Medellinexpat

Yesterday I was watching a Youtube video about the state of the hardware issue and it did make me wonder how much of an issue that was in people not moving from XP11 to XP12, as that may require an upgrade in hardware. I myself upgraded my PC in anticipation of XP12, not a cheap or easy thing to do where I live. The argument in the video was that the hardware market is a mess. Effectively you have Nvidia dominating the market and for pricing their high end cards being very expensive. Their current competition is losing ground and in some case suggesting that they will not be competing at the higher end of the market. Current stocks of the existing Nvidia cards are becoming difficult to source as Nvidia moves towards the new 5000 series. What the pricing is going to be on those is not yet known, and remember the issues with the 4090 on release? The one thing you can still find is scalpers believing that their trove of 4090s are still worth a kings ransom. Then there is the processor market with the leader, Intel, in the middle of huge reliability issues with their product - a story where motherboard manufacturers hardly come out well either - and a new chip range on the horizon. Will people eagerly open their wallets to Intel? Will the existing generation be fixed? Will the next generation sell? Add in that some of the water cooler manufacturers are struggling to stay afloat (no pun intended) and of course the constant demand for high end components from AI developers all looking to try to perfect the alchemy of turning base metals into gold. Bottom line to move to XP12 you may well need better hardware and the current market with lack of competition, high prices and new products on the horizon hardly make this the perfect time to upgrade. MS may run into this problem when they release 2024. Their 2020 product may seem just fine for those who want to avoid the $3-4,000 upgrade their new game needs.

But is the growth in simulation games in PC based flight games? MS are very shy about releasing usage numbers but have said that flight simulation is a niche interest. Now the Steam numbers miss a whole lot of stuff but MSFS usage from there is pretty flat line these days, suggesting despite the millions of units sold the actual user community is pretty static. A lot of growth in simulation games is likely to come from the mobile sector as well rather than PC based activity. Personally I believe the flight simulation market is pretty saturated. How sales go with the new MSFS2024 will be interesting, but they are unlikely to mimic the 2020 release. But a new MS release will once again impact Xplane. If nothing else MS advertising, both paid for and unpaid media articles together of course with the online vloggers, will swamp anything Laminar does. Does Laminar do any useful publicity? MS also reads that wider sim player market better than Laminar. Much of the new audience is younger and the idea of a multi player 20 minute ‘challenge’ is more appealing than a recreating a transatlantic commercial flight. That market share isn’t interested in Austin wobbling on about the physics behind the latest tweak in the flight model. The answer for Laminar isn’t simple. In some ways MS failing with 2024 might be the best hope. It needs very high spec hardware, so expect a lot of negative user feedback on release plus the unit sales will likely be a fraction of 2020. How MS beancounters react to the sales that might be Laminar's best hope.

Although my coding days are long gone into the distant past I have the feeling that an exec to do this (you know the location of the input files and the destination) is probably embarrassingly easy for anyone who knows what they are doing. Likely much easier than the plug in that comes with the sound pack.

Thanks and the video does show that it’s not a complicated process and I’ve worked with sound packs before. Has there been any thought to having a Mango utility to rerun the updates (for all packs) on a regular basis. Something along the lines of having all of the sound packs stored in designated folder and then a utility to transfer them in windows to the correct aircraft files? Probably not difficult. In your video for example keeping the original zip file could be considered important if you need to rerun the process at a later date. The utility would save on future downloads. I’ll likely buy the 319 pack now but making this process easier for people - beyond the first run - might be worthwhile. If you have several sound packs it’s easy to forget about one or more when an aircraft has been updated, a fairly common occurrence as XP12 evolves. Having a utility might even encourage brand loyalty when new packs are released.

Sound packages can be excellent, but equally they can potentially be tiresome to live with. Two issues. One, when you move from engine type to another do you need to update the files to the correct sounds - or does it store both? Second, if you use an updater like SkunkCrafts does the updater see the ‘rogue’ files and overwrite or delete them? Interested in buying this but the developers don’t tend to explain the installation process or when the files may need to be reinstalled again. Any opportunity to include some detail around this in the review?

I currently have a 9 and X-Organizer runs without any issues. Incidentally it is not a program that runs in the background while you are running Xplane. It’s a set up app that you run and then you launch Xplane from it. Once Xplane is launched X-Organizer has finished its work. XToolbox is a companion program by the same developer you might want to look at, again available on the Orgstore,

While understanding your point FSX aircraft were not compatible with MSFS and until MSFS 2024 is released in December we won’t see whether developers look for ‘upgrade’ fees for existing MSFS content. MS does seem to have said that existing content bought from their shop will work in MSFS2024, but work and having full functionality are two different things - as you know from XP11 to XP12. It is also worth remembering that each new version of Xplane has come with new features so to take advantage of those features work is needed. Your comment about MSFS being easier for developers is interesting and perhaps worthy of an article from a developer on the subject. Moving to MSFS makes little sense at the moment with MSFS 2024 on the horizon. One thing to look for there will be whether MSFS2024 is heavier again on hardware. Personally I am happy with XP12 but each month Stephen and his articles are seeding my mind with doubt about the gap to MS.

One thing I use is XOrganizer that allow you to choose which sceneries and plugs ins get loaded or do not. Therefore in the New York are I will select the add on airport I am flying to/from and disable any other add on sceneries in the area. Available from the Org store and for me a critical part of my flight planning. As for the rest of your comments I agree. Adding MSFS eye candy scenery would likely lead to more people leaving as you would need a heavy duty rig. That may change in time of course but reading the forums decent performance is an issue for many people as it is.

Very interesting and well written. On the plans for an internal store it might be worth mentioning that this site does have links to the existing Org.Store. Nothing wrong in that but worth mentioning out of fairness. I use the Org.store extensively and will always buy from it if it has the product I want. My opinion is that we worry about Laminar’s ability to compete against MSFS and then accept the fact that the only revenue they can get is from the initial product sale. The reality is that some add ons now cost more than XP12 itself. While I understand that the org.store does far more for XP than just sell stuff equally how do we buttress Laminar financially?

To a degree true but - plenty of people get involved with a game like Xplane and never buy an add on. There is a group that spends lots on the game, the type of people who follow this site. Lots of people, perhaps more people, like the fact that there’s lots of free content and make use of that - the market adjusts. Noticeably there’s a lot less new content being released but equally there’s always been a huge amount of low quality, extremely niche stuff out there. I buy anything that looks as if it is worthwhile or comes from a fairly small set of developers who do a good job (Toliss, Thranda, FlightFactor, Mister X, Aerobask etc.) but there is a lot of $15 barely if better than the stock on the Org Store. That’s why I buy more of items reviewed on here. You get a better view of whether they are worth your money. Losing the good developers would be a problem. But who are we shedding tears over? Carenado? To some extent X-Plane has been left behind and will stay behind because of Microsoft’s heft. But it depends what you want. In terms of a simulator where else can MSFS go and where Simmers (not game players) want to go? Now if you want to rescue the neighbors digital cat from next door’s digital tree with your Mil Mi-26 while your digital flight attendant serves you digital sandwiches as you hover then yes, X-Plane is going to be left behind.

MSFS other than having Microsoft money has the advantage of Xbox access. Want to run Xplane properly and you’ll need a high end PC with a high end price. That’s $500 console a big differentiator in particular with young players. Having lots of aircraft has some value in terms of choice, but equally most of us end up reverting back to our favorites. The ones we fly well. I buy plenty of add on airports, but stock Xplane 12 generally can be quite good. I bought Cairo on the basis of reading your review. It’s a good location to add, but it’s hardly perfect. Some areas around the apron are pretty ‘sticky’, but you are right that geographically it makes sense. In the past MS have had the simulator to beat out there and they’ve without notice walked away from it. Some of us remember that. Developers for XP12 may be having a hard time with sales, and that is regrettable. But equally on MSFS developers are faced with enormous competition and also suffer from MS blowing their product up. How thrilled must Fenix have been when MS added a free competing A320 from IniBuilds to the platform? Do I worry about the future for Xplane? Somewhat, but over the past year XP12 has improved dramatically, something that often seems to go unmentioned. How does Laminar stop people moving to MSFS? It’s difficult to see a solution there. Why don’t I move to MSFS? I prefer my software on my PC and not hostage to streaming and one day some bean counter deciding that I’ll need a subscription for that. The more game like path that MSFS seems to go down with every release. The fact that most of the time I fly at altitudes that I can’t see Laminar’s new ships let alone my house. The one thing that would make me move is Xplane going the way of the dodo. But until that happens I’ll be positive about a product that’s come a very long way in the past year.

Bought this on the basis of the review (and the current sale price) and am impressed. Nice to fly and a good ‘everyday’ choice. The only missing element for me would be a menu for options and loading - I have got so used to those - but other than that a recommended buy and a comment that the review captures the aircraft well.

The elephant in the room is MSFS 2024. If Asobo get that right X-Plane is going to have a big problem. If nothing else Laminar need to get this next release out before MS suck all of the air out of the room. Of course MSFS fans might be unhappy in having to shell out for a new game. Perhaps the new release will be heavy on game and not flight simulation. But then again some big performance improvements might start making MSFS 2024 look very attractive against Xplane.

While understanding the role the org store has played in the past Laminar does have an issue. The only revenue Laminar gets (unlike MSFS) is the sale of the base package. That has impacts beyond Laminar’s profitability including funds needed to develop the platform on an ongoing basis. While one imagines developer concerns about the charges to sell on the new store (any different to the org store?) the existence of the MSFS store does not seem to have blunted the development of add ons for that platform. License revenue on its own, and particularly over time as a product ages, is not a solution. What are the alternatives?

I was surprised how much these changes have made to the scenery. It was impressive before, but to me it felt a little sterile. Now that’s anything but the case. Frame rates remain very good despite all of the clutter and interior views.

Thanks, bought this yesterday and your review is very accurate. The scenery is certainly good enough for me to consider other efforts by the developer.

Out of interest, and before I buy this, did you revisit the scenery in later versions of XP12?

Bought this on the basis of your review and also if Aerosoft is putting a foot in the water with XP12 why not encourage them. Not a bad scenery, a little heavy and turning to the south lost me 8 fps. Nicely populated by Traffic Global although the traffic flows seemed at odds with the winds, Notably sceneries seem to be moving to the $30 level, something that won’t encourage MSFS users to move, but given the smaller market acceptable. if you know how to install add on scenery the use of Aerosoft One will annoy. No issue with developers finding ways to protect their content, but its a different process. If you keep things clean and tidy Aerosoft One will muddy things a little. Notably XOrganizer picked up the new folder without prompting. Note an extra copy of SAM is downloaded so check any prior links and installations. If you haven’t used Aerosoft One before the instructions on the Org Store download page explain things. The FAQs on the Aerosoft One site really focus only on content bought directly from them.

Thanks to you and the team for all the content this year. Well written reviews of new product are an oasis in the desert of endless, lengthy, biased and just generally tedious Youtube reviews. Why spend three and a half hours riding along with Captain Crunch when you can learn far more in five minutes on here.

Not many expected MS to reenter the Flight Simulator market. When they did, that changed the whole Flight Simulator landscape and for me Laminar have been playing catch up ever since. Imagine a world where MS had not gone down that route and where that would have put X-Plane now. In reality Laminar’s biggest problem is trying to figure out what the MS plan is in the longer term. Will they lose interest again? Is the MSFS community large enough that the product can live without MS? Laminar in supporting multiple platforms and operating systems made their lives difficult, and its a model that hardly points to fast development. Almost the kind of strategy that leads to failure. But what happens now if Apple does become a more viable gaming platform, perhaps even the platform of choice? In that case the questionable strategy might look like genius.

Given Laminar’s size wasn’t it always obvious that getting XP12 sorted out was going to a journey? A lost year? Personally I cannot think of a single area where XP12 is not better than XP11. I will admit to upgrading my hardware as I could see that the coming winter weather would eat into my FPS reserve. Not cheap, but then flight simulation rarely is if you take it seriously. Then there is the alternative. All of us will admit to having had a peek online at MSFS. After all those lengthy Youtube ‘review’ videos must have some purpose in the Universe. In a couple of minutes you will be wondering how MS hide the rails the aircraft seem to be flying on. You can see your house but as a Flight Simulator but is MSFS more immersive? Now, for developers this year must have been a nightmare as Laminar tweaked (sometimes one suspects with a digital chainsaw) the flight model. But several of them have ended up with some quite impressive add ons. Compare X-Crafts E-Jets in XP11 and now in XP12 as just one example. Presumably the worst of the changes are behind us and upcoming releases will eliminate issues like the Minecraft clouds. Or as a MSFS user I could be anticipating the release of landmarks of Antartica or preparing the digital rescue of the digital crew of a digital oil rig. The development of XP12 has been very Laminar. Austin is the Elon Musk of the Flight Simulation world - without the questionable tweets and the large numbers of children. Sometimes the rockets blow up and the gaps between the panels look suspiciously wide.

The problem with Toliss, at least in XP12, is that they have worked so hard on continuous improvement of their Airbus range that its sometimes difficult to fly anything else!

I haven’t bought much scenery for XP12 because in most cases SAM3 is needed to make the scenery work. While SAM3 is free, whether it really works in XP12 is questionable. What the ongoing development plan for SAM3 is also unclear. As the store listing and this review did not suggest that this scenery needed SAM3 I bought it. it does require SAM3 and I do not think it unreasonable that this be included in the requirements. There is no Traffic Global activity at this airport for some reason There is documentation but it is very poorly written Generally it looks promising, a big 5 gb download mind, but the SAM3 issue rankles.

MSFS is such a small part of Microsofts business they can just use it as a promotional tool which is why Xplane should not try to go head to head with it. Xplane can survive as a niche product potentially becoming, say, a move up product for those who having experienced Flight Simulation in MSFS want something beyond the eye candy. MSFS development also seems to be moving more towards a game and Laminar needs to exploit that. I have just upgraded my system from a 2080 base to a 4080, not a cheap or easy thing to do, particularly where I live. I thought XP12 was good on the 2080, on the 4080 and the ability to move sliders to the right you really get an idea of just how good the product is. And there for me is part of the story. If you want fly complex aircraft add ons then you are going to need a decent rig (or spend your days posting on the forums about how poor your FPS is with your latest addition) and the cost of those add ons is tiny compared with the cost of the rig. Developer costs aren’t the issues but video card manufacturers might be. On scenery developers, the base XP12 airports, at least with the sliders up seem pretty good to me. The number of really good add on sceneries that have been produced for XP12 can probably be counted on fingers and perhaps a couple of toes but the reality is there’s an awful lot of rubbish out there hardly better than the stock. Scenery developers want to make more money, want the ability to charge higher prices. Go look at SFDs SFO. Do that and it will sell. On upgrade costs it always seems to me what was important was when the software was developed. Lots of developers released last year for XP11 and committed at the time that they would support XP12 in the future - some even saying XP12 would be supported ‘when available’. Now I bought those products as I saw them as part of my XP12 preparation. Not all of those commitments have been met and in my opinion when those commitments were met, unless an upgrade fee was mentioned, the upgrade should come gratis. However for much older add ons it is only reasonable to ask for an upgrade fee and in some cases sell the product as completely new. Good developers Like Toliss, Thandra, MisterX will always get supported by the community. Why? Because they provide excellent product. I don’t need every Thandra product in my virtual hangar or every variety of the Toliss Airbus A320 family but I buy them. And hopefully others do too.

Very impressive in 12. Some of the colors seemed a little washed at the airport boundaries but a stunning achievement.