to ignore that aspect after MSFS. XP11 gave me many happy years and I still use it alongside MSFS now and then. The issue I have (again i speak for myself only) is that this feels like a huge XP11 upgrade and not a brand new title in the series.
Kinda like what Euro Truck Simulator did - they did a huge upgrade to the game engine, graphics, lighting etc. This is what XP12 feels like to me. It just looks the same as 11. For sure there are improvements but Im looking at it as a whole and it just feels so same-y. I have XP11 modded and looking great. I also hardly use it so will pass on XP12. Great video thanks!
so you're saying it's what ow2 is to ow1?
MAKE MORE VIDEOS! Looking forward to your VR video Russ and thanks again for sharing.
Hey Russ, so good to see you! Some remarks there should be passed to Laminar. Remembering the position of panels should be quite easy to implement.
msfs feels like it's going to be the go to simulator for the next 10 years while xplane 12 just feels like it has a lifespan of maybe 4 years until they release xp13
Msfs to me looks like a.. game style, arcade kinda sim for beginners most of the time however i do love the scenery and graphics etc. I might get both
@@StreagleEagle depends it has more elements for arcade style gamers but it is a very professional software when you turn the realism settings up. Especially with pmdg 737 and the fenix a320. Graphics are beautiful as well.
@@StreagleEagle with plenty of mods, msfs is pretty much realistic.
my advice to everyone, this is EARLY RELEASE! things will be fixed and updated.
Thanks for the great review. I have not flown X-plane, and am considering dumping MSFS due to Asobo's lack of recognizing user knowledge and ignoring bug reports. Asobo only addresses issues by vote count, leaving unsolved bugs for users to fix themselves. There are just too many "bugs" to call it a released product. But, I absolutely love the planes with Garmin Avionics. As you know, it is mostly still usable.
Thank you Russ for a considered review. I get a bit annoyed with some comments on various fora bagging either X-Plane or MSFS. I would like to hope that most simmers can enjoy both. Let's face it, if you have a computer that will run one of them it will probably run the other, and the cost of the product, at least in base form, should not be prohibitive for most simmers. I can drink Coke OR Pepsi (in moderation of course!)
MSFS 2020 : All electronic cockpit panels pop out by pressing Right Alt + Left Mouse click (default).
And my point was that XP12 should have something similar so a standard mouse click could be used on touch screen displays
Thank you for uploading this quick review!
Something people don’t talk about is with a lot of addons, MSFS can take 20 mins to load and randomly crash. Xpane loads in 5 seconds and is very stable. I run Xplane on my Linux PC and MSFS on Windows.
Excellent review Russ, much appreciated.
Hilarious! That skidding sound hasn’t changed all that much since my old X-Plane 7 days.
I’ve always thought the weather was superior in X-Plane.
I’m glad to see the autogen scenery has improved and makes suburbs look more like suburbs. I remember in X-Plane 7 the area around San Bernardino airport looking like farmland during the Renaissance Period. I’d imagine it’s much better these days.
Yes but as a firmer x-plane fanboy they have a loooong way to go to compete with MSFS’s scenery . I usually clone the sound file for wet skid and rename it for the default dry skid to stop that infernal noise. I have been flying over 60 years have never heard the nose wheel screeching at all. I have skidded it on a snow covered runway but no sounds.
Just don't expect the scenery to hold up doing bush flying along rivers and coastlines. X-Plane scenery where land meets water is STILL all angles and straight lines, making unrealistic rivers and beaches everywhere. Same goes for roads. When Austin announced that XP12 wouldn't use real world scenery but would have improved autogen - I was at least expecting that they'd work on a better way of modelling coastlines, rivers and roads. This is probably part of the reason people say X-Plane 12 feels more like X-Plane 11.60 There's absolutely no way I'm paying for a half arsed upgrade.
I have MSFS2020, and I would love for Xplane to do well, but I think this is the end unfortunately, they no longer have better flight models and the scenery really is MSFS holy grail and as much as people love planes they love scenery as well
uhm....yes they have better flight models, even way better
the whole point of x-plane is the flight model.. i tried msfs, tried with several different scenarios, different flight models, different everything, it just feels more consumer grade.. i fly real planes, xp feels more realistic physics wise
I have used MSFS a few times but not this. One thing that stood out to me watching this video is that the pilot's view from the cockpit seems much better in X-Plane 12 than i seem to get in MSFS. Unless this is to do with my lack of experience with the settings in MSFS? But the view straight ahead out the windscreen seem so much better in this.
The only reason you'd buy this over MSFS 20 is loyalty, its like me buying AMD over Intel, its because I know more about AMD well and will stay loyal to AMD!
I disagree. Some people, mainly serious sim pilots, or real pilots, will buy X-Plane because of the physics that are built in and the superior flight modelling.
Others will buy MSFS because of the fantastic scenery and not be so concerned about accurate handling. Some people will have both and maybe some others as well. It all depends what you want from the sim. I don't have the time or money to invest in 2 or 3 sims + addons so I will stick with X-Plane. If I had thought that MSFS would be better than buying XP12 then I would have considered it but the reviews I have read would suggest otherwise. But, that is only my opinion, of course. YMMV 🙂
IMO the real crux is this, XPlane is more focused on the simulation physics itself and then generates generic world objects for the most part (probably a cost cutter as a partnership with satellite imagery isn’t cheap I’m sure) but the objects it generates are high def and look good right up close albeit not always accurate. MSFS is gorgeous out of the box but a lot up close doesn’t look good and seems to have spread out there efforts all over the simulation and some (usually real world pilots) say it’s flight physics aren’t quite there. I enjoy both but I’m not a real pilot so I do prefer the real world of MSFS, it encourages exploration. I can look at a real map, see something and fly there, very cool.
Just another very educational video. Thanks for sharing Sr.
Great video Russ, many thanks to you.
One thing to keep in mind is most of us have been flying 11 with add-ons. Many will be comparing out of the box 12 to hundreds of dollars of add-ons in 11.
If 12 is marginally better in beta with no 3rd party add-ons, that’s valuable to me and well worth the $50 or whatever it costs. That’s less than the price of some of my favorite aircraft.
What kinds of add ons are you referring to? I have stock XP11 and also msfs2020 but I haven’t purchased any add ons for x plane. What kind of stuff is out there?
@@baterista08 Ortho is pretty much a must, Orbx looks good. That will get it close to MSFS2020 now on 12 with the better lighting.
@@medwaystudios thanks. How does ortho affect frame rates?
@@baterista08 OK not seeing much difference if any. It seems more tied to object density.
@@medwaystudios thanks. Where do you download those from? I’m not too familiar with the extras.
I strongly believe that its a reskinned XP11. I think Laminar was caught behind the 8-ball with MSFS taking over. UI is almost identical with XP12. I get this is pre-alpha but this is just bad. More of an update as opposed to a new sim.
Exactly
They got caught slipping. They were on cruise control and then msfs came out of nowhere and they panicked
The answer is simple that dude owner of X11 desperately needs some retirement cash.........
the day MSFS2020 was released Austion didnt even realise the new MSFS2020 was even out!
Thanks Russ. I agree with all your observations. One item I have discovered so far is the FPS with 3 monitors is poor to terrible depending on the airplane, clouds saturation vs XP11 Vulcan.
I found the same thing to be true with my setup. I have a 3 year old i7, with a GTX 1060 graphics card, and I get 8 fps or so, whereas with XP11 I can get 25 or better. What specs do you have?
@@ShadowAlmighty I have an I7700k with a GTX 1080TI and 11 gbs o the card. I moved my overclock up to 4.6 ghz and that made the situation much better. I am getting around 20 22 fps average now with it going to 27 when not in the most challenging senery.
@@jewhipp98 Thanks for the reply. Unfortunately my computer is not capable of overclocking, but I'm glad to know that faster processor speed means better frame rates. It really seems like both MSFS and XP12 are just too much for current computers. It always seems that way. Build a better computer and new software will outreach it!
Great video, Russ!
Fix for Nav 2 VOR obs knob. "Issue with VOR 2 OBS not turning can be fixed two ways. 1. Replace the vor2_ag.obj file with the same file from XP 11, or just go into the file with Notepad and at the bottom replace all the words "copilot" with "pilot" and save.
Desktop\X-Plane 12\Aircraft\Laminar Research\Cessna 172 SP\objects\instruments\vor_glideslope_adf\vor2_ag.obj"
I wish they could integrate study level air craft. Even a basic Garmin 530 In both Xplane11 or MSFS was similar but unrealistic.
The realityXP G530 addon uses the Garmin Trainer and is the very best for fidelity to the actual hardware.
we would all love that but there's a reason why study level aircraft cost the same or more than this whole sim...
With MSFS out X-Plane is back to be the joke it was.
😂 😂😂 😂 😂 😂
It sucks unless you have a real high end computer, FS2020 is way better. X plane 12 is an upgrade to X plane 11, not really a big deal, save your money.
My biggest problem with MSFS2020 is that, in VR, the cockpit has a lot of stutter as I look around (I'm running a pretty beefy system with an 10th gen i7, 32 GB of RAM, and an RTX 3090). Not only is this immersion breaking, but it's extremely distracting. I'm hoping that X-Plane 12 will offer a better experience, especially since it is regarded as the better platform to use to augment flight training.
Tnx Russ ..what about AP & Runways curvature, and I'm wondering how long it will take for our oddons, plugin, & Hardware to be migrated to the new XP12 ????
I really enjoyed this video. Looking to try xplane for my first time ever in just a few weeks. Starting with xp12. As I want to use it for flight training fun.
Still a few rough edges being polished off especially in VR.
@@rbarlow I won't be using vr. But I'll also install msfs so I can get the best of both. 😁
@@simcptmike MSFS is just too beautiful to pass up. I say that as a previous XP only fanboy.
Pretty nice review Russ, glad 12 has arrived. Now we have a new simulator and who couldn’t be happy about that?
We have a new simulator? What would that be?
@@Drmerlin604 exactly some people are really blind or pretend to be. Like WTF dude a new simulator are u fckng kidding me ?
Thanks for the review!!!
Tnx Russ for your analysis.
This XP11.8 version costs $60?
To me x-plane 12 upgrade haven't suprised me, the hazy sky is still bothers me like the older versions, the frame rates are dropped more, syneries are not much changed, but there are more aircraft added, which it isn't cheered me up because I have a homemade simulator wich is cessna 172 , which I stocked with, there are not instruments popups added, outdoor view options are still as it was before, front view still doesn't show the "hood, and prop only", and side views don't show "wings only" , I'm just thinking if upgrading to x-plane 12 has worth for me. I wish they could at last followed the interest of x-plane users. Hopefully x-plane 12 will add more updates in future to satisfy x-plane lovers than I will buy more x-plane products.😉👍
After watching this, I get the idea that your promoting MSFS instead of telling us how good XP12 really is!
This was the public beta over a year ago. Slowly they have worked out the bugs and I understand that version 12.1 soon to be released has solved the blocky shadows and anti-aliasing issues and it looks really good. Still not the MSFS scenery realism but a great, more serious training simulator. No music and explosions and no forced updates. I am due for a follow on review.
@@rbarlow Why didn't you show an Airliner? Most of us only fly them.
Thanks for the video, appreciate it.
Enjoying 12. As ever it takes a bit of tuning.
Hi Russ, lovely vid, very well done thank you. William.,
Hi. After using X-Plane 11 for a few months, I am now trying V12. The scenery is much better but the problem for me is the lack of PAPI’s. Frank
Hey, Russ! Thanks for the video. At about 11:20, you make the comment, "For pilot training and certified simulation, XPLANE has a real leg up (over MSFS)." Are you still referring to the weather features? or something else? Are you comparing it to the latest version of MS Flight Simulator? I'm a student pilot and almost daily I here an experienced pilot say, "If you want pretty graphics, choose MSFS, but if you want realism, choose XPlane." (I would argue that realistic graphics is part of realism). Having more than 200 hours in MSFS in parallel with my real training and a few hours in XPlane, I'm not sure what they mean. However, I just invested heavily in an XPlane 12 simulator for my flying club, and I really want to be an XPlane fan like the other guys. Please help me out and tell me specifically why it's superior for flight training. Thanks again - I really appreciate your time.
wondering the same thing. I am not a real world pilot but I wonder if X-plane early in their development got a partnership with the FAA/certified flying schools and those have remained today. despite some glaring unrealistic aspects? MSFS if far superior in how realistic it sounds and looks for VFR. In addition X-plane has all kinds of flickering issues including night lighting, and oddly placed autogen and unrealistic lighting placement which I wouldn't see as helpful for learning to fly IRL.
Nice quick video.
I have mixed feelings as well.
I find the ground handling pretty bad w/o serious adjustment curves especially on the brakes, I reduced the highest brake power to 50%, and the rudder functions need softening as well. This is especially true on the 172.
It will be interesting when we get some upgrades from 3rd parties.
I think the planes look good both inside and outside, but scenery is hard to take once you are used to FS2020.
I see myself using XP12 for IFR training and probably basic skills like stick and rudder proficiency.
But as far as GA VFR I don't think I will use XP12, spoiled by FS2020.
I did install a few ORBX True Earth regions and airports, and my frame rates really took a beating down low, and even with those additions FS2020 still is way superior IMHO.
I like paying LR as I would hate for XP to die, competition is great, and I am sure XP12 will mature and it still has a significant advantage as a real training platform and for cockpit builders.
Thanks keep your vids coming...
Totally right!!! It's like driving a faulty Land Rover!
Great job .. and thank you for your time and efforts to share with us... very informative video .. looking forward to your next.. sub'd and liked..
Was quite impressed with the performance can get up to 30 fps with my 1050Ti and i7-7700HQ.
Hmm. Since I change from xp11 to MSFS maybe I just miss the physics and "feel" of the physics of X-Plane even tho I like the physics of MSFS and it's continued evolution. I will love some of the features like the more precise weather configuration for training. Even tho, it's a welcome competition and will keep both sims moving forward
Nice reviews. Thanks
Nothing was really "ugly". :D Thank you, Sir, great video. :) (Y)
HI Russ great video as usual. About your monitors can you confirm that it is 3 televisions ? If it is what refresh rate is it setup to ?
Thanks for an answer
And also if you can give us what brand and model of television. Finally do you know if we can find something to avoid most of the reflection between the screens ?
thanks
very nice take on it
I got MFS and love it, but it made me miss the accessibility and big customization of xp11. Sometimes mfs doesn’t let you do a certain thing or it’s UI is confusing, but it’s graphics and scenery are amazing. Another thing is MFS is 100% payware as where in xp you can download pretty much anything for free and have fun. I hope Xplane improves, I would love if MFS and xp had a baby
Nice video. I would like to try Microsoft but I don't think there is a port for Mac as yet. I have Xplane 12 demo so I will try that for now.
Good and honest review as always ... from the online reviews I've seen, I can't say I'm overly impressed with version 12 so far. The weather effects do look great but the scenery is still Meh, the saving grace of X-Plane is it's superior flight modeling.
Time to put my X-Plane "fanboyism" aside and give MSFS a good whirl, hopefully the initial teething problems are pretty much over with that sim.
The saving grace of XP is the flight model? XP uses blade element model. MSFS uses the boundary model which is the superior pressure model.
Maybe it feels more realistic for you, but technically the msfs flight model is far more realistic in pretty much every way. Opinions of professional pilots are divided on how good both replicate real life feelings, but on paper msfs is superior for sure.
Does this have a in-built around the world scenery or like x-plane 11 jus a few miles around certain airports .. I purchased X-plane 11 which had a ridiculous price and was shocked to see that it dint have those around the world sceneries like MSFS.. it was left to the user to download from 3rd party programs..
With in a week I dumped 11.. hope that's not the case here..
???
Not sure what you mean by around the world scenery but both XP11 and XP12 have scenery coverage for the entire world. You only need to run the installer found in the X-Plane folder and select “add scenery”. Then you click the regions on a map that contain the areas you want to include. Since it can take a while to download scenery the demo only contains a small area of scenery. While the XP scenery is much improved and has a few features that are better than MSFS, it is not photo realistic and can’t compare visually. Of course XP is aimed more at serious pilot training so scenery is designed to be plausible but not exact. You can add photo scenery to XP using Ortho4XP which is free but it takes a very large hard drive and lots of downloading to cover extended regions. But XP does include worldwide scenery coverage and has since at least XP9 when I started using it
@@rbarlow thanks a ton for the information.. happy landings
looks like 2005 graphics
Is it me or do others find the cockpit controls and display graphics a little blurry - not sharp enough until you zoom in or use pop outs when they are there?
Thank you Russ!
Hi Russ, I started watching your channel a few months ago. I got back in to flight sim again with the Xbox. Well I picked up a new computer last week to try out X-Plane 12. I am having issues with my joy stick and the flight controls. Only the hat switch works for moving around the view. Can you make a video about calibrating a joy stick for X- plane 12? Thank you so much!! I have not been able to find much on line for help with X-Plane 12. I am an MTC guy with a Major airline and I do love planes. Thank you.
X-Plane has always excelled in the most realistic flight model, best for real world training, based on airfoil, weight and balance to the real world specifications, and Microsoft has always had the best eye candy, outside of the Microsoft eye candy, the ATC in fs9 and fsx was a coding genius, controlling AI and player, I was really hoping that it would have been ported over to the newest version, but I believe X-Plane and Microsoft deserve support, both are good and I own every version of both ever released.
Microsoft needs to purchase the night lighting effects engine from Laminar and call it a day. There’s no room for more than one consumer based flight sim.
Very well said sir. Well done ❤
Thanks for the video. What 3rd party enhancements that bring MSFS closer to X-Plane as a simulation were you referring to here, do you maybe have another video on that?