X-Plane 11 Next Generation Graphics Vs Flight Simulator 2020

G

GripperSim

Members +
[FONT=&quot]Happy Friday all! [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]X-Plane 11 Next Generation Graphics Vs Flight Simulator 2020.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Has the race begun with X-Plane’s Vulkan? And how to I know this for sue!?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Enjoy![/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]https://youtu.be/-cWbQmrSQaA[/FONT]
 
As is so beautifully demonstrated here, the war is not between FS2020 and X-Plane, but rather between flight model and graphics. I;m sorry, but FS2020 is capable ( from what ive seen ) of simply incredible graphics. What its going to take to reproduce that level of graphics remains to be seen. I can almost guarantee that an average build machine is not going to see graphics anywhere near the quality of whats being advertised. FS2020 is using satellite data to render the earth in real time including buildings, landscape and weather, via a cloud based data server which is constantly downloading data to your computer.. If you want to see your house from ten thousand feet, you can do so, likewise, Tokyo's Imperial Palace will be shown (which it is not in X-Plane ), but whats the cost???
X-Plane pioneered in game air currents so there has always been air in X-Plane, which cant be said for anything FS wise. I'll personally be looking at, because frankly, landing at Madiera with a sixty knot tail wind is an adventure I dont really want to do again, especially in a 737.
Now, I've done some pretty interesting things with flight dynamics and its true that you can ( if given enough effort ) that you can come pretty close to an accurate flight model. You can also easily make a ridicules toy. X-Plane doesnt have that. X-Plane says "Oh Look, you made a model: How cute" and it proceeds to put that model inside an infinite direction constant change wind tunnel and subjects it to forces ranging from near nothing all the way past hurricane force. and the plane has to fly through it. If the model is bad, that plane dont fly. You can change CG of course, and power , but the model is the baseline used for determining everything else that happens in the sim. Graphics are secondary, and they always have been. Graphically, X-Plane has never held a candle to Flight Sim. It didnt care about graphics. That changed with X-Plane 11 however.. Though graphics are still secondary, real world simulation has become very important in X-Plane and its possible to make X-Plane simply stunning, for free, But its not going to be exactly what your seeing in the FS2020 vid's. Still, It dont look too shabby!!

Keep the blue side up..
Pam

eGDhUyB.png
 
warchild said:
X-Plane pioneered in game air currents
Click to expand...

Ahem...

In reaction, [Blackley] used his knowledge of particle physics to create a real-time computational fluid dynamics (CFDs) model for Flight Unlimited. The result is a simulated atmosphere: air acts as a fluid that automatically reacts to the shape of any object placed within it.
Click to expand...

This was in 1995. Granted, X-Plane 1.0 was also released that year, but I rate CFD as more accurate than Blade Element Theory.

X-Plane's flight modeling differentiates between aerodynamic and visual object, so while an object may look like a 40 ft cargo container, it can be driven by an aerodynamic model of an F-16.
 
So is THAT why my Kalinin K7 wont fly above 12000 feet ( its true. I flew it from San Francisco to Reno once and ended up driving it on I-80 over the top of the Sierra's ).. I really dont want to get into this antiquated argument.. X-Plane is the front end of a very professional flight simulator which is used by several major companies to train their Pilots.. David Brice works for Lockheed Martin in their Simulator division making simulators to train pilots (they both train pilots ).. I personally dont see a lot of difference in the outcome there. Its only the details that seem to be nit-picky..
What the original question was is: How will X-Plane graphics hold up against MSFS2020's Graphics, and I still insist that will depend on the ability of your machine.. So the war remains between flight models.. MS has already issued a statement saying that legacy FS aircraft will work in FS2020.. That tells me that every aircraft you and I made will work in this new sim, meaning except for some added on pork, there aint a whole lotta difference between then and now, which I'm highly suspicious about.. Trust me, Theres nothing I want more than to fly my P-61 in FS2020.. Nothing!!!!.. But if MY airplane will fly in it, its using a look-up table and an air file, and everything else is patched on accessories that have been buried in the code ( a trick learned from Dovetail Games ), which I cant stand.. X-plane may not be perfect, but at least it breathes and grows and changes with each new release, and I mean it really changes.. They didnt just simply add Vulkan support. They rewrote the entire X-Plane engine for it ( and in beta testing its still a bit of a pain in the behind ) and with literally thousands of data refs, anyone can reprogram the entire game for their own purposes, including the flight models.. Personally, truest flying aircraft in X-Plane is the Kalanin, There are bad ones, and theyre bad because the model is bad, causing poor performance ( if you get them off the ground ).. Nuff said I guess.. Still, it feels good having a gentle Tete-tete with you.. Been a long time..
 
warchild said:
MS has already issued a statement saying that legacy FS aircraft will work in FS2020.. That tells me that every aircraft you and I made will work in this new sim, meaning except for some added on pork, there aint a whole lotta difference between then and now, which I'm highly suspicious about.. Trust me, Theres nothing I want more than to fly my P-61 in FS2020.. Nothing!!!!.. But if MY airplane will fly in it, its using a look-up table and an air file, and everything else is patched on accessories that have been buried in the code ( a trick learned from Dovetail Games ), which I cant stand..
Click to expand...

I believe it has been clarified quite enough that MSFS has two flight models modes: legacy (to support the old FSX models based on lookup tables) and own/new mode.
The new mode has been explained in one of the preview videos. It has literally nothing in common with the legacy mode.
I don't even know why people are still debating about this.
 
Daube said:
I believe it has been clarified quite enough that MSFS has two flight models modes: legacy (to support the old FSX models based on lookup tables) and own/new mode.
The new mode has been explained in one of the preview videos. It has literally nothing in common with the legacy mode.
I don't even know why people are still debating about this.
Click to expand...

I'm not debating anything Daube. I'm simply conversing about something I heard with regards to MSFS2020 and expanding on that overheard statement. If that is offensive too you, tthen I'm sorry. Sin Loi. It's a year for speculation, especially with the likes of FS2020 and P3DV5 being so predominant at the moment. Certainly each in its own way provides the impetus for joyful speculation dont you think??? I think the world could use more of that right now..
 
Sorry, "debating" may not have been the correct word for this, and of course no offence of any sort in my words above.
It's just a way to say that there's not much to be worried about concerning the legacy mode. If nothing else, that mode will simply help us get a few more old addons compatible with the new sim, which will help us wait for the new, real native addons (not using the legacy flight models).

I'm also quite a fan of XPlane at the moment. I also use P3Dv4 but it's mainly because it has way more nice planes available. The impact of dense areas/cities/airports on the performance is less and less tolerable for me, especially in VR.
XPlane 11, with or without Vulcan, has always been performing way better with an equivalent visual quality than P3Dv4, more or less. I just wish it had more military planes, jets or warbirds...
 
Looking back at the release of FSX, I also think that performance of MSFS2020 will be less than stellar on normal rigs.

But I will get it!! :)

Priller
 
Me too Priller, Me too..

As for the look of P3D. When it first came out p3D was and up until 4.5 a veritable cartoon knockoff of FSX. I dont own any payware scenery in P3D or X-Plane ( except for KMDW in X-Plane ). I simply cant afford it, but I digress.. To be honest, I cant find any good free scenery for P3D. It still mostly looks like FSX. At least it has a lot of nice planes, and now with V5 out, it looks pretty darn good out of the box finally.. Yeah, its true that P3D flies on rails, but is that a bad thing?? It is 100% predictable from the moment you turn it on. X-Plane is 100% unpredictable, and frankly it gets tiring after a while..
Do Sky Forge and Active Sky work in P3Dv5??? Soft Clouds are just textures so no worry there, but weather machines?? Those could be tricky..
 
The things is, many people had their colors just set wrong in the P3D settings. The "HDR" section offers luminosity, contrast and saturation settings, but many people set them wrong, and some people just don't set them at all.
But once you set them correctly, or use a proper shader mod, the results can get quite good:
daube_image0217.jpg


Concerning the freeware sceneries made specifically for P3D were few, indeed.
But that didn't really matter, as we could just use the freeware sceneries from FSX, which benefited from the new graphic features. Once you get used to the light and shadows in P3D, it's hard to come back to FSX.

Concerning the flight model, well yes planes on rails are indeed a bad thing. For liners it doesn't really matter much, but for lighter or military aircraft, it's a different story. It's even more sensible on helicopters.
I get the point about XP11 being tiring because of unpredictability, but somehow the same can be said about P3D for the exact opposite reason, don't you think?
At least in P3Dv5, we are finally getting somewhat correct contact points for the aircrafts.... finally, after all these years, it was about time...

EDIT: ah, one last word concerning P3Dv5 => it still looks like FSX. You just get exactly the same identical default scenery, excepted for two or three highly detailed airports or cities. The only things that look different are the water and the clouds. But just like in P3Dv4, your freeware FSX sceneries will just benefit from the new features, including better lighting, shadows, and colors :)
 
Concerning MSFS, I wouldn't be so pessimistic about the performances.
According to some Alpha testers, there's only one thing to worry about: your internet connection speed. And that is only if you want to fly in "online" mode. That doesn't apply anymore if you use the "precache" mode.
The sim runs quite nicely on "normal" computers. By normal, I mean something mid range like a 4 core CPU running around 3,7 GHz, some DDR3 memory and a GTX 1070 or above.
That kind of hardware gives some very good graphics and quite enjoyable performance, according to testers.

However, I'm more worried about VR... "Good" performance on flat screen is not enough to get "good" performance in VR :/
On that side, XPlane11.50 is currently performing quite well...
 
This is an interesting (and surprisingly civil) thread!!

Daube, mind sharing a screenshot of your graphics/colour setting please?

Cheers,

Priller
 
warchild said:
Me too Priller, Me too..

As for the look of P3D. When it first came out p3D was and up until 4.5 a veritable cartoon knockoff of FSX. I dont own any payware scenery in P3D or X-Plane ( except for KMDW in X-Plane ). I simply cant afford it, but I digress.. To be honest, I cant find any good free scenery for P3D. It still mostly looks like FSX. At least it has a lot of nice planes, and now with V5 out, it looks pretty darn good out of the box finally.. Yeah, its true that P3D flies on rails, but is that a bad thing?? It is 100% predictable from the moment you turn it on. X-Plane is 100% unpredictable, and frankly it gets tiring after a while..
Do Sky Forge and Active Sky work in P3Dv5??? Soft Clouds are just textures so no worry there, but weather machines?? Those could be tricky..
Click to expand...

Hi Pam,

Apparently active sky does work in P3Dv5 and is available as an open beta as of May 7th:

https://fselite.net/tag/active-sky/

Priller
 
Daube said:
The things is, many people had their colors just set wrong in the P3D settings. The "HDR" section offers luminosity, contrast and saturation settings, but many people set them wrong, and some people just don't set them at all.
But once you set them correctly, or use a proper shader mod, the results can get quite good:
daube_image0217.jpg
Click to expand...

But what IS a good shader model??? I mean, I'm no mind reader nor Mystic and I stand ignorant of a plethora of things, including shaders for P3D..


Daube said:
Concerning the flight model, well yes planes on rails are indeed a bad thing. For liners it doesn't really matter much, but for lighter or military aircraft, it's a different story. It's even more sensible on helicopters.
I get the point about XP11 being tiring because of unpredictability, but somehow the same can be said about P3D for the exact opposite reason, don't you think?
Click to expand...

Unequivocally! Its why I have so many sims to begin with.. Whereas flying a cessna 157 at 140 knots into a 150 knot headwind is fun for a while, it does get old and tiring. Likewise, When I'm not developing flight models( which I retired from ) having nothing but machine instruction after machine instruction is tedious and non rewarding..


Daube said:
EDIT: ah, one last word concerning P3Dv5 => it still looks like FSX. You just get exactly the same identical default scenery, excepted for two or three highly detailed airports or cities. The only things that look different are the water and the clouds. But just like in P3Dv4, your freeware FSX sceneries will just benefit from the new features, including better lighting, shadows, and colors :)
Click to expand...

AHHHHHH! Good sir, You have struck me through the heart.. I lay bleeding in a pool of over-aged and rotting angst!!.. :::LOL::: In all seriousness, I'll take the clouds as they come. Its a small improvement on what promises to be the groundwork for a completely new P3D some day.. It's true though, I do prefer more dramatic and realistic graphics..

eGDhUyB.png


v3biw5L.png


Perhaps Reshade ( A fools mess if there ever was one ) will work????
 
FS 2020 has released it's system specs. But if you want RAY-TRACING then you'll have to invest in an RTX level GFX card on the NVIDIA side. While I've heard that GTX 1080Ti can technically do RT, it's not optimized for it and may not work correctly. RT is what will make the final look. While many sims use PBR, I think FS2020 is the first to use RT to calculate lights angular reflectivity/refractivity/shadows when used within PBR on a scale like this. Ironic, I mentioned Ray-Tracing sometime last year or the tail end of 2018, IIRC, and was laughed to scorn about it making an appearance in the next FS or P3D iteration (can't recall that part). But, I think even RTX 2060 will do the job. Certainly RTX 2070. Anything higher, of course...
 
Priller said:
This is an interesting (and surprisingly civil) thread!!

Daube, mind sharing a screenshot of your graphics/colour setting please?

Cheers,

Priller
Click to expand...

The screenshot I posted is P3Dv4.3 (I never found the courage to update to 4.4 or 4.5, the fixes were a bit useless to me) with the following settings:
Brightness = 1.36
Bloom = 0.50
Saturation = 1.25

Additionnaly, I am using the shader mod called TomatoShade. That tool came with some presets, one of them had a name like "tomato-bright". I used that one, but I disabled any settings inside that were related to reflections (these were known to create severe issues if not set properly, so I was a bit afraid of that and just decided to get rid of them).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top