ไม่สามารถเล่นวิดีโอนี้
ขออภัยในความไม่สะดวก
Why I use Xplane vs MSFS 2020
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 24 ก.ค. 2023
- A very biased opinion of why I use X-Plane 12 vs Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020, and what some of the key differences are (and similarities) between XP12 and FS2020. Hopefully I have made my case, and if you haven't tried it, encourage you to use the free demo which is not blocked in any functionality, other than a time limit.
![[X-Plane 12] AutoOrtho Project is a Game Changer! | On the fly ortho imagery streaming for X-Plane](/img/n.gif)
Recently retired airline captain, 727 then 757 and former instructor on Cessna and Piper singles. The realism in X-plane is worth the "plausible" ground visuals, and they're better than the multi-million dollar sims I trained in every 6 months.
But apparently, according to the twenty year olds who have no experience or knowledge, we are wrong! I don't know what to think, now! :P Thanks so much for backing me up - while I am stuck to desk flying for the foreseeable future, at least I know I am getting something somewhere close to realistic behavior - the sim will never be real life or give you the feeling, but I'm glad the sim is doing its best to try to do what it would really do.
I fly DCS mainly, and just got into MSFS 2020 (and downloading XP12 as I'm watching). Our IT guy that comes in to our office uses XP12, he said it was more of a study simulator than MSFS was and that people use it when studying for licenses which is what mainly attracted me since I like DCS and spend much of my time reading NATOPS manuals and "dash-1"'.
I'm looking very forward to trying XP12, while saving up for school, rental and fuel (possibly getting my PPL, thinking about it) for fixed wing or at the very least get me a paramotor or an ultra light or something. Been an aviation wannabe nut for almost 40 years now. Pretty dang excited! Also glad that it has VR support. I love how it just looks like you can reach out and touch this stuff. It's insane sitting inside some of these aircraft.
I hope you like XP12 - I have a video in my Xplane playlist about why I sim, but the basic reason is XP is realistic enough that I have halted me getting a PPL - it is realistic enough that I feel satisfied, plus I have studied with actual pilots and have been tested for different levels of competency on VATSIM and have the highest rating - those tests are done with FAA questions and usually a real-world pilot. I've always dreamed of getting my PPL, but in the end I know I won't be able to keep up the time to keep it active, nor have enough time to actually get to fly. One reason why I have even been thinking about ultralight flying - but I think my wife would leave me if I did that :) You can also see in my playlist my setup - yoke, rudder pedals, dual throttle quadrant, and a homemade switch interface that gets me 90% of any controls in a physical desktop box - so I am using real switches and controls to fly in the sim. I haven't made the move to VR which I know is also very impressive only because I like being able to see a second monitor and those controls. Let me know what you think of XP12. Adding Autoortho and probably SimHeaven X-America/Europe or wherever you fly is going to put you on a more even field with MSFS2020's world - it will still not look near as good, but no matter what, XP12 will FEEL more real to you, I believe.
i wish i had a job that can let me afford dcs :(
I have now flown around Australia coastline from Archerfield and return most hops were 125 nm using a Beechcraft Baron I like the map system that comes with X Plane 12. I have also found that 98% of the airports are so close or right on the button the smaller ones are there with realistic settings were as the MFS you have to buy to get the more realistic airports as they put big fuel trucks buildings that are not even close to real life airports. The houses are American style as well.
I had flight sim X (MFS ). And I got a lot of added ons free in those times . That’s why I bought MFS 2020 sadly it’s a toy now mostly for XBox players.thanks for your input.
After using fs2020 for a few months, in VR, I tried X-Plane 12. I was blown away by the crisp look, the flight model en especially the (night)lightning. Although the graphics do not look very real it somehow feels more realistic than msfs. It requires some tweaking but I get decent performance in VR with a modest RX6800XT.
That's fantastic to hear - its the one thing people don't want to admit it seems - the feeling might be more important than the look - and when I am in the plane and not looking from outside, those details of FEELING matter to me. I still haven't tried VR yet - since I'm always on VATSIM I really need that second monitor to keep up with traffic, IFR, charts, so I keep thinking if I bought the headset I wouldn't use it enough - I tried TrackIR but it ended up just hurting my neck because I would stay so stiff trying to keep looking straight ahead :) Thanks for watching and commenting!
You should try it, it's an amazing experience ;-)@@dixielandfarm
For a real pilot like you it certainly makes a difference in terms of flight physics but for someone like me who only flies in a virtual world the difference is unnoticeable regardless of whether it is MSFS or X Plane

For the splash screen, if you are on 12.06 beta, you don't need to use that mod anymore.
There is a folder named 'backgrounds ' in output folder. Just paste your images there and xplane will do the rest.
Yup, I just posted about that in the forums!
@@dixielandfarm yeah, pretty cool!
I've been using 2020 for a few years now. Loved it to be honest, didn't think I could get better. But I've tried XP12 recently, my god I forgot what it feels like in a life like environment. Amazing XP.
This is the craziest thing I have heard - but some dude actually figured out how to use Xplane as the model, but you are looking at MSFS2020 - so your input and all of it is in XP, but I guess wherever you are in the world in 3d space, is where you plane would be in 2020... Best of both worlds, BUT, I think that almost proves what I have said (and people told me how I was wrong) - that XP feels more like real flight dynamics. Thanks so much for watching and commenting - I appreciate it!
@@bb-sky Here you go: th-cam.com/video/Rix1wcbnF2c/w-d-xo.htmlsi=wtE_1Hp8aE8-RAXO
I love both sims. I bought xp12 yesterday and got my beloved 737 and the one thing that really makes me love xp12 is the ground physics. Taxiing the 737 feels better imo in xp12 that msfs20.
I love that everyone (well, everyone except me since I use Linux) can enjoy both sims and get the best out of both of them - but I have heard and read at how much more the ground handling feels real in XP.
@@dixielandfarm any tips or add ons for ai traffic. Its really the only thing thats missing for me at this time. Also, any good freeware airliners (minus the 737) ?
I exclusively fly on VATSIM with other people/controllers so I don't really use the AI traffic, plus it is a big CPU hit from what I understand - Ground Traffic is a real life traffic plugin that uses live ads-b info, so it will be live planes transposed to your sim, which is neat since they will be acting like they do in real life, but you are limited to what is actually happening. As for airliners that are free, I can't say since they aren't a primary focus for me (I fly the MD-80, the SAAB 340, and the Dash8-Q400), but I used to love the Metro III which was free (twin turbo prop, 29 passengers) but it hasn't been updated to XP12 and just doesn't behave right.
This was all very interesting Kris. I appreciated hearing the reasons why you liked X-Plane versus its competitor/competitors. My only question would be. In knowing how much you have learned about simulator flying. Couldn't you take it one step further than Austin Meyer and built or create an even better program? ~
Rob/Boston
Oh, I'm not that good at math, so I wouldn't think so. At work when I program, they are very messy stabs that probably could be done much more elegantly, but I always put minimal effort in to just get the job done. First rule of programming: We don't do things because they are easy, we do things because we THOUGHT they were going to be easy.
Hey Kris! Stopping by to say hi. This isn’t in my wheelhouse, but I enjoyed listening on my commute this morning! Cheers!
Thanks so much for checking in. This is one of those videos that will bore most of my subscribers but will slowly get a few thousand views from people doing searches. I have a few like that :) I am pretty passionate about the hobby, so I do like talking about it.
I recently purchased msfs and am just scared at what time of a free weekend to start the installation!
After 8 hours of installing 10 DVDs and then huge downloads and still not working because the internet is too slow?
So I ordered Xplane 12 today!
Did you buy the DVDs for Xplane or the online installer? The online installer is the preferred way due to updates (which you can opt in or out of) - but it is also nice because you can reduce the world download to just the area you are interested in - I fly ONLY in the US, so I only have the US in my folder. Makes backups and updates go quicker - and that is another lovely thing about XP - you can back up that folder, run multiple versions, no problems at all. Let me know what you think!
The clouds look better in X-Plane? I am guessing you could not run MSFS on Ultra because on my PC they look real, especially in VR. I was flying into a bad weather front and there were Cumulonimbus tower clouds.
They are, especially with 12.06 - they are almost perfect at this point - I think more realistic and have more consequences in them (which was something Austin Meyer was really wanting to get right in this version, since he was dismayed at how many people weren't respecting clouds in GA Real Life aviation).
The first thing that strikes me with MSFS clouds is it’s out of this world. And that’s what they are. Yes they are stunning and beautiful but they aren’t realistic. Have a look out your window and compare the clouds.
@@corntaI Everytime I say this, people keep telling me I'm wrong. I even mention in the video how real clouds sometimes look menacing, just like they do in the example I show. Thanks for backing me up!
No way!!!
There is a replay tool built into MSFS, in the settings go to experimental and turn on the replay tool.
That's what I mean - in XPlane it is front and center - I hit #1 on my keyboard to activate it and I can replay in an instant. For awhile it wasn't a feature at all in MSFS and I think you needed a plugin to make it work, and even that was you had to turn it on/record before doing anything otherwise it wouldn't work.
the repay tool built into MSFS is absolutely horrible
@@ThatPilotKyle That's a shame, because I find as a sim pilot, the only way I can truly evaluate my landing is with the replay to look at it - people seem to go with fpm, but that is NOT the only way to judge a landing, it is all the way at the bottom, actually.
I use both. X-Plane and MSFS. I spend more time in X-Plane 12 but if I want to do a scenic flight, I use MSFS. But usually, the scenery is less important for me. Also, I made a lot of bad experiences with cloud products. My perception is, that we will see MS more and more moving to a monthly or even per flight payment.
Oh, that just sounds horrible - I love that even Carenado who has abandoned Xplane can be made to work despite them and we can keep flying our planes (though with tweaking). Imagine spending hundreds just for your planes to disappear. I've gotten into this debate a lot on this video - if you are simming like I do, the visuals mean very little because my eyes are inside the plane - I do an external shot or two for videos, but if I'm just doing my own thing, I am concentrating on flying. I think a lot of people just autopilot it and never do much in all of the time between takeoff and landing, but I am handflying it a bit, or if I am using the autopilot, I'm still tuning in VORs, following radials, etc. MSFS looks fantastic, it is a great sim - it just isn't the sim for me, but apparently people have a problem with that (as seen in the comments here) :) If MS does what you think they might, even more so for me. Thanks for watching!
Yeah no, MSFS looks really good flying down low, a lot better than XP12 ever will.
Go fly near Kokoda in Papua New Guinea and tell me what looks better.
And then you realize XP12 doesn't have most of the small airstrips out there (i know, i have every sim, from FSX to XP12 and DCS)
Since I only fly in America, I haven’t come across many airstrips missing in XP… and any small private ones I have, I’ve built and put back on the gateway to be folded back into the sim. There was a major push at the end of XP11 and thousands upon thousands were put into the sim. Thanks for watching and commenting.
get free addons autoortho and simheaven scenery and the graphics are on par. I actually prefer xplane 12 graphics to msfs as long as i have ortho and simheaven installed. To me all the buildings and objects in msfs have no clarity. Everything is a blurry mess.
@@ivalterbaptista2305 yeah the photogrammetric cities are nightmare fuel in MSFS, on top of ruining your frames anyway😂
but at least i don't have to spend hours setting up all sorts of things. I'm happy to fly X-plane with the least amount of addons, thanks to the scenery gateway in part @dixielandfarm 🤝
... and the superior flight model, of course 😇
@ivalterbaptista2305 Rumor is MisterX is going to do something similar to Simheaven but using his art assets - which would be amazing. I have ortho for all the areas I love to fly in (mostly the entire east coast), but even when I don't, unless I am really high up, even the default ground textures along with Simheaven and Global Forests (or Xtreme Trees) is pretty damn good.
@mro9466 Xplane is definitely a tinkering sim - but that is also a nice thing - if you really don't like something, you can change it. There is a dude out there that figured out how to get the google earth photogrammetry inside of xplane - so the buildings aren't melting and look perfect - but there is a time and cpu cost for that. Autoortho isn't too bad to set up from what I understand, but I ended up just rolling my own ortho. BUT, in MSFS, if you fly into a lot of small airports (in America - from what people tell me), you are constantly downloading them and having to put them into your community folder - and I would say 75% of my flights are into regional or even smaller airports in xplane - and I don't have to do much at all for those - I think I have 10 or 15 custom airports, and those are ones I built myself and put back into xplane for everyone else (and they should have gotten them in 12.09). :)
Really annoys me that they have moved down the Xbox road. I also think MSFS has became unnecessarily complicated. Heck, just setting up cameras and key bindings is very overbearing.
Everyone seems to glance over that criticism I made except you - when I see menus in MSFS my eyes glaze over - AND I WORK IN I.T.! I suspect they will be going into this is more a game/sim of life with 2024 precisely because of the focus more on xbox and the different scenarios that will be the star (we suspect) of the next version, like firefighting, rescue, fertilizing, etc. - missions being more of what will probably interest people opposed to long procedural IFR flights. Thanks for watching!
Quick word on the Linux thing: I am using (or rather was using, probably switching to X-Plane) MSFS 2020 on Linux, no problem. Through Steam, you get Proton. There set it to Experimental, and enable that all non-native games should use Proton. It runs without any issues for me, including all addons like the AllInOne tablet, Navigraph, etc. With the right fiddling, I guess you can also get it to work with normal Wine.
Thanks so much for that, Marcus - I have read that people have gotten it to work (though I do have one viewer who has not been able to get their rudder pedals to work via Steam and MSFS in Linux). I still am locked in due to internet bandwidth (fiber has been promised for 7+ years at this point). BUT, it is nice that even Linux users can uses MSFS if they want. I am still a XP diehard, but there is nothing wrong with enjoying both! Thanks for watching!
I'm pretty much of the 'use what works for you' persuasion. I like X-Plane; I've been with it since V8 which is a lot less than some people. People talk about MSFS 2020 as a sort of tipping point into sim superiority and they're missing the point that a) It was always going to be bigger and b) people will still use X-Plane simply because they prefer it. A bit like Linux.
And of course I am a huge Linux guy - even though I work in Windows in IT all day. There are deficiencies in both sims and even I fall into the trap of defending the one I use as a mild critique on my choices, but I really do try to make sure I don't do that. Visually Xplane will never be where MSFS is - the team is just too small and that isn't what they focus on - and for MSFS the flight model/dynamics will always have to cater for a larger crowd so they don't get frustrated with skill level or variety of controls - you won't have thousands of people want to fly if they can't use an xbox controller, nor if they are always fighting to stay on a runway or in the air (it won't be fun). Both SHOUD be successes, and both should be applauded. But they both will never check all the boxes. Thank you so much for stopping by and giving me your thoughts - I appreciate it!
X-Plane 12 even looks better at low altitudes than MSFS and without internet. I have both and a super high speed fiber optic cable at 2000 bps and MSFS still has trouble drawing scenery most of the time. Some days it's great and other times looks worse than FS9. I think the internet bottleneck is Microsoft or Google servers. X-Plane is consistent. You can count on the same result every time you play. X-Plane is a lot more frame rate friendly even compared to MSFS with no internet. More planes available in X-Plane especially vintage planes. You're not missing anything without MSFS.
Thanks so much for commenting, David. People who sim helicopters will tell you there IS no other flight sim other that XP - you need that flight model, and you need those building to look good when you are so much closer to them. This weekend I was flying over Detroit to Grand Rapids and the stock ground textures were more than adequate - the people who complain about the visuals being SO bad in XP are most likely spending a majority of their flight outside the plane - which means the computer is flying it.
I still use Xp11 in Vr. I think its great, physics feel right. I only wish I could have as good ATC interaction as MSFS.
The one thing I haven't tried out has been VR, mostly because I would probably go down a big rabbit hole and spend way too much money - but I have always wanted to try it. ATC became a non-issue once I started flying on VATSIM - once you have a real life person controlling everything else pales in comparison. I know there are add on products that are better with ATC, but I never investigated since I'm online. I know the XP12 ATC is better, but it is still a way off from MSFS from my understanding. Thanks so much for watching!
Xplane running on my Unbuntu box, MSFS on my Windows PC. Xplane is faster loading and does not crash. That’s what I like.
My flights start up in 30 seconds or so, and that's with Simheaven and Ortho... Never had a crash (other than testing out a fresh beta, and rarely then as well). I wouldn't be able to wait for minutes on end, which apparently is common. Thanks for watching!
I think you should give MSFS a chance, I personally fly msfs for the boeing 737-800 and training on checklists and procedures, If I get a chance to be a real life pilot then I might go for x-plane but for now its a no.
Interestingly, I think you should give X-Plane a chance. There was a comment just a few days ago from a real life 727 and 757 pilot - guess which sim he prefers and thinks is more realistic?
Thanks for posting this! I really like your external camera work. Are you using X-Camera?
I am not! It is just me and my mouse - I always think my pans and dollys are bumpy, but i was a helicopter photographer in a former career and used to have to use a gyroscopic camera remotely controlled, so maybe that's why I can get my external shots just using the sim controls. Thanks also for watching - all my xplane videos are in an xplane playlist on the channel (if you want to see other content).
Interesting that you bought a product partially because you like the person who created it. The same reasoning had weight in my speaker and stereo amp purchases. While I do use Windows and Mac, I am partial to open-source products software-wise (office suite, email, etc). I don't do flight sims, but if I did, you'd have sold me! Hope you, Marissa and the animals are doing well.
Cheers, Tom
Surviving the heat here - luckily the grass hasn't taken a beating which normally it would have by now. The creator also made a documentary (on Amazon Prime) about him being sued for patent infringement - there is a whole industry that makes BS patents without actually making products and then sue you based on this patent (example, a patent might describe a way for printing to occur across a network, but with no technical description on how it occurs, or that happened 40 years ago by someone else) - and then you either pay up to avoid the cost or get dragged into a million dollar lawsuit after the lawyers are done... He took the latter when it ended up costing him a lot. He also found out that all these patents and lawsuits occur in one small town in the middle of nowhere in Texas, and basically that the town is in on it but rakes in money - offices with no people in it, just empty acting as fronts... Mildly interesting, but then frustrating because in the end it still happens all the time with no repercussions.
@@dixielandfarm Yeah, lawyers are not my favorites. Wonder how many VC members self-identify as attorneys...
I do do a lot of low level flying in MSFS and in SOME places the Photogrammetry is terrible, in others it is really good. The great thing is you can turn it on or off depending on your preference. As too the small airport accuracy issue, unless you have been to that airport how are you going to know if it is accurate or not? I fly out of my local airport KFDK and granted the in sim version is terrible but I downloaded a user made airport and it is a PERFECT recreation. I don't see the need to download countless small airports you have never been to because accuracy means nothing to an unknown quantity.
That's the thing, you don't need to download A THING in XP12 - they are submitted into the gateway by the community (including me), and they are just there in XP. When an update happens, you get the update (for example, KAVL runway had closed - that was updated and then right back into the sim). BUT, it absolutely matters that taxiways are labelled correctly, that hangars look like hangars, that FBOs look like FBOs and not these glass modern buildings, especially in these small airports where you probably depend on those things just to pick out the airport from the scenery. Many times, there are no buildings at all at some airports in MSFS that I have seen on plenty of people's streams who were doing multiple cross country legs.
I love XP11... MSFS is also alright, but I like the feel/UI of XP more. I hop and back and forth from Windows and Linux about once a year (I can operate equally in both environments... when one finally pisses me off I switch and stay in THAT for a year, until it inevitably pisses me off...😏)
I was waiting for XP12 to improve, cuz it sounded like they released it a bit too early. I had heard of problems with cockpit shadows, some other bugs, and not all plugin devs had moved over. Well... sounds like they are hiking the price of XP12 at the end of October 2023; I'm on Social Security, so that sucks. I just bought XP12 at the $60 price point but I feel like I had a gun held to my head.
Anyway... what is the state of XP12 vs XP11? Every 3 months or so I would go around and see what users were saying, and I still don't get the feeling XP12 has reached parity with XP11. I mean, I know it has improvements in many areas, but also sounds like regressions. Also have most/all the popular plugin makers made versions for XP12? (Some may not need much work, I dunno.) The plugins I use(d) are 124thATC, AviTab, BetterPuchback, FlyWithLua, Headshake, Xsaitekpanels, etc. (Not expecting you to go look up these for me, I'm just dreading my walk down the list only to find many plugins aren't moved over yet.)
Just want your general thoughts on how XP12 is looking in October '23. As the cheerleader of XP you should know! 😂Cheers.
I have moved completely to XP12 - it does require a computer/processor made within the last five years to be acceptable to run everything (otherwise you are making compromises). Some things we used to have to have plugins and tweaks for are no longer necessary - and the weather is reason alone to move. XP11 was way too gentle in regards to the effects of weathers - with no consequences flying through clouds - now you are on a bumpy road if you do that (like you should be), plus no longer do you have these updates that are so jarring (that always seemed to happen when you were on final).
All of the plugins you mentioned should work (or with an update) - the only exception might be 124thATC, but Im not sure since I only fly on VATSIM with human ATC coverage (or acting as my own controller if there isn't any). I fly GA planes a majority of the time, and if you were worried about being a GA person in an airline centric environment, controllers LOVE when they get the challenge and I've never been treated with anything but kindness.
The shadow/cockpit being dark issue is overblown - zoom in a little to see outside or the panel and everything is exposed fine - plus there is a fix coming anyway - humans would never see BOTH at the same time (or you would be focusing on one or the other), so the exposure values ARE correct, it is just a limitation of the software not knowing where you are looking and adjusting that - again, just pan up and down and it resolves itself quickly.
I would say the entire thing is an improvement - XP11 with the tweaks and addons made it wonderful, XP12 is very close to that out of the box, which is why people weren't stunned since some of these things were already being enjoyed - but there are so many little details people overlook that are there in XP12 that really make it better than XP11 - and a lot of these things are in the handling that actually make it more realistic but then a little harder to fly than what used to slide in XP11. People were annoyed that you altitude being reported (actually flown) may have not been the altitude you were indicating and that was because density altitude was now being considered - this is actually a GOOD thing in modeling, but annoying to those flying online in practice since it would require EVERYONE to be on XP12 (or to have that modeled).
As always, the demo works completely including with plugins, so I would add a plugin at a time and see (1. Do I need this plugin/lua script anymore? 2. Does it work)? I got all but one plane to work in XP12 and I also reduced my hangar down to a third of what it used to be since I realized I only loved a small set of the planes I had. I think you will love XP12.
The worst thing about Microsoft MSFS is they built it on FSX core code and didn’t start completely from scratch - like putting a glossy Rolls Royce body on a go kart!
I had read that - I couldn't actually believe it, but yup, turns out that was the case.
I have been trying out the XP12 demo after several years of being away from the sim. On my iMac the instrument panel is much darker than I recall in XP 9 and 10, making it impossible to see some controls. (The panel is also very fuzzy, which I assume is due to my computer-limited settings.) Is the panel brightness adjustable? I have enjoyed it enough that I will gladly upgrade to a big monitor and M3 Studio Mac when it is released. I have enjoyed watching MSFS2020 vids but have come to realize that building a powerful PC and troubleshooting everything is an enormous and time-consuming process.
You have discovered one of the engineer vs. user issues. They modeled lighting PERFECTLY in the sim, using light meters and real world data and physics... but almost none of our computer screens can make that a reality - so you will have dark cockpits when you have 51% or more of the outside shining in (your pupils dilate, and darken the panels). They finally have admitted there is an issue with what people have and what they did and promise a fix in the future - in the mean time you can either zoom in/tilt down, change the FOV percentage to show less of the world (something I did, I think I set mine to 60 or 65), or there is a plugin available in the forums to play with the lighting values. You can also play with brightness/gamma settings on the monitor itself, but I think that is too much work to do just for xplane. They will fix this, but it is still annoying. As for fuzzy, that probably has to do with video memory - while 4gb I think is the realistic minimum, 8gb is probably what people need (and I still don't have, actually) - you can change the texture size to medium or maybe a notch higher and see if that helps.
@@dixielandfarm Thanks for responding. Now that I have started paying attention I see other comments regarding dark instrument panels. It’s hard to imagine that the issue did not come up during XP12 development and the “realism” wasn’t dialed back in favor of making it actually possible to use the sim. You are right in saying that it should not be necessary to fiddle with monitor settings to make the sim useable. There are enough challenges in using the instrument panel - relying on keyboard commands and using a cursor to fiddle with dials - and making everything hard to see is simply a bad idea.
@@thardyryll This interior panel lighting issue is being addressed per recent announcements at the recent Flight Sim Expo.
I use Xplane exclusively. 2 decades ago I was an avid MSFS user. Then one day, MS decided that sales of FS were down, so they just walked away from the game. Enter Austin and Xplane. Not only is he a pilot, but he’s a flight sim geek, rather than the corporate stuff shirts at MS. The team at Xplane is constantly improving the sim…they are not going to just walk away one day.
I think I mentioned that in this video (or maybe it was a different one), but I completely agree - but I'm always the underdog supporter. But I find one of its strengths are the passion of Austin and the team to make the sim the best they can, uncompromising to the loss of some people even. I've been dismayed by a recent youtube person I follow who is a real CFI - he basically said Xplane feels real, the dynamics are spot on, the instruments are great - but then he got an xbox and has been using MSFS and often will say this isn't right, or that isn't right, but due to graphics (and therefore viewers), he keeps using it.
Have you tried the A2A Simulations Comanche? It is the best GA aircraft available in ANY simulation.
I have seen several live streams and videos - it does look absolutely fantastic!
@@dixielandfarm I have it and it is fantastic, especially in VR.
😂
@@nukenabber7228 Why do you think that is funny?
I enjoyed Xplain for long time, but MSFS is totally on a different level!!
It looks absolutely stunning, that's for sure. BUT, there are things that matter to pilots (and me) in details that aren't noticeable to casual people - like for example the ADF needle shakes when there is a lightning strike nearby in XP12 on the last beta - I LOVE that detail, but honestly who uses an NDB anymore, and certainly in the sim? Well, I do because I like flying that old tech, but that isn't the norm at all. But it is those details that I adore, and those don't happen in MSFS - but of course, having an area look picture perfect is important as well, so MSFS wins with that, for sure. It's just where your interests/priorities lie. I don't spend a lot of time looking out the window in the sim, so that is less important for me, but most users it is vital, so MSFS wins. Thanks so much for watching and commenting!
Good morning Kris. See you this evening~
Good morning, Rob! Hope you have a great day!
Regardless of sim have you tried starlink for a faster internet connection? I had to as the area in Tennessee that i am in has no or very low speed internet.
It kills me because there has been fiber laid out directly outside of my house for years - the service just isn't here yet. Because of the price, I have been happy with our DSL - it can be as fast as 25mbps down now (they recently got rid of any tiers), but upload is still slow at 1.5mbps.
You are not wrong about the airport sceneries. They look amazing as defaults
I do have the AEP package, but that was because I paid for it for XP11 and it was free in XP12 (which adds a little character to the buildings). But it always amazes me when I see videos/livestreams in MSFS2020 and they are at a small rural airport with this big glass building and either no hangars or hangars the size of 737s.
@@dixielandfarm Absolutely, at the same time even though MSFS2020 uses satellite images some places still have flat surfaces which should pop up and resemble the exact landmark in real-life.
Great video, many thanks. Linux user for some 9 years, but only an Xplane flyer for 4 weeks. I owned a PA30 for 9 years in the '70s in the UK. Flew most days as an Air-Taxi captain/operator between the UK and Europe, about 70% IFR in 'bad' weather and/or at night. Best aircraft I have ever owned, great to fly, just on 'steam gauges' and very economical. No problems at all, except the VOR antenna was hit and destroyed by lightening, twice!
ps Pasted 'my' Xplane PA30 on the splash screen, flying over Western Australia's Perth airport thanks to you and @SimAviator.
It's such a lovely plane, and modeled very well - I have a few flights in my Xplane playlist in it. It is my favorite plane in XP. I have been playing with the Islander and the Beaver (got them for Christmas), but I always go back to the Twinkie. I honestly don't think I have every used the AP in it - it is too much fun to handfly. Today's video was actually about how touchy the trim in the plane is, and how I modified a USB volume control to be a trim wheel for it!
Never had an AP all time I owned the PA30. It was sooo easy to trim out. Others joked about the roof mounted Trim handle, but it worked very well. It flew ILS nearly hands off. In Xplane it's more difficult to trim. But I find all the aircraft the same. Don't know if it's just a newby novice, my Logitech yoke, or the fact this is my 1st pc game and I am 77 years old. Guess it does not help being only 'one-handed' person thru' a stroke. But hey, live's full of challenges. Thinking when I am more proficient I might look at a up market joystick, we'll see. Watching your next video now. @@dixielandfarm
If you are basically only strong in one hand, a joystick with a good twist axis will be fine for most people, and that saves you the cost of rudder pedals. The Logitech Cessna yoke was the best you could get (can turn the full 180), but the standard Logitech only does 90 degrees of rotation - plus the dead zone in the middle is where you need it to be the most accurate and it isn't. The Honeycomb Alpha is the best yoke for the price and feels great (and suddenly my landings improved with better equipment!). There is a new one that just came out from India that is a step above, but honestly most people use the Honeycomb. Same with the throttle quadrant - I have the CH one but that was all that was available at the time and fits my desk - but the Honeycomb Bravo is probably the best out there (plus you get more buttons for controls. As for rudder pedals, unfortunately the Logitech and Thrustmaster ones just won't make you happy - the Turtle Beach ones are good (and what I have), or the MFG ones - though the Thrustmaster Pendular are the top of the line, they probably are TOO good for a desk setup and really are suited more for a cockpit.
As for the trim, the volume control thing I ended up doing is great to do the fine control - you get it close with the electric trim and then just a nudge with the wheel. I no longer have issues trimming out most GA aircraft anymore.
Many thanks for the detailed reply. Most helpful. Have a 'trim wheel' ordered. The right side of my body is very weak. I can use my car's accelerator [just] with the right foot, but can't use the brake pedal, b'coz of weakness [so, left foot braking]. Rudders will pose the same problem. Hence my interest in 'sticks. Do you have any knowledge of the Gladiator NXT EVO ?@@dixielandfarm
@@SuperBluemoon21 Unfortunately I don’t. Most people I know either have the HOTAS or the Airbus, but that doesn’t mean much since its a wide market for joysticks. Yoke market is much smaller and I know more about them.
Clouds doesn't make shadows. There's a darker areas when cloudy, but those are just for random areas. Not related to clouds. XP12 has better rain effects and vehicle traffic at night time, but but that's all I miss when I dumped XP12 and started to use msfs. ATC is thing I (And everyone) hate on XP12
The ATC I don't get hung up on because I fly on VATSIM - once you have had a real live person give you ATC, everything else pales in comparison. Each update in XP12 feels more and more realistic - but I also understand I fly in the sim for different reasons than others.
@@dixielandfarmVATSIM ATC is unmanned 98% of the time and place except a few hot spots where it usually gets over crowded and shouty. Top down is another reason to dislike VATSIM. GA airfields almost non existent ATC in Europe. Once a good ATC mod is created like beyond ATC if it lives up to the media so far VATSIM will be second best.
@@johnmaguire2185 I can only speak for ATC in the US, where I fly. Specifically the east coast. There is often controllers on any time of the day - but since I tend to fly GA, it is uncontrolled anyway. But even this weekend at 8am I did a flight IFR in semi-icing conditions (specifically to see how I would fare in the BN2 Islander) and Boston ATC were on, worked with me as /A and I had to switch to CTAF when it was time to land and then report back after landing. I dont often fly to the huge NY bravos or any bravos, but I rarely have had an issue, but then again I rarely will fly a commercial jet. At night, almost all of the areas are staffed, and even afternoon on the weekends there is quite a bit of coverage. I’ve enjoyed most of the controllers, and I’ve been lucky that 80% of the pilots have all been behaved and competent. Not that there arent issues - there are, but mistakes and learning are going to happen. People will not put in the work like I have at a training organization and get full VATSIM ratings like I have - but that isn’t my expectation.
This is the fairest comparison I have encountered. Thank you for that. I am back and forth between these sims. One thing that makes my blood boil is how MS hides their sim from you behind AppData and the ridiculous path! And then there is FlyWithLua and DataRef Editor! Game changers for me. FS is for Causual, XP is for Serious imho. Thanks much!
Thanks so much for the kind words, Mark. You can see both sim users are passionate for their respective sims. While I prefer Xplane (for all the reasons stated), MSFS 2020 keeps getting better and hooking anyone into the hobby is a good thing. Since I'm a Linux guy, I certainly appreciate how open X-Plane is and one of the reasons why I adore the sim - that ethos is still being carried out - their developer blogs are quite clear on their goals, what they are doing, what the future is and you can always see their incremental successes on each version. I have more X-Plane videos in my playlist if you are interested (otherwise my channel is a jumble of topics/content). Thanks for watching!
I’m trying to learn how to fly. FS20 is useless, last thing I need is to be surprised by having to use the rudder on takeoff. The flight model is why I don’t care that it isn’t pretty out of the box. That being said, auto-ortho + simheaven is damn solid.
Like I said lots of times to various people - if you are IN the plane and actually flying, those concerns about graphics get much less and you noticing just how RIGHT it feels goes up. While I love my Ortho, sometimes even the stock ground textures are good enough - the denser the area the less you see of the ground (or the same when it is more rural and covered with trees). Thanks for watching!
Recently got xplane and a free scenery update that was photographic. I didnt like the scenery because I could not fly GA and at realistic altitudes and see my homestate from the air. I like the flight model, but dont think they are that much different. Outside forces on the plane seem about the same. I do like the looks of the cockpit in xplane and seems like more is simulated or at least I can flip more switches. Xplane scenery gateway is great and what I thought msfs should have always done. So much 3rd party software is lacking.
Thanks so much for watching and commenting. The 3rd party software is quite vibrant in Xplane, which is why I think people were not dazzled with XP12 since we had a lot of the upgrades through 3rd parties already.
I am beginning to hate MSFS 2020. The program crashes about every third flight for me.
That's a shame - but one of the reasons why I have always leaned towards Linux for all these years. XP12 has been rock stable for me, but that isn't always the case for people using Steam and Windows. And with MSFS, I have heard those load up times can be brutal. Someone told me it isn't too long, but I really can boot within 30 seconds with the satellite imagery and everything.
whats your pc specs?
@@lquidty5 There is a video in my XPlane Playlist of me building my PC. i5-12600k, 32gb DDR4, 1TB M2 SSD, 500gb SSD, 2X2TB 5400rpm (not used for sim), 1660ti - running CH dual throttle, Honeycomb Alpha Yoke, Teensy/Custom switchbox, Turtle Beach Velocity One Rudder Pedals - Linux/Ubuntu 22.04 LTS.
Oh I was asking the the orignal comment but thanks for letting me know your specs,@@dixielandfarm
You forgot to add you can get a Piper Aztec and Ercoupe models to fly in X-Plane.
There are quite a few planes that are exclusive (or better, or both) to Xplane. Thanks for watching!
What addon do you use for satellite imagery
I made my own tiles with Ortho4XP, but most people use AutoOrtho now and just download the tiles they need on the fly. Only until last week I didn't have an internet connection that could handle that, but I prefer my own tiles at this point.
Hey Kris. Are you a ham operator as well? I think I recognized a Yaesu World Map in the picture of you on the xplane website! 73
Yup - Extra class. But I stopped chasing DX once I got into flight simming - the antennas are all in some sort of disrepair at the moment.
Used MSFS almost 3 years now, recently got into Xplane 11, must admit the graphics are meh but flying feels way more fun (especially helicopters they were unbearable in MSFS) , everything is smoother and the loading times are better aswell, i prefer the xplane UI more as well, everything feels more straight forward and faster
Thanks so much for watching! There are a few things you can do (moving to XP12 if you can, autoortho or making your own, etc.), but I think for most people who complain about xplane graphics (MSFS are of course, much superior) are people who like to zoom in or be outside of the plane making screenshots - when you are actually sitting where a pilot would the complaint becomes much smaller.
Great video. You make a lot of good points including some I was not aware of. One thing I can not stand in MSFS 2020 is the annoying music. Also I fly mostly at night in bad weather in Mountainous terrain so the satellite imagery is not important to me. The other thing that bothered me about MS was when they fired all of the people working on MS Flight Simulator during the 2007/2008 "great recession". In other words they really are not Flight Simulator enthusiasts. They are just out to make quick buck.
A lot of people glossed over that fact in my video - supporting a small set of passionate people is important to me (and you). Austin Meyer has been working on this project for decades and keeps continuing to strive for the most realistic product he can, sometimes at the detriment of his clients - some would prefer the innovation remain static, but they would rather break existing third party products for a better simulator than just staying stagnant. They also never charged for their API - you don't have to pay a cent to Laminar to create your own product. Thanks for watching!
I use both but there's nothin wrong with picking one sim over the other. Most of your examples are quite subjective although that is the intent when expressing an opinion.
Now THAT is someone who gets it! Yup - my opinion from my viewpoint, but some people had a real problem with that for some reason - as if my decision was saying THEIR decision was wrong - but of course, that is not the case. Thanks for watching!
Love that you are enjoying your flying/flight simulator time. I hope things are going well on the farm. Say hello to Marissa and all the horsies for me. We haven’t seen her in a bit….I think it’s time for a 🎶 hooooome vlooooog 🎶 😂😂😂 Have a great week Kris 😊 Theresa
There was an update two days ago, and the clouds are frighteningly realistic now - just gorgeous. This past weekend I did two flights - one from Jacksonville Exec to Orlando Exec in a twin turboprop (in the sim, I'm a millionaire, btw). Then another from my hometown airport on Long Island that I used to work out of in the helicopter 20+ years ago to Block Island (Rhode Island, even though it is right off of Montauk). So much fun and relaxing (and I was a great pilot both trips). You will see Marissa next week as our May trip day 1 goes up.
@@dixielandfarm I visited Block Island years ago….I remember seeing a lot of mansions on the Cliff Walk. I’m so excited for next weeks video. Love all your content, but always enjoy seeing how happy you and Marissa are together 😊 xo
The claim of there aren’t accurately simulates airliners for msfs is false. Msfs has the Fokker f-28 which is amazing, also the pmdg 737 which has more system depth then zibo but it doesn’t really give that wow factor the zibo does in terms of ground handling and the Fenix a320 which is one of the best a320’s for any simulator. They have every system simulated
Would you concede that there aren't as many accurately simulated?
@@dixielandfarm in terms of what’s out now? Definitely not. However in the future certainly msfs will have more accurately simulated airlines than xplane. I could tell you right now. Aerosoft a330 all variants, flybywire a380, imibuilds a350 and 380, bluebird 767 and 757, pmdg 777 series, Fenix a321/319 variants, tfdi md11, fslabs a330, fslabs a320 line up, pmdg 737 max, pmdg 747, ifly 737 max, dfd a350, synaptic a220. All these aircraft are confirmed to be coming and all having accurate systems. The only airliners msfs is missing which is the a340 but that isn’t in much use irl anyway.
@@majoraviatior1611t this exactly puts into context. XP12 is in the margin. XP Devs don’t seem that excited by XP12. MSFS 2024 will be soon there are new announcements all the time from several MSFS devs. External engine and flight models becoming more common, FSL yet to enter with their products which also use this technique.
No point comparing default sim and default aircraft if what you want is the best. The hotstart 650 is probably the only outright winner for XP. For Boeing or Airbus there are competitive aircraft in MSFS. Fenix B2 will probably be an outright win for airbus.
GA plenty of mid level quality for both sims. I think MSFS has the edge of a few GA and A2A may well be another outright win for GA with their Comanche on MSFS.
Xplane 12 much more superior. Great video
Thanks so much for watching! I have a whole xplane playlist with flights and stuff if you are interested.
Casual simmer here, internet speed is a major barrier for me to use MSFS. As beautiful as the game looks it's just not an option for me right now, I need a sim I can more or less run "offline". The satellite imagery here with X-plane 12, it's downloaded and not streaming, correct?
That is correct - downloaded/created by me (though you can get ones made by other people for certain regions), and works offline. You do need a bit of space for it - my east coast of the US (pretty much where I fly) takes up 500gb. Even at that, I actually find the XP12 stock ground textures pretty good in areas I don't know, so the satellite/ortho isn't a must.
Ok, thanks so much! @@dixielandfarm
i like both simulations, if that makes sense. i was flying XPlane 11 for a very long time. what i didn't like wasn't anything about the look and feel, it was the poor performance the sim could get out of my pc hardware. i was upgrading everything regularly but just to had 5-10 fps more. in MSFS2020 my 4060 makes minimum 50 fps on the ground and goes up to 120+ in the air. second big thing is multiplayer in 2020. i always can find a gonk who's ready for some F22/F35 activities. does have XP12 Frame Generation/AMD's FSR3 and Multiplayer mode? if so then i probably would buy it. if not then i'm going on with enjoying the excellent flight model in XP11. because the stock 737 in 11 is the best airliner i've ever flown!!
Well, people will argue this, but I will take the Xplane stance on fps - in a flight sim, anything above 20fps is adequate, and 30fps is perfectly fine - anything more isn't going to do much for you other than make you feel good about your hardware. With shooters, the fps are critical for razor quick action - but on a flight sim, it isn't going to make you a better pilot. As for the multiplayer aspect, all flight sims can have multiple live aircraft online with a service like Vatsim, IVAO, or Pilotedge, but they will be expecting you to fly to real life standards, in the sense of airspace, direction - you will have live ATC with a real controller (sometimes) and be expected to cooperate. FS2020 has the multiplayer mode where it is basically anything goes - some will fly with courtesy, some will just act like nobody is there and cut in front of you... so I fly on VATSIM where there is a real controller and other pilots all (trying) to work within the real word rules when online. Hope I answered your questions well enough... thank you so much for watching and commenting!
I respect your opinion I personally like MSFS more. I do think that the performance argument is very weak considering that xplane12 is very difficult to get good performance. Scenery argument is meh, xplane airports are not good enough to satisfy most users and ortho takes up place so in the end they are about equal. Flight model, msfs is TECHNICALLY better in terms of what is possible BUT it will always depend for both sims on the developer of the aircraft. Also there is no correct flight model for a certain plane. It will always feel different for each user depending on their joystick/hardware. And the visuals is msfs are better it’s not an argument. So that’s why I like msfs more but to each their own. Also most devs are switching to mostly if not exclusively msfs.
Thanks for watching and commenting.
I agree. I prefer the UI and view controls of X-Plane, but for GA what you see out the window matters, and MSFS leaves X-Plane for dust in that regard, especially if you're doing visual navigation. The flight model of MSFS gets bashed a lot, but there are reviews by real pilots and even flight instructors who say it's realistic. Some even think it's more realistic than X-Plane. As you say, the backend is there but the end result depends on how much effort was put into each aircraft.
I live in Australia and I am finding X Plane 12 has much better quality land marks than MSF 2020, in fact MSF has only 4 gigabytes of Australian data and I had the top of the range. The houses and the airports for MSF you had to buy each one yet in X Plane 12 90% of airports are so close to perfect, the houses are like Australian homes yet MSF 2020 are so American not funny streets are missing in my part they say you can fly over your home and see it not true. I will give MSF one credit they had Longreach pretty close to perfect. It was well done. I gave up on MSF 2020 as downloading was over the top every time you would spend hours downloading and then find you had trouble getting it to run. I love flying smaller aircraft and X Plane 12 suits me perfectly very happy with it. Thanks for sharing your experience too
There are also a TON of grass strips that aren't really modeled in MSFS (from what I have been told), and lately that has been one of my favorite things to fly to - doing short hops from one private field to another. If you are adventurous, I would suggest trying Simheaven X-Australia, but those houses may end up looking like europe - that uses more accurate data to place real life landmarks... and ortho is also nice to have - but not always necessary... I'm a GA pilot mostly myself, and XP is a joy to use. Thanks so much for taking the time to comment!
Hey Kris, Well you certainly made your case for this, like anything else coming down to preference overall and as you were saying with the practical consideration of slower internet where you live. You touched on A.I. a bit.....What's your take on all that? Do you feel it'll be the greatest thing or is going to render humanity extinct, or somewhere in the middle....? Or is that question opening a can of worms...or, er...bots? 🙂 Thanks for sharing and happy flying the program of your choice. -Carm
I do think it will be somewhere in the middle. We will have intelligent helpers that will get the gist of what we are looking for and do it or answer it... and certainly mock up things we dream up of, instantaneously. Drive our cars, help out around the house... we have glimpses of that now with vehicles and roombas (which already use a fuzzy AI). BUT, I also see us bending things FOR AI having us adapt to it so that way it works right/better. At what point do we come replaceable is always the thinking - but in a corporate structure, EVERYONE is replaceable as it is - we are all widgets in this type of society. Having said that, I have never touched anything AI related - never had them answer a question, type up an article/post, create a picture or a movie... I keep thinking I don't want to participate in this.
@@dixielandfarm Feel similar with this....somewhere in the middle, probably not being much of a participant though recognizing that it's here to stay, like it or not. Would like to think our species as a whole will recognize it as a tool for growth and evolution concomitant with our own, or hopefully aiding us in our own....my reservations do come though partly from observing more and more people staring...er....nearly in a state of catatonia into their phones...appearing more like the tools being used by the devices themselves...just hope we collectively don't make the same mistake here! Then again, maybe my previous existence was in the 1890's and I should have stayed there as I sure don't get this age at all, ha.
New subscriber, thank you for your review. I too am a Linux user and couldn't be happier with X Plane 12. It runs well and I have had very few issues. As for MSFS, I wouldn't have a Microsoft product on my computer if they paid me. Besides, I fly airliners so low and slow flying doesn't hold much appeal for me. Photo realistic scenery doesn't do much at FL350.
Thanks so much for watching Jeff (and I assume a fellow ham). Apparently you and I are wrong, as I keep getting told so in this video :) I have a video buried in my computer playlist on why I use Linux at home (despite being a sysadmin at work with Windows) - and people will throw at XP preferred pilots two or three airliners as if that's all that exist when there are so many more. XP has them ALL, and modeled fairly accurately. MSFS has a handful.
@@dixielandfarm Yes, I have been licensed since '88 and still having a blast on the radio. I still have VE6EFR assigned to me but I have since added another call sign, VE6DV (DV for digital voice as I use the digital voice modes more often than HF since moving into an apartment).
As for flight sim, it seems as if people get fighting mad when another person prefers a different simulator. They forget that competition is a good thing. I seriously doubt that X Plane would be where it is today if MSFS didn't come along. Competition always brings out the best in those that create. Windows and MAC brings out the best in Linux. It is the users that benefit.
Yessss! Game play vs authentic simulation.
Thanks so much for watching and agreeing! Most people like to tell me why I am wrong :)
I think most people view flight simming as a GAME, they rightly prefer MSF. I like realism and detail and technical accuracy. XPlane is indisputably superior.@@dixielandfarm
I'm a first time Simulator player, I don't know which of the two to chose. I heard xp12 is for more advanced gamers and lack a flight planner. Help me out.
Most people who use xplane wouldn't call it a game, they would call it a simulator because of how close to real life it acts, just like you can't just jump in and fly around in a real plane. Same with the flight planning - either you would use real world tools for that or websites... so having said that, MSFS might be more suited for you since you can just jump in mid flight plus play its missions, etc. I basically read books and took virtual ground school to be able to operate in XP12. The good news is there is a free demo so you can try and basically have the whole program in 15 minute chunks to see if you like it or can use it. Neither will work well without at least a joystick (preferably with a twist axis) or a full yoke/rudder setup. Good news is the joysticks aren't too expensive. The yoke and rudder pedals are, no matter which ones you get.
Most of the advanced simmers I know and that’s a lot, moved from P3D with FSLabs to MSFS and Fenix. Which is just about to be the best A320 in any sim.
GA the A2A Comanche in MSFS is a real as it gets to owning your own aircraft in a sim.
XP is a marginal market with devs that not seem that excited about XP12.
MSFS is alive with new content every month.
If you are just beginning MSFS is the choice.
@@johnmaguire2185 Well, devs will go where the market is, and people definitely are with MSFS2020… and I have heard good things about the A2A. XP isn’t marginal, but it is niche. It is made by dedicated people, many real world pilots, have been in business for decades, and continue to make a product that is used professionally as well as for the consumer. MS made a good simulator for years, abandoned the product for years and had third party people come in to take over, and are back with something that works on Xbox as well as PCs. Its a great sim. Casual sim pilots should absolutely give MSFS2020 the nod. But that wasn’t the company, product, or level of sim I was interested in.
this is exactly why i will always prefer xplane over msfs. I'm working on becoming a pilot and having a career in aviation so what's important for me will always be the physics and flying part. People need to realize that everybody wants something different from their sims whether it's graphics or simulation of flight, no need to attack each other let people have fun on what they want. There is a big enough difference between how they feel that xplane will always feel closer to home stick and rudder flying for me personally. It's faa certified, do you really need to say anything more than that! Xp was built upon and still is around flight physics and with a muchhhh smaller team than asobo with a budget coming from microsoft, will ofc be slower to update stuff.
Where msfs shines is that it's more catered to everyone at every skill level and knowledge. The flying part is more or less a bit static during take offs and landings that even xbox users can use it which is brilliant. No need for scenery installation either or anything else!
What a great comment! Thanks so much for watching and taking the time to tell your perspective.
Well I have no problems with MSFS2020 and I have an old pc (all Asus rog strix components+ Sansung SSD 1tb for MSFS)with a 1080, tons of add ons thay I manage with a free program and all run well. I fly only GA like in RL. No liner.
Thanks for watching and commenting!
you dont need fast internet for msfs.. the server is limited to 50-150kbps, where 50 is the norm more often. dsl can handle more than that. even without the online mode the visuals are better in msfs. so you shouldnt avoid msfs because of dsl.
i dont know where the myth came from, you also dont need fiber to use google maps do you?
DSL most certainly can not handle 50 mbps in most cases (if you meant 50 mbps and not kbps). I lived less than a mile from the local exchange point and got 27mpbs, best. Once you are longer than a mile the speed drops considerably - 5 to 10mbps is not uncommon in rural areas. I lived with 5mbps for a long time until they got new technology and the speed increased. Upload speed was 1mbps.
As for google maps, you aren't loading nearly the amount of data - it is rezzed down depending on your speed and zoom level - MSFS has to load in quite a bit more data for the surrounding area, and while it is also rezzed down depending on settings and speed, it is pulling quite a larger area to start.
I have fiber connection with 100mbps and It still sucks, no thanks !
cant understand you spend most of your time in an airport. first thing i do is lift my nose, and then i can already not see the airport anymore, and i dont even care to look back on it. and then only after hours i see the other airport again, and im there 10 minutes max.
I am assuming you are not on an online network like VATSIM, where you are required to start at a parking stand and taxi properly. That includes clearances (if required), getting the ATIS/weather, switching to a ground controller, taxiing, switching to tower, taking off and the reverse after landing. Following those real world procedures, it can easily be 25-30% of your time if you are doing airliners once you factor in loading, fueling, computing figures, programming and FMS. When you are on VATSIM or another online network, having an accurate airport is a must - you need to follow taxi routes as given, and having mislabeled or incorrect paths will cause an issue for other aircraft that are around you.
Thanks for your video. MSFS2020 keeps crashing on my new computer and there is no real support to get for it. So I'm just out money for it. Probably going to go with xplane now.
If you don't own it, try the free demo - other than the time limit and location it is the fully program. I have had three crashes in xplane in the past five years, and they all were due to me doing other things on the computer - otherwise, it just hasn't been an issue for me. Let me know if it works out!
I have played xplane for years but to tell the truth right now I much prefer mfs2020, is going through objects in xplanet realistic or going through houses and trees???, not at all.
I try to fly the plane so I don't go through any objects, but that might just be me. I am glad sometimes that it doesn't recognize it due to bad art/placement options, or poor pilots on VATSIM who do what they want.
@@dixielandfarm I'm just saying that xplane is a realistic simulator and in many many cases it is not real at all, it is very very arcade. I've used xplane since 7 and I'm already tired of it.
The Bing satellite imagery with its blurry photos, green roads, inconsistency and slow streaming times resulting in pop-in on every system and setting, is actually the weakest aspect of the Msfs visuals. Almost every part of the world scenery in Msfs that has not been enhanced by hand since launch looks 2005 level technology.
The weather, lighting, and aircraft detail is what really sets it apart visually - in other words everything that Wasn't the responsibility of Microsoft to provide.
Case in point the initial installer was clearly also Microsoft, and is .. serviceable but nowhere near the design and usability of any other launcher.
And yes it's arguable whether the black whatever AI actually achieves anything. It would not surprise me if there is a running joke among the team, all still under NDA no doubt, that it literally made the scenery worse.
Thanks so much for your comments. When I made my ortho, I always used Google - and of course there is a mod to use Google instead of Bing in MSFS2020. I would argue that payware aircraft in XP12 has a leg up - I find lots of aircraft in FS2020 (pictures and videos) have a plastic-y, clean look that doesn't have that lived in look that the designers seem to do in XP. I would also argue weather and lighting is now surpassing - but that is personal preference - MSFS LOOKS prettier, but I think XP12 looks more realistic (and sometimes that means drab, hazy, gray). Nice guitar work on your channel!
I play msfs on Linux using steam and it works great
Awesome! I thought I had read some people got it working on Steam, but I wasn't sure (only found one or two posts about it). Not sure if you had to do anything special (I assume not), but that is very cool. Thanks for watching!
What are you using for scenery in X-Plane
Simheaven X-America, Ortho for the east coast of the US, otherwise stock ground textures, Xtreme Trees for better tree placement for the ortho (otherwise you end up with trees in parking lots). Most people with this combination don't use Xtreme Trees (I had already bought it), but use Global Forests. I think most people also have converted over to AutoOrtho (I don't have the internet speed for it). So, roughly $15 spent, three products, and that's it. No custom airports. I do have Airport Environment HD installed, but that was because I had already bought it - it basically just makes hangars look a bit rusty/lived in. I do use Orbx True Earth: Florida, but I'm a big Disney World fan, so I wanted to make sure the Orlando area had all the special landmarks - it really isn't necessary for most people, Simheaven will take care of it for most people.
Xplane wins hands down with load time and ease of flight.
Msfs - even with a high end setup and nvme drive, still takes 2-3 minutes just to load the main menu. Plus another two for the flight. It doesnt crash as much lately - vr may change that - but still the grind of reloading 5 minutes of menus for when the game crashes is hell.
In favor of msfs, the controls are easier - more simpler to edit and change. Especially with the camera controls. I want one joystick/analog stick to control my view around the plane and camera. Slightly more intuitive camera control for viewing the eye candy sights. The marketplace makes it easier to find new stuff as well.
Neofly is fun to use with msfs, slightly more intuitive and easier than AirHauler 2 for xplane.
I find the camera extremely easy to use in xplane - find a setting/space you like, hit ctrl and they key on the number pad, and you are set. Arrow keys plus , and . - and outside views are fairly straight forward. I always have my left/forward/right set as 4,5,6 and then those are mapped to my yoke as well, so I find it easy - but like most things, its probably what you use first sets it the way you like it. As for marketplace - I'm sure it is good, but I pretty much only stick to the x-plane.com store or orbx (and that's a stretch), but I get how it is easier inside the program. Thanks so much for watching!
@@dixielandfarm I need to change the camera control in my yoke, they either pan the camera slowly or they immediately stick to the direction it is pushed in a bumper camera way.
You could make the hat just go directly to a quick view (like left, forward, right and one more), and leave the panning to your mouse for other times - I found my hat on my first yoke was not smooth, but fine once I got the honeycomb.
@@dixielandfarm I'll give that a try, so many options when you open that control menu. I'm using the Logitech setup.
cameras are sensors.. this is often forgotten. even if a photo is very bad quality, it is still the best sensor capture of the buildings. the things in xplane are not real captures, and therefore i hate them. i also hate beautified ai images, because it has nothing to do with sensor capture anymore, by then it is just a random texture to me, and it removes any meaning or magic from the sensor capture for being study level real.
it is far better to have a 100x100 px real capture of your children, than to have a 8k ai painting of them. simply because you can analyze the real one, and the fake one is meaningless.
This is the most asinine argument I have heard yet for MSFS vs XP. You can have orthographic scenery and see the real world in XP, very easily with an add on (you don't have to build tiles like I did, the program does it automatically and in the background). So, at a sufficient elevation, you are looking at essentially what you would be looking at in MSFS. Come lower, and of course that is where MSFS absolutely shines, however. Too low, and that's where it falls apart.
Buildings in MSFS at the airport are not photogrammetry, the planes are not photographs in MSFS, a substantial percentage of the world in the sim does not have photogrammetry, the trees are not photogrammetry. To those who fly helicopters in the sim, they will tell you that Xplane is THE only simulator, not only for flight characteristics, but because seeing the buildings (however fake) is more realistic than what photogrammetry can do at the elevation they are flying at - a GA plane will be at a sufficient height to not notice the limitations, but those in ultralights and helicopters will definitely notice.
MSFS now has 90% of the flight sim market and the devs have followed them with study level planes and add-ons. XP is on a death spiral.
People have said that over and over, but it is a smaller team, smaller overhead, and catering to a different market, including professional applications - it will survive just fine - maybe less consumer activity, but enough for them to be more than comfortable. I suspect once Microsoft either brings it more into a gaming direction, or abandon it completely (like they did in the past), XP will sweep up those users and grow again.
@@dixielandfarm - or they could join forces, XP/Laminar to release flight models and other add-on on MSFS market. Imagine the demand!
@@roborat2000in other words, there should be no healthy competition…
I bought msfs 2020 right when it became available. I really tried to like it, but I've hardly touched it since because of all the bugs and constant massive updates, etc. I don't even bother trying to play it anymore because every time I've tried, there is another multi gig update that I can't skip or install later. Maybe I'll start playing again if I get x-plane. No amount of cool graphics can make it worth dealing with the headache every time I try using msfs 2020.
Try the free demo. At no point do you ever have to update (some people still fly XP9). Even at that you can have two copies installed so you can keep what you have and then upgrade as you see fit. They understand some people have custom cockpits - I remember watching a livestreamer have his whole multi-thousand dollar setup break completely after a 2020 update and it took him weeks to sort out.
After having bought XP9 and XP10 and having strugglede with a totally useless and exstremly complicated user interface and also seen that addons suddenly were no longer compatible after an upgrade of XP10 I decided to never again waste time and money on XP products, now I use MSFS and are happy using it and I never go back. An example: I bought a fantastic SAAB 340 and every time I wanted to go for a flight I should assigne all controls again and again, useless userinterface.
I have the Saab 340, which I love. You can even see me fly it on this channel (in my xplane playlist) - I have never had to assign any controls more than once to any plane, ever. XP9 and XP10 definitely were complicated user interfaces, which they changed in XP11 to something that is beyond simple - some will argue too simple. It is intuitive, and easy to understand - so your frustrations were for products that were more than 10 years old at this point. BUT, that doesn't mean you can't enjoy what you enjoy - I am saying if you download the demo and look at the UI, you will be impressed at the changes.
@@dixielandfarm thanks for your answer and for starting a relevant debate, I will check out your channel
there has not been a decent 340 since, PMDG's J41 was also very good so I bought that instead
But strange with that controller issue, I did try everything I could thinlk of back then, it was the LES 340 with a fantastic documentation , not the Carenado version
another thing that really annoyed me was the primitive built in ATC, I can still remenber it shouting at me: you are of course, you are of course, you are of course, you are of course..... and the AI planes, there were one or two, and alwayes a 747 trying to land on a grass field, it was a bleak world without life compared to FSX and prepar,
that is of course not a problem for VATSIM users but it was for me
@@oledamgaard7688 Yup - unsatisfied with ANY ATC, I moved to VATSIM and now will only fly on there - now 75% of my flying is uncontrolled, but I still am on the network. There is a plugin that is supposed to be better, and XP12 ATC has grown, but in comparison, it can't compete with humans. I do have the Carenado version, the LES wasn't Linux compatible - and while most Carenado planes are lacking, I do believe a different developer worked on the 340 in partnership, so it is very good (and I even got it on sale for $20USD).
make sure that your visuals on screen match up with what you are talking about. 99% of people skip trough videos until the "relevant" visual comes on, and only then people start to listen to your speech. you shouldnt have a visual of the planning board while reviewing airport quality.
Well, the video is on why "I" prefer Xplane over MSFS, it isn't a video other than opinion. Which also means I will piece it together however I like, show whatever I like, and talk about whatever I like.
I’ve never used X-Plane. I’ve had fs2020 for less than a week; and it is awful. It feels like an arcade game. It is not pit friendly, the cockpits feel dark, displays seem distant and difficult to read, weird zoom controls, weird view controls. The airports look fantastic, the aircraft look great; but I NEVER use an external view. Maybe great for some, just not my jam. I was considering going back to FSX, but I think I’m going to check this out.
Please try the demo - it is completely free and other than the time limit, not limited in any way. The camera system is so intuitive in Xplane - I alway have left, center, right set on the keypad as 4,5,6 and those mapped to my yoke - so I can always see no matter what in any aircraft without having to think about it - plus having profiles for each aircraft, proper ground handling, proper small airports (without taxi lights four feet in the air in the middle of a taxiway, not to mentioned being labelled correctly), and you can either choose to have satellite imagery or not - the autoortho isn't too hard to set up, and honestly neither is making your own - but unless it is an area you love or know real well, the default ground textures are fine. Let me know what you think!
Are you sure you’re not talking about xplane? Those issues sound like xplane issues
Great video,of course MSFS2020 looks superb for sure.But as you pointed out already,you need a powerful pc to run it beautifully,and fast internet.Which in my case i dont have both either lol 😂 I use to be a big MSFS supporter,as those were thee sims in the good old days.But with my 3rd gen pc and internet thats constantly a struggle in South Africa,it was not an option for me.MSFS FSX was the last version i used,and moved over to Xplane 11 back then,and i was not disappointed.Still enjoying Xplane with its performance on my 3rd gen pc, and after getting a gap to download Ortho4xp tiles for the whole South African continent,which took more than a week btw, now looks superb with tweaks, and simheaven scenery.And even up until today, MSFS2020 is still not an option for me.
Thanks so much for the comment, Mark. So many people just assume that high speed internet is available everywhere, and it isn't. XP12 will probably need a computer update (that's what I had to do), but it DOES look gorgeous. Thanks for watching!
@@dixielandfarm Im planning to perform an upgrade on my system when financially possible :) Although I have tried the XP12 demo in the past just to get a feel, and it was not behaving too bad to be honest. However thats with default settings, the moment you start adding plugins, payware aircraft and custom scenery then I guess one will start noticing a dip in the performance. But with regards to the internet, yeah sadly not everyone has access to that kind of internet speed, although they are in the phase of installing it on our area, but as with anything else in South Africa...it takes a looooooooooong time 😂
Interesting comparison. I have some observations as one with countless hours on both (XP user since v. 10). For low-flying VFR it's a choice between the "Dali melting clocks" and cartoony buildings and butt-ugly ground textures. Pick you poison. They both look better at altitude. XP12's clouds, lighting, and weather effects are not anywhere in the same league as MSFS.
MSFS has been closing the gap on accurate fight dynamics, and 2024 will surpass XP in physics modeling, I believe. There are plenty of RW professional pilots who favor the flight modeling on either side. depending on the aircraft. At the end of the day, neither will prepare you for the physical feel of real world flying.
MSFS offers MUCH better frame rates at higher graphics settings than XP. They both have very long loading times, depending on the scenery. ASFAIK, XP doesn't take advantage of my 4070's DLSS or Frame Generation. But even without these, MSFS outperforms XP by a longshot.
I don't find configuring MSFS more or less than difficult than XP, just very different, so it does take some getting used to if you've been using XP for long time. I actually like the extra granularity in MSFS graphic settings to better fine-tune performance.
The only two things I would counter is the new beta I think the clouds look better than MSFS, but that is still probably down to preference. The other is I do think 2024 is going more towards a gamer market, so I wouldn't think the flight dynamics are going to improve that much - the missions they are advertising as the feature of the product makes me think striving for accuracy is less important than variety and especially world building (not a bad thing). Thanks so much for watching and taking the time to comment with your impressions/thoughts.
@@dixielandfarm You may be right about 2024. But it might not really matter, because as we've seen with XP (and what was always its greatest strength), I believe 3rd party developers will increasingly extend the flight modeling beyond the capabilities of MSFS' base platform with their own code, such as what A2A has done with the Comanche (which reportedly has superb flight modeling), and in this case via an external app, which leads me to think that developers really are not limited by the platform. Very exciting times for flight simmers!
i'll tell austin meyer send you a free copy for x plane13 when relase . but make sure still can't beat MSFS 2020 !!!
Thanks so much for watching!
I still think that in a GENERAL aspect Msfs is wayy waay better
For you, and that's great. And you should use it. For me, it wouldn't work for the way I enjoy the hobby, so X-Plane suits me more. No reason why both can't be out there and people choose. Thanks for watching!
There is no comparison when it comes to visuals between x plane and msfs2020 real life actual pilots will tell you how great msfs2020 looks visually. X plane clouds look horrible the map layout is basically just a grid layout. 30k+ feet up msfs blows x plane out the water visually the higher you get the worst it gets for x plane. X plane flight model is superior bar none but visual wise it’s being lapped like Ricky Bobby in talledega nights.
That's right - and I said as such about the visuals. But that isn't the only quality of a sim. When I'm flying the plane, I'm sitting in the plane and doing work. I think most casual simmers are 50% in an outside view looking around. But clouds are getting better and better in XP12 - I prefer them at this point (definitely wasn't the case at the launch of XP12, and XP11 clouds are not even in the same league).
@@dixielandfarm I fly 75% in VR visuals is important for me as that would defeat the point of VR. From the A2A Comanche VFR or my now new favorite the kuro 787-8 flying IFR. Visuals surly come into play when your running AI traffic. On a trip 2days ago from KJFK-KICT on a late night flight; cruising at FL380 I literally watched a AI plane shoot an approach and landed at KCVG from the height I could only really see the Nav lights and strobes and know it was an airliner not like I could pick up the livery or anything I only knew it was a delta because I was listening in as they communicated with ATC but that was fascinating to me. Granted I do have a pretty decent rig plus 1g internet so I do understand your dilemma with having the bandwidth limitations. X plane 12 does look better than x plane 11 for sure. That’s because visual just can’t not be ignored. At the end of the day no one will get a type rating from in front of our PC’s so they have to understand the lane that they are competing in.
@@youngsmooth8318 I always fly on VATSIM with real people and traffic - and the same thing there - every livery, every plane that exists there is a model for, so when I hear the controller say to AA, when I look at that plane, it is an AA - or if he says Delta heavy give way to the crossing traffic, I can look and yup, its a Delta. Though, as you know, X-Plane IS used in real FAA training simulators and DOES count towards airtime. I still haven't used VR; tried TrackIR but it hurt my neck. However, I have a real button controller here I custom built that covers 90% of the controls used in any airplane, so it would be hard to use that just by touch - and I do a lot of IFR work so having my second monitor ready makes it tough as well. One day I hope to have a cheap headset just so I have the option. And I can certainly understand VR looking better in MSFS, especially under 5,000 ft.
@@dixielandfarmand that’s wrong, every xplane fanboy says this, no xp does not count towards flight hours unless to have a very very expensive near full motion sim.
I think you misread, I said xplane is used in real faa simulators which WOULD count towards airtime (usually IFR rating, and only 10 hours max) - your personal copy doesn't count towards anything.
Here is my take away, X-Plane will NEVER look even close to what MSFS does. However there are plenty of "Study Level" aircraft out there that you can get for free. I have one for the Cessna 152, 172, Airbus A-320. There are also study level aircraft available in the marketplace. The A2A Simulations Comanche comes to mind, where real world pilots say it is the best simulated aircraft available in ANY simulation. Black Square has study level Baron, Bonanza, King Air and Caravan aircraft. The point is I can meet or exceed X-Plane in realism but X-Plane will always look like trash compared to MSFS.
It will always look better, but that's not my motivation for flying the sim - it is to get as close as I can to realism in the sim. MOST people, it is a game... for me this is a substitution for real life flying that I can't dedicate time or money to. I do engine out procedures, failures, difficult IFR legs, /A, VFR, turboprops, twins, and occasionally an airliner. I fly the Q4XP that multiple real world Q400 pilots say is the best simulated aircraft ever made - and same with the vFlyteAir Twin Comanche that has been out for years (and has been updated), but what does that mean. You enjoy MSFS - this is why I fly XP (and for some reason, people keep taking my preference as an attack on THEIR choice). I have gone through training classes with real world pilots for VATSIM ratings, with real world CFIs, and they all have also been of the same opinion - but like anything in aviation, get five pilots together and you will have six different opinions. These are the reasons I fly XP12 and will continue to.
@@dixielandfarm I am not attacking your choice, only saying that I think it is a bit uninformed, that is all.
@@dixielandfarm I just bought it on Steam and am installing it now. Some of the things I HATE about MSFS is the size of the download. I jokingly call it Microsoft Download Simulator. The install gets corrupted, I have had to uninstall and reinstall 4 times in the three years it has been out. So there are times I am looking for an alternative to MSFS so I will give Xplane a shot and see how I like it.
The nice thing is you can always rerun the installer and it will look at each file and only repair the ones it needs (which almost always happens due to user error and tinkering). Make sure you check the beta box if you want the betas - at this stage of XP12 development (if using XP10 and XP11 as indicators). You can always uncheck the beta and it will put the last release version back on. The betas have been fairly stable for me (though there is a new bug where it rains too much, documented and a fix hopefully coming in 2 weeks). The 12.05 release doesn't have that bug, but the clouds aren't as nice.
@@dixielandfarm So I got it installed, I am running with everything maxed out, I have a 5800X3D CPY, RTX 4090 and 64GB of ram so it runs silky smooth. I will say that for VFR flying around Maryland where I grew up and still live there is no competition between MSFS and X-Plane 12. So I flew out of my local airport of KFDK and flew down highway 70 to Baltimore, you had mentioned that X-Plane 12 presented a "Plausible" word but I will disagree. If someone would have dropped me into X-Plane 12 over Baltimore Maryland without telling me where I was I highly doubt I could tell you where I was. There was NOTHING in the scenery that was real, it was just randomly placed computer generated buildings. No port facilities, no inner harbor, no stadiums, no Fort McHenry. The roads don't look bad per say but they look like computer generated roads like you would see out of FSX, a program 17 years old. I can not fly VFR around Maryland in X-Plane 12 because it is just random scenery generated by the sim where in MSFS I AM flying over Maryland, in the Eastern part of the state I don't need maps to tell me where I am because I can just look out the aircraft and I know exactly where I am. I can fly over my house, my sisters house, I can navigate by roads because I have driven them enough I can easily identify them by air. The roads in MSFS don't look like computer generated roads they look like they do in real life. In VR my brain is often tricked into thinking that I AM in an aircraft and I AM flying over Baltimore MD I will NEVER have that level of immersion with X-Plane 12. Even my small local airport, it is a perfect recreation of what it is in real life, where in X-Plane it is a close proximity of what it is in real life, meaning computer generated buildings in the places they are supposed to be vs hand crafted 3D replica's of the actual buildings.
It is a cute little program but does it compare to MSFS......not even close. Comparing it to FSX pr Pr3pared is more realistic. However, even back then I was using Megascenery Earth to give me a far more realistic experience of VFR flying around The East Coast of the United States in FSX than X-Plane 12.
Msfs 2020 players are like little boys......don't touch their toys or they will get mad and start to cry😂
I've been noticing that, especially with the comments I have been receiving (telling me that I'm wrong).
I just refunded msfs after the fact you can’t use joystick while clicking R on mouse to free look
@@hank10111111 I think sometimes they never test these things with people who actually use it, and just use bug testers who treat it like a game.
@@dixielandfarm I think also they’ve decided who cares because msfs24 is announced.
Same with xplane boys
I think xplane not that superior, it just fanboy who used to that product for so long.
Msfs 3rd party products like pmdg, fenix, blackbird, just flight, made better flight model than default. Many irl pilot said default plane is good enough.
I 'm racing simer also, no sim game is 100% accurate. so what u said is just assumption.
Thanks for watching!
I don’t know if you know this, but all of said 3rd party addons cost as much as the whole of the x-plane 12 simulator that comes with tons of free aircraft that are on par with these addons. Plus, the zibo 737 is essentially a free PDMG 737. Adding to that, X-plane is used as a training simulator that’s FAA approved. Where is MSFS’s approval?
@@RealTojo090 many forum said the FAA approved only the commercial one, not home version.
I love both sim for different purposes, in terms of cost X plane is amazing, slight better flight model, realistic visual tone, better ATC, default airports.
But xplane is not that superior, Cessna 172 default plane in msfs only don't have weight as xp when it comes to landing, other things just the same. Respected youtubers compared this.
Msfs so much better avionic now and sense of height for vfr.
@@ariehendrawan9784 one of my major criticisms of MSFS is how hard it is to land properly. It doesn’t feel like the planes actually have any suspension and they hover a lot. X-plane just feels more realistic in this department, where they have just the right sensitivity to fly things right. X-planes default aircraft are incredible, not forgetting they are entirely free.
@@RealTojo090 yes, I agree. Hope they fixed it in 2024
X-plane 12 looks exactly like X-Plane 11 a complete graphically and performance joke.
I'd rather be able to graphically enjoy a flight than physical enjoy a flight dynamic flight.
Our priorities are different, which is totally fine and valid. Thanks for watching!
you are talking shit
Thanks so much for watching!
"I enjoy dilettantes doing code submission and review.." yeah, that's why I love Linux too. I do not like MSFS, but Windows vs Linux, fuck that. People do not want to be IT Pros. People want shit to work like dial tone. Linux is nowhere near that, and never has been. I doubt it ever will be because what makes it Linux is not conducive to that.
Well, one could argue Linux is in 80% of the stuff everyone uses all day/every day including appliances, but that's a nerd argument that means nothing. It's either really simple (like a FireTV or Android phone), or extremely complicated (like my computer). Very little in-between. Thanks for watching and commenting!
@@dixielandfarm There is a HUGE difference between making an appliance and using a personal computer, and you know this. Any time you open an OS up for users to interface with, and you don't allow for that lowest common denominator, you get what you deserve.
Can’t compare what you don’t know. 🤦🏻♂️
It's not like I don't have eyes - I've seen countless hours of videos, people comments/reviews, articles, posts, people critiques on both sides by knowledgeable people, real world pilots, etc. That's how you make an informed decision.
If you are not a real pilot it doesn't matter if x plane is accurate or not....unless you plan to hijack a plane.
Who gives a f@&#$^. Just play an arcade game.
Oh, but you are wrong. It matters to lots of us - I fly online with live air traffic controllers (who train extensively) - we fly real world procedures, real world maps, real world weather, and I studied all the FAA manuals, took tests with actual pilots and was certified under strict rules laid out by the training organization - so all of that effort to try to make it as real as possible (within limits), the airplane acting as it would in real life is just as important. I want to feel it wobble when I go through a cloud. I want to feel air currents/up and downdrafts over mountains, etc.
@@dixielandfarm Ok -- in that case I'm wrong.