I didn't pander for Subscribing and Liking in the video, but since I have started this channel I now empathize with creators and why they do that. Now I realize why it so important to do so. You Tube basically buries a video and won't recommend it if it doesn't generate likes, comments, and subscriptions. Take a look around my channel and if you like what you see and if I earned it, it means A LOT to get a like and subscribe. I have learned a lot about You Tube in the last 2 months, it's a tough gig. Mad respect to the OGs who made it to 1k/4k, this takes more effort than I ever imagined.

I use 99% XP 12 because I enjoy the physics, fleet, weather, more serious GUI, better folder structure/modularity. Yes,graphics are worse but modded it looks good to me.

I’ve been using ms flight sim for over 30years (started on a Mac SE) and xplane for at least 15. I don’t play them. I fly them. MSFS is not bad and the eye candy is amazing. I have gone through flight training and spent a few hours solo only for the sole purpose of connecting with reality. I am not a pilot but that context was valuable in helping me understand the flight sim environment. X plane 12 is more realistic in all aspects of airplane. There is a reason the FAA allows it to be used for flight training. They are both great but when I’m in the mood to do a serious flight with realistic engine and flight parameters, I go with XP 12. When I want to do go seeing for fun, I fly MSFS.

As a real 737 pilot, Zibo in Xplane has it nailed. MSFS even with the PMDG still felt like the aircraft was on rails, to the point where I’ve been using solely xp12 for recurrent sim practise. I guess it depends what you look for in a simulator as to your opinion but that’s the good thing about flight sim! There’s something for everyone.

Nice video comparison, I think my preference is for MSFS over Xplane 12 as well and it's pretty much been the foundation for all of my content. I do kinda dig the way the rain hits you in Xplane though, it may not be realistic but holy crap do you feel like you are being pelted with raindrops at speed. Cool channel and congrats on blowing up, I'm hoping to get there myself some day. And I hope you get your 4080 Super soon!

I really like the runway textures of XP12

Nice work. It must be hard to program the two sims with the same weather. XP11 was a game changer for me when I couldn’t stand FSX anymore. Then came MSFS2020 and my world changed again!

Amazing side by side comparisons, some of the best I've seen. Must have taken ages, nice one. When ACES went under, I bought X-Plane 11, but the purchase was only viable because Orbx brought out the TrueEarth series and the PNW and England, Wales and Scotland were done to a pretty good level. It makes the scenery in those areas much more pallatable. I've enjoyed X-Plane for a number of years and I purchased X-Plane 12 and I use the same Orbx scenery and planes I purchased with that product as well. At the end of the day though, I've only played X-Plane 12 for less than 10 hours since purchase and I'm regularly on MSFS with friends in VR and I've had 1000's of hours in MSFS, it's an absolute joy, no real comparison.

Honestly I'd say X-World is more important of a scenery add-on than Ortho. Ortho does help but at lower altitudes it can be very apparent that you're just slapping on a photo. X-World adds a higher variety of buildings and density (it should frankly have been integrated into the base game). So while that's not photorealism it fills out the space of urban areas at least with styles more similar to the actual regions. In US/Europe/east Asia at least. MSFS's method really excels in the "global south" where buildings are more shoddy and OpenStreetMap data is sorely lacking (another thing the competitors can't really help). But really the core motivation for me on XP12 is using Linux primarily. X-Plane being available cross-platform is nice to the non-Windows users. I know the scenery will match, but the ability to click on the game casually without rebooting or doing some convoluted configuration is valuable (i.e. the laziness factor). It's "good enough" at least, and it has its share of top-tier aircraft so it's not like it's a bad experience. Might still try out MSFS though, when the paycheck allows.

I'm not a pilot, however I have flown a Cessna 172 before in a flight training setting, and own both X-Plane and Microsoft Flight Sim. Both X-Plane 11 and 12's physics feel vastly superior to Microsoft Flight Sims, Microsoft Flight Simulators physics feel like the plane is on rails almost. In terms of overall software stability I think X-Plane is leaps ahead of Microsoft, every single time I am forced to update in Microsoft, it resets the progress and it ends up taking a week just to download the update. However I must agree that on a high end system, Microsoft flight simulator has better graphics, however for a I don't think this should be the priority. I can understand why you would prefer Microsoft but this is why I prefer X-Plane.

Everything you said about MSFS is correct but let's not forget that X-Plane focuses more on realism. Plus I'm still jealous to how they accurately animate turboprop engines.

I have MSFS 2020. And I'm not blindly loyal to any game per se. I think this was though a very fair assessment. I can state that MSFS 2020 of course has its flaws. But, from a LOT of video comparisons I've seen over the years, X-Plane still has some catching up to do. I wish them the best though because competition usually is good for the consumer. Still, the way MSFS 2024 is looking, I'm not sure if this will be the knockout blow for X-Plane. Curious to see comparisons later this year. As well as your comparison with graphics maxed out. Great vid! Cheers!

Both can't teach me to land a 172 properly irl. One thing you can never replicate is the feel of flying.

Graphically, X-Plane 12 cannot compete with MSFS. Where X-Plane excels is flight Physics. Having flown both, and as an ex military pilot, X-Plane reacts more consistent with what I’d expect. MSFS has improved a lot, and the upcoming MSFS 2024, from what I heard last year at FSE23, will include much better flight Physics. We’ll see.

For me, as I work on my instrument rating, I prefer x-plane because I can fly RNAV approaches in light aircraft and they get vertical guidance. Not sure why that doesn't work in MSFS.

Great comparison. I always crackup hearing ATC in a nutcracker (7:25)

i cannot express the please i just had of going full screen and seeing the video take up the entirely of my wide angle screen. i love this content already

Moving from FSX to P3Dv4 was absolutely a game changer for me. Having that 64-bit architecture meant that I could start cranking up graphics without fear of CTD’s due to VAS.

Why didn't you compare the Zibo 737 to the PMDG?

For me the avionics implementation for XP12 is what sells me. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve had unexplained results flying IFR in MSFS. It doesn’t handle dynamic changes in flight to the flight plan very well.

At least x-plane has WAY more realistic physics.

Great video. Thoughts on MSFS vs XP12 as it relates to general aviation (GA): I use MSFS about 95 percent of the time. Sometimes XPlane is not even installed on my setup. Lately, I keep it installed because I still get questions about it on my YT channel. Having said that, XPlane is still far ahead on flight physics as it relates to GA, particularly left turn tendencies. However, XP is simply uninspiring, at least for myself. YMMV. It's use as my prefered trainer is being mitigated by third party avionics developers for MSFS and the hope that the MSFS physics model for GA will improve. Again, thanks for the video! Subscribed!

X-PLANE for the physics simulation, MSFS 20 for the scenery. I couldn't believe how awful the experience was when I first booted up MSFS 2020 (like aircraft yawing off the runway even with full steering and full rudder applied). It's gotten better over time, but their claim of "full aerodynamic simulation" fell flat when they admitted that an enormous overhaul was needed just to add helicopters. FS 2020 felt half baked when I bought it, while X-PLANE has been insanely reliable and capable - even if not as pretty.

I imagine that its mostly about the addons available for each sim, you wanna fly a specific aircraft, you launch the sim that has a specific addon i guess ? if both have a good addon, you go for the one better modelled x)

Trying to buy a vtail. I live near ILG not far from Brandywine. N57 new garden is a nice airport and near good food and small towns. If you’re back this way again give me a heads up. I’d be happy to meet. Fly safe.

The only sim I used for years was FSX, mainly because I spent a substantial amount of money on add-ons over the years, but it was also the sim that got me started in flight simulation. Around 2017/2018 I made the switch to X-Plane 11, but I never really liked it as much as FSX. So when MSFS came out I immediately switched. At first I was disappointed by the physics, but now a few years after release, with some of the high end aircraft addons they released, I really enjoy it. I wouldn't go back to X Plane now, knowing that MSFS is constantly improving.

The scenery is the only reason I use MSFS. To me, X-Plane is better is almost every other aspect. I have them both and I use them both, which one depends on the type of flying I'm doing. MSFS is great for GA VFR and visual navigation, when what you see out the window matters.

The sims seem to be more of a platform for people developing addons and less of a fully functioning sim out of the box. I found so much stuff in msfs that just didnt work properly and took an addon to fix it. I think i spent less money on xplane than I have with msfs.

Nice comparison (out of the perspective of an MSFS guy). I own both sims. I usually fly more X-Plane if it is about flight training and more MSFS if it is about sightseeing. Just flying from the US East Cost to the West Coast. The big problem with MSFS is, it is a MS cloud service. It is STILL not a monthly payment. Eventually you will pay monthly and I am not willing to do that.

Enjoy both both somewhat but tend to always revert back to XP and DCS. Not flying much now but plane to get more into XP when the graphics update comes out, and hopefully the shimmering is improved.

So, help me out here. I really want MFS to work for me but... it just seems so unstable. I have a top end rig - 4080 super, R7 7800, 64gb DDR, NVME, X56 etc. The game crashes in between loading screens. Randomly, ground steering won't work - at all. I have to now turn down graphics to medium or so just to stop the choppy flights. After several weeks it still won't save settings like Window vs Full screen. I have to set that every time. The plane will randomly roll all on it's own and so on. And the multiscreen? Try lining those up and depending if you are on the ground or in the air, will never look correct. That's extremely annoying. Watching this video and reading all the comments have made me want to remove it completely and go play xplane. So what if the little houses don't quite line up or the trees are a little off. It seems like the actual flying part of the "flying sim" is a lot better. It sound like there are a ton of mods out there that fill the gaps where Laminar fell short on. Don't get me wrong. I'm not bad mouthing MFS or anything like that. I haven't been playing flying sims that long - a couple months. I was so excited about playing MFS but the game itself gives me more frustration trying to get it setup than actual flying. I even tried AutoFPS for MFS and that just put a band aid on the graphics and still have the unstable frustrations.

That moment the sun comes from behind and you see the instrument panel for the first time in xp12 😂

This was most interesting on several levels. For one, I have lived in Vancouver for 61 years and for the first time seen how MSFS displays familiar scenery. I also have used X-Plane 9, 10, and, as of a few days ago, 12. I skipped 11 after becoming weary of upgrading my computer to handle the sim. That said, I am no X-Plane fan boy. I use it because I have used only Macs at home for 30 years. I tell people that I used only PCs at work, and that was all the convincing I needed. Would I use MSFS if were available for Macs? Absolutely. Am I tempted to gin up a PC for MSFS? Yes. But it is my suspicion that the commitment to the sim to obtain the stunning MSFS footage we see on You Tube is huge, both in time and money. I’ll bet the majority of users build their own PCs, a significant undertaking in itself. And the tuning, tinkering, and troubleshooting to make it all work are ongoing and inevitable. In a perfect world a flight sim would have the scenery realism of MSFS, the multi-platform design of XP, the flight characteristics of XP (I know that is debatable) and the wider hardware availability of MSFS. And, more than anything, not require a vast amount of screwing with a computer so as to make it possible to do what a sim is intended for: flying.

Guess I'll stick with Xplane 11... I use it mostly to practice IFR approaches anyway. I've never found a flight sim that feels the same as landing a C172 in real life. Also, for me it's so hard to get the C172 to trim up correctly, but using the autopilot fixes that and I can just focus on doing the IFR procedures.

As someone who extensively has played both MSFS and XP11+XP12 for hundreds of hours at this point, XP's physics feel much better. MSFS physics feel delayed, too smooth, and almost bouncy to me in comparison. MSFS deff generally has the graphics advantage as far as lighting and scenery (sometimes it can be too much and looks over saturated and cartoony), but XP's utility far outweighs that; proper non-laggy menus, replay mode, updates, STABILITY, more extensive modding support, and general feel of use scream out as much more professional and simmer oreientated rather than oreientated to casual gamers like MSFS feels. I own both but lately play solely Xp12 since MSFS is still so unstable in comparison and after 30ish minutes will start to chug for no reason until you get to an unplayable 2fps, no matter the settings. That issue has been reported on bug trackers for years since it came out, most seem to blame it on how the game caches stuff, but none of the fixes resolve the issue for an extended period of time. Asobo can't seem to be bothered to fix that nevermind implement a proper update system so you don't have to be hit with a giant 20gb update every time you open the game after not playing for a month.

In VR MSFS I can suspend disbelief for VFR, which I can't do at all with XPlane.

Let's put it short. I enjoy feel of flying in XP11/12, it just feels natural. You can truly feel the aicraft weight and inertia. I can feel what aircraft is doing. While in MSFS, everything feels so sterile flying wise. Majority of aircraft feel weightless, fly the same. As someone said before, C172 feels the same as 737 flying and weight wise. The only thing I could do to make them different is to fiddle with the sensitivity curves for my Honeycomb yoke. But that all is an artificial way to enhance something that is broken, or in another terms put a makeup on a pig. So, after every MSFS flying session, even with Fenix A320 and few other good payware aircraft, I jsut say meeehhhh. Then I jump into XP11 or XP12 and it immediately put a big smile on my face. Flying feel is everything for me. Screw good visuals (I even think that XP12 have more realistic visuals than eye candy MSFS) if I don't enjoy flying itself.

For now, I'll stay on Xplane12 because for me it feels more realistic and there's a bigger and better long haul fleet available. I used to be on msfs, but after some time I kinda got tired and deteted it because 1) most of the planes look too "plasticky, 2) the planes felt really weird while taxiing, especially turning 3) the rotation feels odd because as soon as you lift the nose a bit, the plane takes off like it's made out of paper, 4) most of the addon airliners quality, especially the long haulers, are kinda bad (except for the PMDG 737 and the Fenix A320) and 5) the default airports are really bad because the stands and taxiways are all placed wrongly or are inexistent and during nighttime, tgere isn't any illumination, killing the realism. I'm honestly looking forward to msfs2024, hoping they'll fix these issues because it's a very amazing looking simulator.

Give this combo a shot: AutoOrtho + VisualXP (basic version) + Challenger 650 by HotStart. I'm sure Challenger 650 alone will make you stick with XP12!

I hate how toxic MSFS players are to X-Plane 😭

FS2020 takes centuries to load to the menu and in the world, XP12 runs on more platforms has better per-aircraft controller configuration and can look pretty darn good with heavy ortho, simHeaven, etc. mods

why people support a company or flight sim like a sports team has to be the weirdest shit for me

All your points are valid, but i don't see both sims as direct competitors. I enjoy both, with a slight preference in XP. I generally choose XP when i want to fly complex airliners, and choose MSFS when i want to enjoy the scenery and graphics. For me MSFS is the more arcade like, which mostly has to do with the UI and sim interaction. I feel like xbox integration ruined it as a proper SIM. You can still get a great and realistic experience, but no matter what, you're gonna get reminded that you're playing a console hybrid game. IMO it has great potential, if they'd focus more on the PC simmers. Also, even though most of the general scenery is great, default airports aren't. They're straight out terrible, which makes me want to fly less to new places and confines me more to the airports i have scenery for (which is what i felt limited by in FSX/P3D). I don't want to pay 30 bucks every time i want to fly somewhere new. What i focus on most in XP is not the graphics or clouds, but the really great addons, as well as the straight forward no bullshit approach. Select plane, airport, gate, weather/time and GO! And the in game toolbar has a proper UI and is simple to access (Like the one in FSX/P3D) where you can configure everything and hundreds of modes and settings without enabling a "DEV" mode in the settings... Even with worse looking scenery and clouds, i somehow still end up feeling more immersed, flying some of the very nice addons available. Also, even though the scenery and autogen looks worse, the actual default airports are actually decent and very usable. Which makes me feel more free and doesn't hold me back, like in other sims. For the future if you dive deeper into XP. I'll highly recommend the Felis 747! Also, can't go wrong with any of the ini airbusses. The freeware Zibo 737 is also a very good place to start.

I will never use MSFS, it is garbage, they botched the release and I refunded it. FSX was great, MSFS is crap. X-Plane beats them both.

I love msfs up to the point the plane skids of the runway to the right on takeoff.

I had to switch to X-plane because I only play in VR and MSFS is not as well optimised and kills my PC. If you have the PC for it MSFS is the better puchase out of the box, if you don't mind modding, go for X-plane.

MSFS is a toy/game, X-Plane is a flight sim. OldBozo lacks the ability to even patch their bloated game properly.

I want to like MSFS but it has a lot of problems that lead me to stick with other sims. With a limited internet connection, the mandatory (and very large) updates make it impossible for me to use MSFS without planning for it a day in advance. I have to leave my PC running, downloading content, for sometimes as much as 12 hours to be able to launch the sim. The cloud dependency for all the data streaming makes MSFS not only unusable for me, but also is a huge red flag for its longevity. I do not trust MS to update the sim into an offline-capable state prior to discontinuing the required cloud services. The overall UI/UX also leaves a LOT to be desired. I can't even set different keybinds per-aircraft. The terrain really doesn't look that good in my opinion. Yes, it looks pretty from a distance, but it doesn't take long to see glaring problems where the mesh generation struggles to shape buildings correctly, or layers a river on top of a bridge, or something like that. A lot of smaller airports have incorrect taxiways. Some of the northern floatplane aerodromes are perpetually frozen. MSFS also just doesn't run smoothly on my system. The only way I can get an acceptable framerate (i.e. above 30fps) is with DLSS enabled, but DLSS introduces unacceptable visual artefacts like ghosting and generally reduces image clarity.

since autoortho avail on xp12, im less playing fs2020, only use fenix, thtas it.

The fact that we can nit pick between 2 fantastic simulators that would've blown our collective minds 20 years ago really goes to show just how good we got it these days.

Nah flight dynamics r not similar at all imo. U feel the resistance in xp not msfs

Vanilla/stock airplanes fly better in Xplane, but that's about it. For payware add ons/planes, well it really depends on the developper: I find msfs2020 have incredible payware planes (Fenix a320, FBW, Comanche, Heatblur's F-14), but so does Xplane. And there's also a truckload of crap, but no one forces me to purchase it. People tend to forget that both Xplane and Msfs are general public video games. They try to mimic as best they can the real thing, but the media has its limitations.

Excellent video!!

I was a huge XP proponent and held back on MSFS because every time I tried, the controls did feel odd. Switched to MSFS for the visuals. In come the Fenix A320. Sorry, but the Fenix coupled with the scenery, weather, and lighting pull MSFS way ahead. Overall, the MSFS platform is just more appealing. Did not like the vid, but did enjoy the commentary.

i like the rain effect Xplane use other than that in terms of realism i always say if you want realism go for the real thing everything else are just effects , audio and video.

I do like the Xplane rain physics and honestly it’s flight physics better. Put that in Msfs or Vis versa the graphics in Xplane and it would be amazing. With the failures and all.

You have put x plane with ultra setting but not in msfs 2020. If you put ultra in msfs details are more great that I can to see in your video. Thanks for your job.

MSFS is nowhere as stable as Xplane 12, every update MSFS has issues I have an extremely powerful PC but MSFS keeps crashing... Xplane 12 never have any issues MSFS is prettier that's about it, flight dynamics are rubbish

Xplane is more into flights dynamic and physics rather than flying a paper plane

Not surprised to see frankbyte in the comment section in this video 🤣🤣🤣

At least XP has a “fly by” view.

I like X Plane 12 because I can get better airbus' in it. Especially for long haul. The ground textures don't bother me much as I almost never fly VFR, but I do also fly the Fenix in MSFS and the 747 and 787, now that they have been improved. In overall, I like the eco system in XP better than in MSFS. I find the menu more janky and unnecessary complicated. There are even times when I find the XP clouds to look better than the MSFS, but in overall, MSFS does win when it comes to cloud and ground textures.

One great thing from X-Plane is, when you go to MSFS you just realize how pretty it is. I do that. And then, I happily go back flying X-Plane ... Just do the sim you enjoy, it isn't religion.

Should have used the Zibo 737. It's free and as good as, if not better than, PMDG's 737.

As more of a casual flight sim guy, more of a “gamer”, MSFS just looks too good to play anything else. I have an OLED ultrawide and can play on max settings, and it’s just really stunning.

It's not AI. There's no feedback. It's interesting if you go somewhere rather boring ; I live close to EGSV, it actually doesn't look so great.

If msfs 24 comes out with realistic physics and updated weather and turbulance.... RIP xplane

Yes, good video. And I agree with your conclusions. X plane is such a dinosaur. I am amazed it is still a thing!

MSFS looks way better, the immersion with the world it’s better, like other traffics and so on. Xplane has better airplanes, better airplanes dynamics, better weather effects, better night vision, and better feel. I fly them both and love them both. But MSFS is not better, it’s just different.

Msfs2020 looks better yes, but the planes feel like they are on rails..plus xplane has much better weather, flight dynamics, 3d wxr...msfs 2020 has puffy clouds

Errh... my computer kinda sucks. so i think i will stick with the cheap copy of MFS, it seens decent enough...

Havent played MFS since the first edition. Lol. But X plane on android is horrible. Very wobbly on ground and in air. And game seems to have a one point tilt axis which seems very dated. Very good graphics just a let down on performance. I use the RORTOS Airline commander app. Pretty basic but realistic in performance. Thx. Great video.

I love how our journey is more or less similar. When MS decided to dump FS franchise, I stuck with my 72GB+++ FS9 (FS2004), which AI traffic I manually compiled one by one using various AI painter works and AIG flightplans, plus some help by World of AI. FSX just won't do for my PC at the time. When Lockheed Martin announced P3D, most of affluent third world country users like me are already out of their "piracy" phase, and we are looking at its licensing, and immediately put off by the "educational, professional, and other nonsense" - we get it, Lockheed Martin wants to be taken seriously and asking for some serious money. Boy, American defense contractors really get used to be paid generously don't they? Pentagon doesn't look at software bills the way we normal people do. I never touched FS again after SimCity 2013 debacle ended up EA giving me free Battlefield 3, which mandates an upgrade to Windows 7, and thus X64 system. This renders my FS9 rather unusable or unstable. I switched hobby for a while, until my work necessitates me to frequently travel by plane, which sparked childhood aviation interest once more. And that's when I pick XP11 in 2017. I mean, 11 years later, there is not much improvement on the graphics, but XP sure has some more serious airplane systems simulation depth compared to MSFS. ZiboMod 737NG is awesome, but I never really liked their engine sound effects. Similarly, I don't find PMDG's 737NG sound in MSFS to be something great either. You need to try ToLiss Airbuses + BSS or KOSP soundpacks. That combination is something that not even Fenix can replicate, or perhaps it is MSFS' inherent jet engine simulation depth limitations. The effects as you can see are full fledged when it comes to the aircraft itself, but totally lacking when it comes to the environment. The clouds are awful, the weather system just doesn't work (it abruptly changes per section, you may want to use 3rd party payware add-on to address that), ATC is practically not working or non-existent. MSFS for me is graphically stunning, but in cinematic way - unrealistic, overly filtered - but that's what we want from our screen. Its Bing "orthographic" satellite maps gave the player a "sense of travel" which is totally missing in Ortho-less XP series. Plus XP11 default generic set of buildings, vegetations, and environmental library doesn't give you a sense of place - everywhere around the world is kind of the same, until you reach the airport. Overall, it is enough to compell me not to get into XP12, as it also hogs performance like crazy. Not to mention Austin's antics and his fan army's attitude is getting tiresome. Yes I know the guy is passionate and really love planes, so what? He seemingly doesn't grow out of it when it comes to competing. Plus XP12 add-on is very very expensive and very limited.

yes graphics are (s*t) not the greatest in X-Plane, but the flight dynamics are much superior (of course not in a "self flying" Airbus;-), still flying with X-Plane 11 btw on minimal resources OFFLINE (no loading of scenery etc.). Have flown small airplanes in the past myself, so X-Plane would be a great training device, MSFS more for "gaming", however I noticed there is now study level aircrafts coming to MSFS, that might be something of interest for me in the future. One no no from X-Plane: CPU utilization of exactly 1 Core...wtf.

Aero flight was very good for VR visuals.

Wow, MSFS looks so much better

I love X-plane more than msfs but I would pick msfs over a bugged X-plane as you show it in this video 😐 I always say that if X-plane 9 survived msfs2000 it is going to survive everything 🙂

Xplane fanboys also forget the fact that MSFS was meant to be a game for exploring every corner of the world, not doing IRF flights over the ocean, they talk smack on it when it’s not meant to be like Xplane, and Xplane wasn’t meant to be like MSFS. I get pissed when people talk smack on both sims for not being something that they weren’t supposed to be.

Use Zibo Mod for 737 compare

Primary Directive: Simming is better than not simming; the rest is a matter of taste. (I have XP12, MSFS, P3D, and DCS installed) Although the scenery is great, one of the things that isn't usually shown is how it keeps loading as you travel along, or how sometimes it doesn't load. I flew into Chicago, and it looked like it was recently nuked! Or, the terrain is constantly shifting. That breaks the immersion for me. When it's loaded, it's outstanding, but the constant shifting of the earth can be distracting. XP12 is lower quality, less so when using TrueEarth or Ortho/X-World, but it's solid. Plus, I've migrated to mostly airliners, so at high altitude it matters less than if I was flying VFR low-leve,l for example. My primary motivation is the cool planes, I like. So I go all over because there are unique planes I love flying in each sim: XP12 MD-11, A340, and A300 - MSFS B737/FENIX A320, and P3D the 777. Went long just to say, all of these sims have some outstanding strengths and fleet diversity. It seems strange to argue for the best. MSFS is beautiful and you don't have to buy scenery, XPlane intuitive replay and cameras alone do it for me (Toliss state-saving is a game changer as well), P3D is rock-solid and has some of the best long-haul features I've ever seen (and CHASE PLANE). I'd love to hear from people that use multiple simulators and why they end up flying one more than others! Aviation is cool!

depend on you are looking for a game, not a problem, people deserve to enjoy their time, you may find: wow MSFS is way much better. AND People who are looking for flight sim, then X-plane indeed for me😊

Another comparing of Apples and Pies... Anything new? No ! Thank you...

only idiots PLAY flight sims.... you FLY flight sims if ur serious...

My biggest issue is Mac.

Im the real c172 pilot Msfs has much better physics for cessna 172 Xplane is just freaking tram tram on rails I cant judge about airliners since cant fly any of it IRL sorry

KZfaq is definitely a tough gig! Good video too by the way. If you are interested in doing a collaboration of some sort hit me up. We have a very similar weighing channel so it might be good for both of us.

X plane is superior as far as flight dynamics and aero dynamics go.

I hate x-plane too it's not as fun it's just looks to much like microsoft flight but everything way more unrealistic soo I vote msfs better

You fly xplane!!!!!!! You play msfs!!! Level d use xplane!!!!

do a comparason with the zibo 737 (if u can install addons), zibo is absolutely free and in my opinion better than pmdg!!!

I think if Microsoft makes downloading real world scenes more expensive and unaffordable you won't fly anymore just like everything with subscriptions!

Zibo !!!!!! 737 is best! And free and better then pmdg!

You might have upset some Xplane fanboys with this video: Gozz, frankbyte, GoldGamer. 😂😂😂 All dislikes are coming from them.

Simheaven + AutoOrtho and you get a great experience with XP12 especially VR. The textures are more realistic than cartoon MSFS. Always been a fan of MSFS until I tried XP12.

I think having both is the best. When I want to feel like I'm flying an actual airplane, I use xplane, when I want to look at pretty stuff, I use MSFS.

xplane 11 is verry superior fsx prepard

I guess we know why you don't have subs.

MSFS is a game. If you want to look at the pretty scenery, it's great. If you want to actually practice your real-world flight skills and shoot accurate IFR procedures (which is why XPlane was created) Xplane is far superior. You PLAY MSFS, you FLY Xplane.

XP fanboys desperately coping in the comments 😂

I do feel like the atmospherics and lighting in Xplane look more realistic. Also, the one thing that Xplane does very well is reflected light as they use a Photometric light formula. You can see this in taxi lights reflecting off aircraft at night in Xplane whilst in MSFS you have to move to a very particular angle to see blue taxi lights. Lights in MSFS are round balls that look more like png alpha graphics that don't have light spill or reflect on ground surfaces when they are wet. Xplane simulates RVR a million times better than MSFS.