Pretty fun to ignore them though… 
1 Like
I just installed my copy of XP12…been away on East Coast last week so no f“Virtual “flying for me 
But now it’s time for some football 
So might have to wait till tomorrow I have not messed with XPlane in 8 yrs…So I’m sure I’ll need to “relearn “ how The UI works.
1 Like
I keep updating the “first impressions” post above. The short version so far:
Things I hate: ATC, some autogen, clouds, jaggy/shimmery VR horizon.
Things I am learning to love: clouds (WIP–they’ll soon be nice), autogen. (Tried ortho but the look was jarring, too incompatible with autogen trees and structures.
Things I love: Sounds, rain/snow/ice effects, performance, new tailwheel friction modeling, F14, R22, the Nimitz!, the water and most everything else.
5 Likes
I tried your VR settings, but the objects, near and far, were too jagged, IMO. I tried messing with those a bit and still not at my happy place with VR. 2D it’s much improved over XP11. But the team working on VR has some work, IMO, to bring it on par with MSFS and DCS. If anyone else has some settings that they like for VR, please post. An additional aggravation is not having the ability to save graphics profiles, as you can with controls now. So, if you enjoy the ability to switch back and forth without restarting the sim, you’ll be quickly brought back to earth if you use different settings for each configuration. Or am I missing something? Entirely possible.
2 Likes
I do have Oculus set up for 1.2 pixel density. For me, detail is either on par or better than I achieve with DCS. There, I also use a 1.2 PD but with the DCS GUI, not Oculus. As for switching, XP is the only sim where I can switch instantly and error-free between 2D and VR. It’s great for videos and screenshots, and also for long periods with the autopilot on while I enjoy a beer. If you meant switching between saved graphics profiles then, yeah, DCS is the only sim I own where that is possible.
@chipwich I don’t mean to imply that things are close to acceptable in every respect. There are known issues in VR–jagged horizon being foremost among them. In my case, though, clarity is not a problem. But I use an Oculus Quest2. It could be that I am at my limit in XP and that’s why I see DCS no better. The G2 may rock in DCS and therefor you G2 owners really notice where XP puts on the visual brakes. I hope you find a configuration that works.
2 Likes
Being able to jump in and out of VR on the fly is a big deal IMHO. I would spend a lot more time with DCS and IL2 if I could do this. The only time I want to be in VR is when I’m sat in the cockpit. Setting up the flight, mission briefing etc etc are much better suited to a 2D monitor. MSFS does this well, as does XP11 & 12.
3 Likes
I think this is what I’m experiencing most. Now that I have a fast GPU, I’m getting spoiled by the distance clarity improvements in the others two sims. It’s not that I need it to fly, but that it is a constant reminder that I’m in a sim. Hoping that LR can put some resources toward improving the image. With a due respect, this somewhat looks like first gen VR.
1 Like
I spent some time with the default Robinson R22 and also the VSKYLABS R44 and must say that the default R22 is really nicely done and looks surprisingly better inside-out than the VSL offering. but I guess that we will see some updates for the VSL birds in near future.
and fast forward to the helicopters flight modeling in XP12. I would call it realistic. 
but, the question can be, it is the best helicopter sim platform for PCs ? I would say thats not the right question!
we actually have few sim platforms available which simulates helicopters pretty realistic. and by realistic I mean flight modeling and systems modeling.
it is down to the particular simulated helicopter type which platform to pick imo.
I mean if I am looking for realistic simulation of civi helicopters like R22, R44, R66, H125, SA315 … and many to come (Bell206, MD500, Bell222, S300, Bell407 promised to be updated soon and many more) than it is hands down XP12, no surprise here.
but if one wants to fly realistically simulated Mi8, Mi24, Ka50, AH64, SA342 … than it is of course DCS.
and you want best EC135 ? than go no further, there is AeroflyFS4.
and where in all this is MSFS? its going there, at least thats the promise for November when MSFS should bring helicopters in the game. then it could be the new platform for realistic civi helicopters. but that just to be seen.
for now there is pretty nice H145 for MSFS which could only offer good systems modeling right now.
so in general, I am very happy with XP12 as the prime civi helicopters simulation platform … at least until November 
what I dont like about XP12 right now is the depiction of water. up close its nice, but from altitude the water lacks. its flat with no areas of different wave heights. waves are all the same so its looks flat.
second thing can be the autogen and the vector data or how its called. simHeaven can do miracles with the OSM data and correct depiction of cities and roads.
also LR should work hard on the coasts and rivers. its unbelievable how jaggy they are.
but we are in the EA phase so hope they will work hard on the improvements. I sent my money their way just to support them in this early phase
here simHeaven already available for XP12, I would say its worth a try
https://simheaven.com/x-world-for-xp12/
@smokinhole based on my exp form XP11, it looks good with ortho only after application of simHeavens products. otherwise its really hit 'n miss.
5 Likes
Thanks @NEVO! Happy to read your thoughts. I had ortho looking great in XP for Canyonlands, SE Alaska and New Jersey. But there have been some issues with seasonal settings and the OSM neighborhood placement that looks odd with XP12. Thanks for the heads-up with simHeaven. I think I’ll leave 12 stock, without orthos except for “Playground Sceneries” like Frank Dainese’s Mountain Parks and PS’ Quatam River. It’s early beta and I want to enjoy the sim mostly the way LR presents it, warts and all. Check out the CitationX. It’s a hoot and the artwork is stunning. I agree with you on VSKYLABS. They really are capable of cockpit wear and detail, both of which show nicely in the well-crafted C-47. But the VSL Robies? They fly ok but have zero visual attention to detail.
3 Likes
OrbX copied over. So far, looks like a great success! Still tweaking the VR settings…
2 Likes
here you can see what I mean, its XP12 Enrique Meyer Soto SCCR (South America) and google earth for scale its still pretty good for VFR flying with just map and stopwatch (shapes are there, the islands in the river are there) but they should work harder on this to looks plausible imo. its water in the end, the edges should be smooth and round
plus, the placement of trees is terrible. I would guess that there are better sources available to place the trees / forests correctly.
what I really like is the new in-game map vfr layer
1 Like
and forgot … we need procedurally generated grass already !!!
That’s a feature I like in MSFS as it makes off-field landings great.
Only it would be nice to be able to set its height. The grass in MSFS is a bit overgrown.
2 Likes
Disregard. Confusing post about SteamVR that was probably irrelevant.
Thanks NEVO for your excellent post and comments, especially regarding helicopter flight modeling. I’m surprised that you left out the DCS UH-1, but you are in good company, because it’s not Casmo’s favorite either. The simHeaven work is intriguing. Have you tried the Europe terrain yet?
1 Like
…And I am surprised you left IN the Gazelle! 
2 Likes
hmmm, you guys noticed it !? 
these modules like R22, UH1, SA342, … , could prove ‘problematic’ as they are available on more than one sim platform.
R22 in XP & AFS, UH1 in XP & DCS, SA342 in XP & DCS. now the comparing could begin no, I think in these cases its more about the preferences of particular customer which platform to choose … or both … or all.
because we can find flight modeling imperfections in any of these sims, there is no winner or looser imo ( or I am too lazy to do detailed comparison ).
btw we should not forget that, to some extent, each sim is also artistic representation of the real deal.
e.g. I flew Spit from Manston to Brussels and back in XP11. then I realized that MSFS could be better fit with ortho scenery. I tried it but didnt recreate that flight in MSFS eventually. for that WWII theme XP had better ‘look and feel’ for me (for the reasons unknown).
now regarding simHeaven x-eu for XP12. its night and day, or (sim)heaven and hell
placement of the trees/forests and representation of villages/towns/cities is dramatically improved with these OSM data.
I have noticed some fps impact but didnt measure it precisely but its not significant. need to test more.
just dont know why this is not by default in XP12. did LR saved on performance? I could understand it for towns where the less dense buildings can save something performance wise. but why the trees/forests are not placed correctly is beyond my understanding.
3 Likes
I am not sure why X-Plane is blazing down the autogen path. Performance is one. Another maybe be that the gut punch Austin endured (and continues to endure) with patent trolls leaves him reluctant to touch anything that might raise copyright issues. I certainly wouldn’t blame him if that’s the case. I personally have a love/hate relationship with orthos. I enjoy making them and “discovering” new places. That process has been a big part of my enjoyment of the sim over the long COVID months. But I hate photos of cars, houses, clouds, snow and shadows on my scenery. And now we live in the era of Asobo. And no sane person looking for a new sim is going to put up with a bunch of mods to make this sim look OK when MSFS looks terrific out of the box (minus the occasional melting building). Autogen is not a bad route but it will require a huge amount of work on the part of talented regional volunteer artists to make consistently plausible structures and tiles. They will always be a distant second fiddle regardless. I’ve decided that I am happy with their work as-is. If they survive with the small segment of the market that hasn’t abandoned them, great. If they fail to compete with the Seattle juggernaut, that’s fine too.
3 Likes
Asobo is French, Blackshark are Austrian (same city I live in). Seattle only puts the name on it.
3 Likes
And statistically, at least one of the developers like Swedish meatballs, so, there’s that…
2 Likes