MSFS or XPLANE?

[VeeBomber]

Hi all

Apologies if this has been asked before (im sure i thas) but Im looking for some advice/thoughts on which SIM to get...

Ive read/watched that MSFS has better scenery outside the planes but XPLANE has better aircraft flight dynamics (realism). Is it also true that MSFS requires more add on purchases vs XPLANE

All comments welcome - thanks!

[skydancer]

Well I cant comment on MSFS as I moved away from MSFS After MSFS X, and have since been on X-Plane from version 11 and now 12.
physics engine has improved alot over time. But it all depends what you are looking for, if you love scenery realism over aircraft realism, then MSFS might be a good start, but bare in mind that you require fast internet connection to load bing/google maps overlay into the sim, otherwise you will end up flying with poor quality overlay in the sim from what I understand. But if you want physics engine that are in constant tuning, then X-Plane is the way to go, and also you have some good freeware and payware 3rd party plugins, and Ortho4xp or "Auto Ortho4xp"? to download or load google maps overlay into Xplane 12, so you can either download the tiles which requires alot of HDD space depending on quality, or live download as you fly. Haven't tried the auto ortho4xp plugin, as I have downloaded the tiles for RSA which are already in the sim, no need to download again, and together with simheaven scenery for Africa, you have a nice realistic scenery for South Africa.

[VeeBomber]

Thanks for the in depth reply - appreciated. Think Im leaning towards the higher quality physics engine...

[Phugoid]

I have both; I use FS significantly more than Xplane, probably due to familiarity.

It all depends on what you want to do with the sim; I use mine mainly towards my instrument rating and engine failure drills on the twin. Scenery addons are not that important, as you don't get to see much of it till you break through, but a navigraph subscription has been invaluable(works on both).

I have tried to find addon aircraft that mimic the aircraft cockpit the closest to help with the flows. As for the physics,I'm not sure, I don't think either of them get quite close to the real thing.

[Cornell Blok]

The old story of Xplane Physics are better than P3D or MSFS is nonsens Do not fall for that I've flown on all and they all pretty much the same.

So far P3D and MSFS is pretty good MSFS giving you great scenery with fantastic add on Aircraft, I've got almost no scenery installed on MSFS because it looks amazing Standard.

[Johan van Wyk]

Just do a proper search on the Internet and you will find all the answers that meet your needs. We have really well informed people who write well researched articles.

[LoopSoosStroop]

Just do a proper search on the Internet and you will find all the answers that meet your needs. We have really well informed people who write well researched articles.

No not the internet don't google

I think the best to ask is Pilots with Real word flying experience and flight sim experience and there is a whole lot of them on the forum.

[Roosta]

Regarding MSFS 2020's physics, its all dependent on the 3rd Party developer.

For example, Accu-Sim's Piper Commanche is leaps ahead of the competition when it comes to realism. Though saying that, the default 172 is really not that bad.
https://a2asimulations.com/product/accu ... nche-msfs/

The biggest issue I have with MSFS is the ground physics and the way the planes act on the ground, especially take-off with a crosswind.

I can't speak much of tube-liners though as I prefer low and slow.

[Johan van Wyk]

No not the internet don't google

I think the best to ask is Pilots with Real word flying experience and flight sim experience and there is a whole lot of them on the forum.

So there are NO extremely experienced real world pilots flying and commenting on flight simulators other than the ones on here?

[Cornell Blok]

No not the internet don't google

I think the best to ask is Pilots with Real word flying experience and flight sim experience and there is a whole lot of them on the forum.

So there are NO extremely experienced real world pilots flying and commenting on flight simulators other than the ones on here?

Well he asked here did he not ?

[Cornell Blok]

Regarding MSFS 2020's physics, its all dependent on the 3rd Party developer.

For example, Accu-Sim's Piper Commanche is leaps ahead of the competition when it comes to realism. Though saying that, the default 172 is really not that bad.
https://a2asimulations.com/product/accu ... nche-msfs/

The biggest issue I have with MSFS is the ground physics and the way the planes act on the ground, especially take-off with a crosswind.

I can't speak much of tube-liners though as I prefer low and slow.

Having over 1200hrs in C172's I would say the one in MSFS behaves like a C172 regarding spins, stalls and steep turns but as we know no C172 are a like some loves spinning and some you have to force all depends on the life they had and how many times that specific one has been pranged and rebuild Or even the year and model.

Even the default Baron preforms well doing stalls and VCMA like the real one.

I think the selling point for Xplane vs FSX where the Physics where beter in Xplane is very out dated and is really not relevant anymore. MSFS gives you good standard scenery and a great flight model.

[VeeBomber]

Thanks for all the replies - really appreciate it

Im a PPL doing my instrument rating and would like to practice approaches etc. Ive downloaded the Xplane demo and it seems really cool - will be buying the full license later this week.

[Johan van Wyk]

Someone building aircraft motion simulators said:

"The only thing different is that in MSFS you get a lot more bling for your money, while you're flying a foam airplane."

[Marno]

Someone building aircraft motion simulators said:

"The only thing different is that in MSFS you get a lot more bling for your money, while you're flying a foam airplane."

Maybe you right in msfs the c152 just before touchdown with full flaps the ASI went below 40, with no stall warning. Landed just fine doesn't seem right.

Or maybe I did something wrong ?

Let me go fly again....just to confirm for myself that this actually happened. Does not make sense that something this basic could be botched in the sim.

Also I can barely here the jet engines in the sim and the startup sounds is basically non existant.

[Kyle Durham]

I’m currently an MSFS 2020 user and the flight dynamics have really shifted over time for two reasons.
1. The core sim has moved towards Computational Fluid Dynamics and they have done even more in the MSFS 2024 core sim which is releasing in a month. They have also done a lot of work on ground physics.

2. 3rd party developers have really optimized and tweaked. The A2A Comanche is a good example but there are others that have really pushed the sim hard.

If you combine the above with the scenery and the budget that Microsoft is throwing at MSFS overall, it makes it hard for XPlane to compete although it still has a very loyal fan base.