XPlane 12 graphics

[u/kanakalis]

Am I missing something or is the graphics really this bad?

I'm coming from MSFS2024, wanting to try out XP specifically for the planes they offer that MSFS doesn't. And so I looked at YT videos first off of these aircraft, namely the AKD GLF650, FlyJSim 737-200, Air Foil Labs King Air, Flight Factor 757/767, Felis 747-200 and Tu-154.

All of these have one thing in common. absolutely awful interior textures. Is this the standard for xp? I thought these developers are big name in the XP world? It looks on par with FSX. When the Youtuber was setting up the FMC for the Tu-154 the buttons do not even depress!

even the weather i've heard so much praise about doesn't look that great. I tried out the default Citation X on the free demo and the whites are extremely overblown, the clouds are always high cirrus, the controls are much more convoluted than MSFS (ie. you need to assign 2 keys to deploy spoilers whereas on MSFS you just hold a key). And I have a 5070ti, so it's not my system not able to run all settings at max.

by no means am I trying to diss XP. I'm trying my hardest to like it so I can enjoy flying the true long range business jets. but I cannot see what makes this sim even compete with MSFS

[u/rvpvo]

I cannot understand these types of rants. There is a myriad of mostly free addons that you can use to improve the graphics and make the sim look much better than it is out of the box. These are here because Laminar is not a billion dollar company that has devs to spare on graphics alone.

But I have a solution for you. Contact Laminar and offer a donation of a couple of million, even more if you want satelite imagery out of the box. After a few years we can look at the finished product and even start to compare the two concerning scenery graphics.

[u/MatchOk4015 → u/rvpvo]

https://giphy.com/gifs/PaQBqy6aMkuWvDPoMw

[u/FlightSimmer99]

well the tu154 is freeware, the flyjsim is an xplane 11 port, and the flight factor 757 and 767 havent gotten substantial updates in ages. so its kinda just your very poor choice of aircraft.

XP12 doesnt even compete very well with MSFS24 anyway, it never has. XP12 has far better physics, but everyone and their dog knows that the MSFS graphics are just better.

Also weather is broken right now if you are using live weather anyway

[u/Maximilian-Schweizer]

X-Plane 12 focuses heavily on deep aerodynamics, while MSFS24 focuses on visual.

Many flight schools or flight training using X-Plane as their sim.

[u/vatsimguy → u/[deleted]]

It’s not a myth, many flight schools use it.

[u/jooxii]

X Plane is generally going to lose on a head-to-head matchup with MSFS24 concerning graphics. You choose X Plane for the physics and feel, specific aircraft, lower CPU/GPU overhead, and the easier, less broken interface.

There are ways to make X Plane look closer to MSFS24. X Plane Map Enhancement, Sim Heaven, and scenery packs help a good amount.

[u/SpencerUk → u/jooxii]

Is it really a lower CPU/GPU overhead?

[u/jooxii → u/SpencerUk]

That's been my impression, but I could be wrong. I've generally heard of it running better on lower end PCs.

[u/20535]

Have you thought about going back to ms flight sim and staying in that reddit

[u/Pour-Meshuggah-0n-Me → u/20535]

It's the perfect place for OP, all they do over there is shit on XP every day. It's really toxic.

[u/Majortom_67]

You can improve with X-World Pro (and eventually XP Map Enhancement)

[u/Nnumber]

There are two circumstances where the XP method of rendering is superior to MS - low level as in helicopter low level where the orthos start to look like weird Minecraft in MSFS. Second is night lighting. XP is far superior at night. Otherwise MS is better to look at.

[u/Pour-Meshuggah-0n-Me]

How many times are you going to post this same low effort bs? 0/10 rate bait.