We posted the first X-Plane 11.50 release candidate today. (Release notes here.) X-Plane 11.50 is not final however–to get the release candidate, you still need to have “get betas” enabled.
The changes from beta 17 to RC1 are not very invasive; we’re trying to tweak carefully and not destabilize the build we have. Sidney and I spent most of the last two weeks looking at tons and tons and tons of performance traces from users, looking for performance bugs to fix.
A Note on Addons
A lot of developers have updated their add-ons for 11.50 – either to gain Vulkan compatibility, to modernize old code, or to fix bugs that were revealed when running with X-Plane 11.50.
We still see a lot of crashes in our automatic crash report collector from add-ons where we know that the author has fixed the underlying issue.
If you run an X-Plane installation that has been “heavily enhanced” – you know who you are, with the 1500 scenery packs and the 100 plugins – I’d suggest that X-Plane 11.50 might be a good time to build your system back up from a clean install. This makes it easier to only run the latest versions of add-ons that are Vulkan compatible, rather than having to fish through your full past install to find that one plugin or script that’s causing a problem.
If you use FlyWithLua to whack art controls (or run scripts from people who do this) I’d suggest removing them when you get 11.50 running, then put them back later. A ton of art control tricks simply don’t do anything anymore, and some are now harmful to performance or cause crashes.
Incremental Roll Out
One last note – because 11.50 is such a disruptive release (in that it requires add-ons to be updated to run in Vulkan), we are working on a staged release. While everyone who wants to get the RC can get it, and everyone who wants the final version will be able to get it, we are trying to make the auto-update notice ping the user base incrementally, so that our tech support is not overwhelmed.
If you don’t see the update prompt for a new beta or final release when you launch X-Plane, it may be us testing out this system. Just run the installer manually with the “get betas” box checked to get the latest no matter what.
Thank you for all this hard work!
Hey guys,
crongrats for the achievement so far!
For me 11.50 so far is super stable and great – but not in VR. Tbh I´m a bit surprised to see this made it into RC. Tickets and so on are already adressed and WIP.
Overall it feels as if VR was somehow let down..
Regards
VR works great for me, even better with this release (11.50R1 Vulkan). This is with both my Vive Pro and Oculus Rift cv1. Also nice to see it shutdown from VR with Oculus now. Thanks Laminar, good job!
Hi TomC;
How did you get the controllers to be working on Vive Pro?
Thanks,
TB
They just worked fine. I only use the right controller though. Mainly to access menus.
Check your system. VR worked perfectly for me and I’m using the Valve Index.
VR good for me too. Adding in the likes of OVR were detrimental to performance. Just using X-Plane without anything extra for VR and achieving 30 to 40 FPS generally with some slow down in FPS on approach or complex weather sometimes. This is with ORBX scenery, Active Sky, TBM-900. Rift S with overclocked i5 and Nvidia 1060 so not a top end rig. Installing 11.50 made the difference between keeping the Rift and sending it back as FMS was around 20 or less with 11.41.
I have had CTD on every beta release since Beta 1, not sure what it is but a vanilla installation may need to be tested. I have 5k hardware setup with minimal plugins installed. Would you say it is recommended to run X-Plane with –aftermath every time just in case? This of course to help the team out narrowing down bugs?
Install a second copy and add all your addons one by one.
Sadly in order to fly some airplanes you need more than one.. But elimination method is know and good, so thanks for you suggestion. Always have a clean test installation 🙂
Thank you Ben and Sidney!
Thanks to all the team at Laminar.
X-Plane 11.50 rc 1 is running smooth as butter for me, as have most of the beta’s.
Running the zibo mod on a complete opencockpits cockpit using one master & two remote visual pc’s.
Absolutely stable.
OMG! Finally I can feel improvement in FPS near the cloud for the first time. I waited almost 4 years for this moment. Great Job, hop the random crashes issue is also fixed.
In a previous beta we fixed a Metal-specific bug where the setup of the rendering surface, in order to be plugin-compatible, wasn’t optimal for fill rate. The bug was that we didn’t make the same matched change for HDR. HDR is now fixed in RC1.
I only tried quick landing and it was amazing. I still don’t know if I can trust X-Plane now and make long flight or it will disappoint me with midway random crash. But I will give it a final try.
It depends. I can fly x-plane 11.50Bx and now R1 for literally 12 hrs a day without issues. But that is with a very lean and clean install consisting of x-plane, the Zibo 737 (which is usually what I fly), and avitab, and plugins for navigraph and my X52 flight controls, and some Orbx and DD Designs payware scenery, and most of the US coverage in orthophoto scenery.
I have found that it is best to run only the most necessary plugins and only the ones that are known to work well in 11.50. There are still a lot of plugins that need serious work in order to be stable in 11.50. Many 3rd parties have taken the position that they won’t even start working on updates for 11.50 compatibility until this is out of beta.
I personally would rather have vulkan and the higher performance than plugins, and quite frankly I hate the idea of plugins holding me back. One popular payware plugin I own, which isn’t 11.50 compatible, still doesn’t have formal support for 11.4x! That is just unacceptable to me.
I run X-Plane with ZERO plugins and addons, and I can never fly for 2 hours with crashes (Only sometimes I install Better Pushback, but usually without plugins)
My device is i7, 40GB Ram, 8GB Vram. and I set every settings to low.
This version is exception, it’s better than any version I had before but still what not I dream about.
What took you so long? 😉 The HDR fix did the trick for me. Finally, 11.50 is faster with Metal than without in cloudy conditions on my iMac.
Good work!!!
On the settings I’ve been using for beta test I went from (already whooping) 50+ FPS to about 70 FPS (PC, Vulkan) laind same heli, scenery and view as usual.
Not sure it was HDR, but you guys hit something for sure 🙂
The more FPS I get, the more sad it feels that we can’t improve a kind of outside monitor view 🙁
It is really one_thing that would make a big difference.
Working really great for me now, especially under Metal. I have an iMac i5 9600k 580x 32gb and a pc 3600x Vega 56 32gb both running identical setups on rc1, metal and vulkan. Strangely the iMac now runs X-plane much faster than the pc! Guess metal is more efficient!? Really happy with rc1 guys, well done…
Amen! Experiencing the same…. !!
Nice job guys!!
I keep having crashes on Linux, always about 20-25 min into flight. Have had them all through the betas and still with RC1 (which, other than that, runs great!)
I’ve sent a crash report every time it happened. Question: do those reports contain everything you need to know (i.e. stack trace etc) to decide whether it’s a problem with x-plane or my system? If not, should I run x-plane in gdb and file a bug report with the trace?
Apologies if this has already been covered somewhere.
On Windows the report has everything we need – on Linux it can vary. If you can get a clean GDB back trace please do file it, although we also have a category of “Linux weirdness” that we don’t have time to chase down.
Idea: A crash on Linux could suggest the commands to provide the information you need, like “info threads” in gdb
Do you want/need special parameters to be used when getting a “clean GDB backtrace”?
When I see crashes under Linux, I typically run X-Plane with this command from a terminal:
gdb ./X-Plane-x86_64 2>&1 | tee /tmp/xp_beta_`date +%G-%m-%d_%H%M%S`.gdb_log.txt
Then type “run” followed by return to get X-Plane launched.
When the crash occurs, I type the gdb command “where” followed by return, which gives an informative stack trace.
After that, I type “quit” followed by return, which ends the gdb session.
The above command routes all output to a date-time stamped file in “/tmp” which I then send to Laminar Research. This has proved helpful for them in the past.
I hate ‘thanks’ messages, so I won’t post one 😉 But it is indeed good info. I’ll start a topic on x-plane.org.
I’m surprised that gdb still gets the input that way. Actually I would have used the “script _filename_” to log every input and output to _filename_. (You’ll have to type “exit” to end the logging). This logs every key press, that comes from the terminal (even cursor movements), and the output too, of course. Note that “2>&1” may not capture stderr and stdout synchronously, because most programs switch from line-buffered to block-buffered if the output looks like a file… Maybe tee does some magic, bu tI don’t really know.
R1 runs smooth on my mid size system (ryzen/radeon) with almost completely maxed settings and orthos. Huge improvement to 11.41. Great work. Keep up !
Just updated from 11.41 (I didn’t test any betas before) and tested with the plane I use the most, the Alabeo Diamond DA42 which was abandoned by the developer since Xplane 10, and which has a pretty bad bad fps because of some outdated bad plugins it uses.
I was glad to see it still works despite the old plugins.
The frame rate is identical but the orthoxp zl17 scenery I use looks much better, I don’t know if it’s because of changing the anisotropic filtering from 4x to 8x or from the different way you now load textures.
Forests also blend in better with the scenery textures, before I had a moire like pattern, but power lines still don’t blend well.
Frame rate is smoother.
I see you finally fixed an old bug with “matching ants” flicker on some objects (this I noticed with the Alabeo Diamond DA40 which also still works).
I only had one problem, the cockpit shadows seem to be pixelated again, I used this in a lua script to fix the issue, maybe it doesn’t work now with vulkan:
set( “sim/private/controls/fbo/shadow_cam_size”, 4096)
set( “sim/private/controls/shadow/csm_split_exterior”, 2)
set( “sim/private/controls/shadow/csm_split_interior”, 4)
set( “sim/private/controls/skyc/max_shadow_angle”, 5)
set( “sim/private/controls/skyc/min_shadow_angle”, -89)
My hardware is an intel i7 4770 cpu, 16 GB Ram, Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 6GB with the latest 452.06 driver.
I didn’t test with other newer planes I have that are not abandoned because I don’t expect issues with those when they will be updated.
I hope you will publish a roadmap with what comes after 11.50 soon so that those of us who didn’t move to the other thing that was launched today can make a decision…
Disable SSAO (pull back the “quality” slider one notch). It’s… not exactly broken but looks really weird on Vulkan in it’s current state. I have a very similar system (i7-4790K@4.6GHz, GTX1060 6GB, 32GB) and noticed maybe not always a higher FPS, but always smoother and consistent.
“…Just run the installer manually with the “get betas” box checked to get the latest no matter what….”
Great work making XP better and better !
Maybe i have to change my glasses but when lauching my XP installer i can’t see anywhere the “get betas” box.
Thanks for your job !
JP
It’s our shorthand for the “check for new betas as well as updates” checkbox.
It’s running very well for me. The only very minor issue I’ve noticed is that unchecking the Show Missing Scenery Details in settings make no difference. I still get messages about missing scenery in flight.
The current GPU drivers from AMD and nVidia have already been optimized for MFS2020.
For example:l nvidia 452.06 –> This new Game Ready Driver provides the latest performance optimizations, profiles, and bug fixes for Microsoft Flight Simulator.
Why are they never optimized for XP or did I miss something?
Thanks for the hard and good work.
Maybe we’re not high enough profile to get release-notes listings? We definitely got driver fixes from several different vendors during the (very long) dev/beta process – mostly correctness issues. I don’t know if they have made a profile that tries to optimize internal driver decisions for us – since we use Vulkan the driver isn’t supposed to have latitude to make its own decisions.
Im sure you just need Austin to take Jenson for a spin in N844X and you can probably have your own dedicated section in their release notes.
Where can i find the release notes? Thanks!
Post is now updated with a link.
Thank you so much for your hard work. I love X-Plane and I am very excited about the future of X-Plane. Keep it up.
My version of X-Plane is running as smooth as butter. 11.5 is the first stutter-free simming experience I have ever had.
Congratulations to the team for producing such excellence.
The ONLY issues I have are flashing in VR as the two screens scenery clash on occasions. There are also some curious large white squares in the water between Lisbon and Madeira.
Please, please address the scenery conflict between the two screens in VR. This has always been an issue which needs addressing.
Full screen vsync is still not working correctly.
Every second frame swapchain acquire is taking a huge amount of the the overall frame time. On the subsequent frame it’s sub millisecond. The end result is frame times alternating pretty much between n->n/2 and the output is extremely stuttery.
This does not happen in windowed mode.
Please file abug.
Hi Ben
I already logged this on b17 and it’s still occuring, better overall average frame rate but significantly worse frame pacing. I didnt recieve a ticket number back from support after sending on the microprofiler dumps but going by the release notes it was probably XPD-10970.
Stuart, see if deselecting the vsync checkbox in sim lets you still run full screen mode (but leave your Nvidia vsynch on). I hope what you’re describing is related to a bug I filed around beta 14 along with traces. Beta 13 and prior let me run w/ X-Plane’s vsync checkbox on. However, Beta 14 and beyond I noticed in full screen mode that if I went to camera angles with more scenery in the frame, the frames rate dropped from 50-60 to a seemingly locked 30. The three things that allowed the frames to go back up to 50-60 was to alt-tab a different application, or run X-Plane in windowed mode, or keep the sim in full screen but uncheck the vysync box in sim (but on in Nvidia)
Although, I just saw that my described vsync issue is improved in RC1…
Interesting timing – while I was using the “current” beta, I’ve been getting GREAT framerates in standard and VR modes – only real hiccup was I couldn’t quit without crashing. Yesterday I updated my driver to the newest NVIDIA release (452.06) and it seems to have fixed the issue… should I report this?
Could you update with a link to the release notes?
Done!
It has been interesting to see how many of Laminar’s concepts M$/Asobo have shamelessly picked off recently, ranging from GUI details to simulation methods. People keep asking me if I’ll be returning to my ’80s “Bruce Artwick roots”. I explain that I’ve had many of the fancy “new” capabilities to some degree or another for years now. With due respect to said roots, why bother? Live long and prosper, Laminar.
Yea, I would have filed a copyright infringement long time ago, if I was Laminar….;- )
But Laminar will survive, as they have done so many times, that MSFS look great is largely due to the sim being developed with moderne computers in mind, but XP12 will be the same, and will be absolutely stunning….
We have two amazing powerful competing sims on our hands now. That can’t be bad.
Hi Ben, me again 🙂
Tried the FLIR camera as you suggested.
The resolution is really, really poor, and we can’t move or resize the Garmin.
Please, can we have a little improvement with Vulkan for helicopter missions?
I think the most important stuff is 3rd. party/user made objects.
“The rest” doesn’t necessarily have to improve, so if there was a way to add better view for user objects only, that could be a way?
In case you forgot how bad the FLIR view is 🙂 –>
https://i.postimg.cc/ZnY3HLQs/FLIRcam1.jpg
Love the RC1 release… no stutters and smooth as silk, VR has a few stutters on occasion but oy on the ground when turning my headset… tested out the “other sim” today and I couldn’t wait to get back in XP, this is a Pro simulator while the other sim feels more like an arcade simulation..
Great work Ben and team
Russ
Fantastic work by the Laminar team, XP11.50R1 runs smooth and fast on my iMac i9/VEGA48, not a single crash since beta 17.Thanks from the x737 project team!
Benedikt
x737project
Thanks for your hard work and for release! 🙂
To the automatic reports – my XP crashes made few ones over last few weeks. I found it is combination of ASXP and Traffic Global. Running only one of them is fine, but as soon as i run both of them at once XP will crash like in 20-30 minutes for sure, generating automated report.
Will try to resolve with HiFi and JustFlight first, but i have aan odd feeling that they both will claim “our plugin is not the issue” ;). It is always hard to convince developers to cooperate in such causes as end-user definitely can’t find or debug more.
Cheers,
Ondrej
Make sure you have the newest of both add-ons…I know that ASXP got an update a while back that fixed a bunch of issues.
This is do as both programs are trying to use TCAS at the same time. I also run both and when trying to use TCAS with both automatic crash. I also have the GTN 650 and have to choose which one I want to use TCAS. Hope this helps
Best so far, but I still I think that VR needs a deeper look regarding stutter. Also it would be great to have some guidline what to expect regarding performance. I have an I7 4790 with 32Gb, SSD and a GTX2080 and maybe this is to weak to “smooth as butter” performance in VR(oculus rift)? It works fine with aerofly and DCS though…
It’s a slightly weird CPU vs GPU combination….in that that’s like the most expensive new GPU you can get with a 6-gen old Intel CPU.
Ben would it still be an advantage to use prosses lasso and set all background task operations to thread/core 1 only and XP11 and VR server to all the other threads but core/thread 1?
We’ve never endorsed this because we have never tried to get into how to manage all of the stuff on your PC. It may help and it may still help.
I used Process Lasso for a long time, but since my system is running with a ryzen processor and Windows came up with some improvements of the thread-scheduler I no longer saw any benefit in using a third party scheduler..
Your mileage may vary, try it out.
Ok, but is it really so wierd? We are always told that a good GPU is good and now with Vulkan, the CPU usage should increase… 🙂 But I hear what you say and I will consider an upgrade. What is not a wierd combination in your opinion? I9 10XXX?
Well, it’s okay to have more GPU than CPU – your case is just a bit extreme – I have the same CPU – but I only have a 1070. I also am not trying to run 4K all the time, of coarse. Mostly the CPU might help if you’re trying to run VR and thus trying to target a very short frame.
I have encountered vulkan device error for the fist time on my ubuntu 18.04.5! I’ve filed a bug report. I have x-plane beta clean installation without third party addons
I wonder (about plugin compatibility): Could LR provide a kind of table that lists plug-ins and their versions and a rating like: works/crashes/poor performance (affects frame rate)
Possibly with a link where to get updated versions
Another thought: If there exists a newer version of the Space Shuttle, it should be refreshed. I also wonder what happened to the “reentry autopilot”: Did Austin rip it out and name it Xavion? 😉
Unfortunately most of the Shuttle’s controls are defunct dummies.
Finally what happened to Mars? The real world heads for it, but in the sim we can’t any more…
There is no newer version of the shuttle.
8-(
Hi Ben.
This is a subjective view but let me say that I have downloaded MSFS2020 (Xbox for PC £1) and spent the last 18 hours playing around with it, That is, trying to get it to work properly. I have to say, MSFS is NOT a flight simulator; rather, it is a scenery simulator/game with no regard to anyone who intends to fly seriously.
I will be sticking with XP which is – in my opinion – the only true simulator available.
Rc1 is excellent, no stutters, fluid responses and in the Toliss a319, a joy to fly.
Should XP ever get the scenery update it deserves (talk to Google maybe lol) and a a proper ATC system which recognizes elevation of the terrain together with SIDs and STARS, it will solidify its position as the only true simulator.
Congrats to all of you and a big, big thank you.
Roger
Clouds, weather, water and trees!
RC1 is working great for me! Good work Sid, Ben and the rest of the team!
I gave it a good rip-around last night with every scenario I could think of….day, night, stock scenery, Orbx scenery with almost everything set at max (no reflections/shadows) and AA at 4x, 5120×1440). Frame rates from high 20’s in the most challenging scenarios and up to 80+ at one point. Smooth with no stutters regardless of FR. I don’t do VR.
So, ya done good! Now you can get on with including some giraffes and flamingos like that other sim has! 😉
Cheers,
Tom
So I tried out FS2020 today. After a few hours I came back to X-Plane. I gotta tell you: It felt like coming home. It has just increased my faith in X-Plane – so solid. Honestly: I even like the scenery better. I just want to encourage you to keep on building up on X-Plane!
If I could buy an Upgrade today: A better ATC, some make over of the interior textures, some tweaks here and there, tunable ADF (G1000), indication of the main pages, shortcut commands like “set altimeter”, “readback ATC”, airport wind-info right in the weather tab, maybe 2 or 3 aditional stock planes, a baron with a G1000… I’d definetly go for X-Plane. I feel like its still the best sim :D.
I really can confirm that!
MFS2020 doesn’t feel like a simulator. Especially the landings. Planes land like toys. It seems there are no physics :/ Of course, the scenery is beautiful. But only if you fly in a higher altitute.. If you are very close to the scenery it just look not so good anymore. The buildings just look like in Google Earth. And for me I think the color in MFS2020 is just too colorful. It doesn’t look realistic. If I fly in xplane in FL360 it just looks quite realistic and really great. The atmosphere, the colors and the clouds in the distance. I hope Laminar Research won’t change the colors in xplane once. And for me although laminar research doesn’t use satellite-maps, somehow xplane looks and feels more realistic than MFS2020.
Agree on the colors, but one thing I think it’s missing in X-Plane – and I remember @Ben talking about this “dilemma” somewhere – is the way light exposure would change depending on where and what you are looking at.
MSFS seem to have tackled this. If you are looking outside and then look down to the panel, the eye will have to adjust to the new brightness.
And I don’t think this is something that just adds “coolness” factor, but it surely help to bring realism to the sim. You get sunny days to be bright and to actually FEEL like it.
This is why some people call X-Plane graphics “dull”, because its exposure it’s sort of “equalized”. You can look at the sun and your compass at the same time.
But again, I remember Ben mentioning this some time ago, so I could bet he already has plans for that [insert evil laugh here].
Actually I think we don’t need the “eye stress”, neither real, nor simulated. The typical monitor environment has a contrast ration of roughly 1:100 (more than a classical film emulsion could capture). If you have a very dark room, you may get 1:1000, maybe, but on a sunny day it’s much more…
I disagree. It seems to me that the colours in X-Plane are unnaturally bleak. To change this, I use AMD’s driver to increase saturation and contrast by 40% and this alone makes X-Plane look twice as good in my opinion.
Hi I use AMD so thanks for this information. I will do that next time i load x plane to see how it looks. I also can say x plane 11 is my sim of choice after my first few days of MFS2020. Dont get me wrong MFS2020 looks great in a lot of ways but x plane feels so realistic to me. The game play is awesome, the simulation is awesome the physics are awesome, and the ability to sit on just ride on a flight you just completed is irresistible. All xplane needs is Vulkan to be complete, fix terrain, auto-gens, and scenery/photo-scenery, add more default planes, fix atc, realistic weather. All these thing i feel they are already working on. So ill just wait, hopefully it be soon. #TeamXplane
Having taken many photos from the inside of real planes, I disagree: Usually you have a bluish color balance, little color saturation, an a hazy type of sharpness.
Maybe some people have misadjusted expectations ss in socal media so many photos use “maximum contrast, maximum saturation and maximum sharpness”. The real world doesn’t look like that…
I think X-Plane looks realistic, even when past versions looked more colorful.
Once 11.50 becomes final, will the default rendering be switched to Vulkan/Metal? Users will expect better performance as promised, but some might not know that they need to do anything in order to get it. If they don’t get it, they will complain about it instead of try to figure out why they didn’t get it. Sorry if this was changed already-I’m not participating in beta (because I already have average 1141 fps in 11.41 :-)). I am following though, and grateful for all the hard work you have done.
No – we were planning to keep the check-box – it’s not that hard to set.
He didn’t suggest to remove the check box but to have it checked by default.
Why not make Vulkan the default? If it is the better experience and you invested a lot of time and money to support it. I estimate that at least half the users don’t even know what Vulkan is.
Right – we’re not defaulting it yet – we need to let it sit in the field more.
That makes sense.
You’re doing a great job, Laminar Research. Keep it up 🙂
The sim engine needs a rewrite with proper multi threaded CPU / GPU scheduling. Fix up graphics defects and bugs. Drop linux, drop Glomo. Add 3d trees etc etc.
…it wouldn’t be a proper 11.50 post without this comment. : )
Wouldn’t mind 3D trees tough, with those around the aircraft (on the ground, duh) realistically moving with the wind. It would be nice for the immersion… Maybe for XP12…
Neither would we – one way you can tell it’s not an insane choice for X-Plane is that people sometimes put 3-d trees in via existing scenery system tools.
When are you guys going to tease us with some XP12 previews!!!???
Hey ben,
Are we talking here about objs or is there some sort of way in x-plane for 3d vegetation? Like a way for example, to “grow” grass out of terrain textures? so that colors will match?
+1
What do YOU get when OTHERS drop Linux?
What is the advantage of dropping Linux? I wouldn’t use x-plane if I had to start Windows.
I can actually spell this out. Sometimes users like Doug see the dev team working on things he doesn’t use and come to the conclusion that if the dev team wasn’t working on those things, the dev team could spend more time on the things he cares about. In other words, he thinks Linux is competing with other stuff for time.
Now the obvious things to point out are:
1. Things we do take time and they bring in revenue, so you can’t really make any kind of sane trade-offs without knowing how much time something takes and how much revenue brings in. If we cut something and can’t afford the engineering staff because of the revenue loss, it’s not a win.
1a. We don’t publish either time spent or revenue break-downs for ANYTHING. So y’all are totally making wild speculations and cannot back up your points with data because we don’t share that data. I’d encourage everyone to take that discussion somewhere else because it’s sort of fundamentally pointless and speculative. It’s unlikely anyone here is going to convince us to change our engineering roadmap based on not having the cost/benefit data. There’s a huge difference between saying “I am interested in X” – which does matter to us – we care about what our users want to do with X-Plane, and telling us how to run the business.
2. With that in mind, Linux represents < 2% of sales by platform last time I checked and, and that number hasn't moved over the fifteen year period or so we've had Linux. So Linux users, you really can't make a case for your OS by revenue because it's not there, and it shows no signs of changing. This is one of those rare cases where users really can identify from public info that the business case of a feature is weak. With that in mind, we've already attempted to take this into account by intentionally running Linux at a lower level of support and a higher level of DIY, and 99% of the community has been okay with that. Once a year we get one user who doesn't understand why we haven't made Linux plug n play on his distro and we all get annoyed, but for the most part the Linux community has done a good job of taking care of itself. and in that context, so far, we've kept it going mostly to support the hackers, developers, tinkerers, etc. who use it - Linux is over-represented in developers, tool makers, etc.
I have to say that I appreciate your efforts to keep Linux as a platform for x-plane.
Your Linux support is what it made me start with x-plane many years ago.
I also have to say that x-plane 11.50 betas have been working great with the open source OpenGL AMD drivers and that i have been very satisfied in general with the experience, performance and stability wise. I have no data to support this, but I have the feeling that the performance with OpenGL has improved compared to 11.41
Looking forward to see what comes next in x-plane development
Thanks
This!
I understand that from a pure revenue / market share point of view linux support may not make sense. However, to me that is typical corporate short-sightedness. To me, tagging along since xp9, multi-platform support among other things defines the spirit and soul of the product. The open approach, the tinkering and DIY … that is part of the identity of the product. It might be more “niche” than the other competitors. But I’m proposing that quite some windows users also buy the product because of this.
Hi Ben/Laminar, I did comment with something slightly similar somewhere above, but it appear as if my comment disappeared when I entered it (< I didn't get the usual "Awaiting moderation" message), so I'll put it here, with a little on top.
-Please pass it on to the relevant person(s) at Laminar….:
If You supply an improved default scenery with XP12 (see a few details in the end), AND a very easy to use World Editor that not only cover the airports, but the whole world, then Laminar will have the whole community putting everything right for You; from their own houses/neighbourhood/cities, over fields (< correctly placed borders, with individual threes/bushes/trenches put where they are supposed to be, and maybe even with the right crops "tagged"), to rivers (again with individual threes/bushes put where they are supposed to be, and "water-colours"/sand wherever sand can be seen in the real world), and to the beaches (< length/width of the beach, and water-colours).
-And everything in between, really only depending on the imagination of the Laminar team….
As far as I know, OSM data haven't got anything but the size/shape of the fundament of the houses, and in some places the height, which is why the X-plane scenery rarely get the type of house and/or its colours right.
But if You make an easy to use World Editor, where people can do all the above mentioned, plus maybe a bit more, and then hand the lot over to OSM for free, then You will not only have us X-plane simmers working for You, but a lot of non-simmers as well, AND OSM will benefit as much as we do….
ALL the X-plane simmers have been flying over their own house, and have probably been disappointed, but if it takes two minutes to get it approximately right (maybe in-sim, with the sim paused of course) by "tagging" the type of house (eg. "two-storey block, with three entrances/18 apartments", which goes for where I live), and with a standard palette of colours/textures/facades available (< it could be very interesting however, if people could upload an image of the facades that they have taken themselves, all it takes is a small bit of simple pre-done photoediting), then EVERYBODY will do it….
-And if it is really, really easily done, then chances are that they will do the neighbourhood as well, and/or fix the surrounding fields, and the river and the park, all the way down to the beach….;- )
So I'm sort of speaking about building an artificial "photoreal" scenery, however, as it is build with standard textures, and not actual orthophotos, it is fail-safe in terms of some company claiming any kind of intellectual rights.
-If people use freely available orthphotos for reference when they for instance put the fields in their area right, then thát is not something that Laminar can be blamed, as long as we use default (but high-quality) textures etc in the actual scenery.
And if the raw file that people upload to Laminar (for instance facades that they have made themselves, or other textures) has enough resolution, then this artificial "photoreal" scenery has a long longevity.
-The resolution of the default textures etc can of course be increased as the end-user's computers grow in capability.
Imagine people sitting there, for instance putting fields in a hilly area, and in a matters of twenty minutes can put a full network of hiking trails or stone walls, just by dragging the mouse around, or at the beach, just drag the mouse out in the water to put a row of rocks, or along the harbour, if there are rocky wave-breakers present.
-It could become freaking perfect, like ORBX, but with everything in actual 3D, for those that have a computer that can run it anyway (< but super-cooled 5 GHz 6-16 core computers with 12-22 GB graphics cards are just around the corner, and even more powerful computers will come…).
Any way, this will take time to build up, like some people will have less capable computers, so there will have to be a default scenery as well;
Apart from HD meshes (and UHD in selected areas, like mountains or by rivers), bushes/hedges, parked cars and forests with a dark brown/green texture underneath (< this can give the illusion of shadows and small bushes), this will have to have no fields continuing on the other side of the roads (< in the real world only very few fields do, this is one of X-plane's big immersion-killers, if You ask me), the rivers will need to have far more realistic edges (< those rocky textures look sooo awful, no particular edge-texture whatsoever will be a lot more realistic), like they will need bushes/trees along them as well, and btw, rather than having trees more or less spread out everywhere, these should be put where it make more sense, in clusters or along the edges of fields/rivers/roads etc.
Both in the default scenery and in the above described custom made scenery, the colour of the fields should change with season, as it is we have summer textures all year around, but it should be pretty easy to create seasonal textures, eg. brown/green in the early spring, bright green and yellow in the late spring/early summer, darker green and more reddish yellow in the late summer and autumn, and dark brown/dark green in the early winter, and white in the late.
-Likewise all but the pine trees should have no leaves from the late autumn to the early spring.
This last part is btw not to ramble, it is just me dreaming on, but I just can't see how changing seasons should be very difficult to apply, as it is just about us having some additional textures.
I hope that Laminar will take this direction, just see the succes of the Gateway airports; I have just been on a trip around the world where I landed in some twenty airports, and it was only one or two that hadn't been done by one of us….
-And most of the airports that I landed in was small remote airports, chosen not by choice, but by lack of fuel….;- )
I have never in 15 years looked for my house in any flight sim. Take off fly to another airport land. Takes long enough to build and airport with what we have, i actually dont have a single payware scenery. if I fly into an airport and its not done, i just do it. Still hoping for better hangers and towers otherwise im happy.
Thát is just exactly what I’m talking about, if it is easy enough, and if it improve the quality of the scenery to near perfection, then everybody will be sitting doing it….
-And the “better hangars and towers” is really easy to provide, by letting people add to the World Editor’s standard objects, or hire someone to make a bunch.
Just saw an MSFS video on YT, and the only three things that I noted as improvements over X-plane was the trees (< they seemed to have less resolution, or maybe rather a quite different texture, so there could be a lot more of them, and there was bushes/hedges as well, which I have hoped to have in X-plane for a long time), rain on the wind-shield (and thát even with a proper interaction with the air-flow), and then the clouds, which -while they did seem to be way too softly rendered- did have some qualities in terms of lighting.
In Skymaxx, I actually prefer the softer version of the clouds, they both look much more real than the sharp ones, and they are also much easier on the framerates, however, in MSFS they seem to be completely un-defined, which I think do look odd….
And then of course the orthoscenery, but with the above mentioned corrected (threes/hedges, rain on windshield and the clouds), X-plane would be as incredibly good looking with freeware ortho installed, and it would the same with the earlier mentioned "artificial photoreal" scenery….
That’s something that I would love to have too.
As a player that submited 2 airports made with WorldEditor, I know how hard is to make an airport look like the real one using the current tools. The feature that I would like most is the ability to adjust the ground near the airport (inside airport boundry). Another good feature is improvement of the facades, to make hangars usefull and look like real ones (arched ceilings, as an example).
But I don’t think Laminar is going to improve these tools for two reasons:
-> Lack of resources
-> Would kill many payed 3rd party add-ons
Ground adjustment _is_ on our road map – it hasn’t happened yet because (1) it’s hard to do and (2) we have other stuff we are working on, but we are designing for it and do appreciate how important it is. If it was cheap to do we’d have done it years ago. :-(. I expect more art like facade hangers is when and not if.
I’m going to try and be optimistic and tell myself “when and not if” for better hangars (large and GA size) is code for “almost ready”. It is past time for those XP 10 AGP objects and hangar facades to find the trash bin.
Ha ha uh no, they’re not at all almost ready. It’s just that they are on the road map.
A world editor would be a great idea!
I like the sentiment. There was some scepticism about the Gateway airports at first, but it has been great (through big efforts by some “heroes”, and small efforts by the many).
On seasons, it would be more complex than described. Where I live (Melbourne Australia) ONLY the imported “exotic” trees change colour like that. Most are green through the year. But the grass/ground is yellow-brown in summer and early autumn, green otherwise. In tropical parts, different again. So Laminar would need to plot the world’s climactic regions and have different (customisable?) treatment for each.
But I like the thinking, and would love to see that in a future X-Plane release
“ALL the X-plane simmers have been flying over their own house, and have probably been disappointed”
Errrh, my house in MSFS 2020 is lost in a forest like its now on the moon of Endor and in X-Plane its a house with a roof and everything! 🙂
Some folks want a flight simulator and some folks want a cloud/scenery simulator and some of us want it all….but have realistic expections!
Having a credible flight- and weather-model is absolutely the first thing, however, if You sit with Your VR-set and everything is just right, except for the scenery, then the immersiveness is simply not there, despite everything else being perfect.
-So eyecandy is important enough, and for the first time in the history of flight-simming, we have computers that can actually deliver both (or maybe rather, we will get, in the XP12 run), so surely it will have to be prioritised.
Plane Maker no longer opens files from old planes, even those converted to the latest Ex ’11.50 b17 format • Very good VR improvement even with planes loaded with unnecessary detail. hence the importance of having a smooth running plane maker.
If you can’t open a v10 or v11 aircraft in Plane-MAker, please file a bug immediately – I have no idea what would have cause that. The only aircraft that should be rejected are v9 and earlier.
Hi there,
I am running Xplane on a 2019 imac, 6gb of memory and a radeon Pro Vega 4GB grpahics card at 1080X1920. No third party addons.
Perfomance is not really steady, settings are not highest, mid-range for textures and effects. Still it won’t run at full FPS and it regularly crashes, regardless of metal or open GL.
I know 4GB is not a lot of graphic power, but I was hoping that Xplane was not crashing as often as it did. Especially after setting up a flight, take off, and then have to strt all over again. That is frustrating.
What can we expect from the next release?
Thank you.
This is the case for me since 4 years ago, I changed 2 iMacs and still has the same issue in stable and beta versions. My iMac is more powerful than you, I have 8GB Vram, 40G Ram, and I still can’t get good FPS or stable flying without crashes.
This version was the first version ever in X-Plane history to give me fine FPS near the cloud when I tried it in Cairo airpot which is very basic and empty airport, but when I moved to KSFO with low settings, the FPS was very bad again and the sim still crashing randomly after taking of or during the flight, I was full of hope in this version but I lost the hope again.
I already taked with Ben many times and tried investigate this problem and he was very helpful but my feeling is that X-Plane will never ever work good on any iMac. I didn’t have time to continue the investigations with Ben but you can fill a bug report and try to talk to Ben directly, send him your logs and continue debugging with, maybe we can have an improvement one day.
That’s weird as I’ve got a 2017 iMac 27 that been getting solid FPS with Orbx pretty much everywhere?
I took the plunge and just added an eGPU with an AMD 5700XT to hook up my Apple Cinema Display and the FPS is even better now.
I too have been running X-Plane successfully with an iMac 2017
I did a fresh installation of RC1 without add-ons and with default rendering settings. With OpenGL I get 48 FPS in a test situation and with Vulkan exactly double that, i.e. 96 FPS (on a mid-tier 2017 iMac running Windows 10). Quite an improvement! There are no stutters but some very blurry textures next to the runway in LOWI (Innsbruck), even when I set texture resolution to the maximum. Other ground textures in LOWI are very sharp. The iMac has 4 GB of VRAM.
Not really relevant in terms of the subject of this thread, but what is Your experience with running windows on the Mac, I have heard that it is not worth the trouble, but from what You write, it does sound like a good idea….?
Installing Windows 10 with Boot Camp was very easy. It runs perfectly stable. I use unoffical graphics drivers from bootcampdrivers.com. They are even faster than the normal Windows graphics drivers for Macs provided by Apple/AMD (I guess up to 20% more performance).
While I generally prefer macOS overall, Windows 10 is better for gaming in my opionion because
a) More games are available on Windows (especially since Catalina ended support for 32 bit apps)
b) many games run faster on Windows (e.g. because many use DirectX on Windows and OpenGL on macOS and graphics drivers seem to be more optimised on Windows)
c) many games run more stable on Windows (because for many developers, macOS and Linux is only an afterthought).
Hello Ben,
are there any plans for including landmarks for Berlin? For example the TV-Tower, Berlin cathedral, Brandenburg Gate, Berlin Victory Column or the “Potsdamer Platz”?
Or are there any plans for landmarks in other cities in the world too?
Greetings
I am not Ben, but you should definitely check out X-Europe 5 from simheaven.com. I am using HDMeshv4 and X-Europe 5 / VFR Aerials on top. Enriched autogen as well as treelines v2 for all things outside Europe. And Europe looks really awesome now – especially if you have been to the places before. The rest of the world is fine for me with enriched autogen and believable.
And by the way, simheaven.com X-Africa is already beta, and X-North America already in the pipeline.
Great job, LR. 11.50 is a big leap forward in terms of performance / graphical enjoyment. I even ditched a lot of graphical enhancements/performance improvements when testing the betas.
Ben, I noticed a huge drop in FPS on RC1 when using it in VR.
There is no stuttering but my FPS went from 40 to 27 in the new version flying on KLGA.
But since you told us that it would be a good time for a clean install, I installed a second copy, and on the new vanilla copy I’m getting 27-29 FPS on the same area with no custom scenery or plugins installed.
What I found curious is that on previews version my CPU was working around 40-60% and the GPU at 70-90% on the same area, now on RC1 the CPU is 16-24% and GPU 40-54%
Also the Frame times are on an average of 20ms on GPU and 35ms on CPU, I don’t recall how it was on previews version.
I measured it with fpsVR.
Please file a bug.
I’m experiencing something similar, when I’m flying over cities with lots of buildings (Chicago, or LA with Ortho), CPU is around 55-60%, GPU is around 55%, the FPS drops to 33-35. Outside cities (or in smaller ones) I have solid 40 FPS (even when it drops it’s still acceptable for me, but would be nice to have a solid 40 with higher CPU/GPU usage).
My system is an I7 8700K, 2080Ti, 32GB RAM, Valve Index headset. If there’s anything I can do to help just let me know.
What about asking Google to provide access to Google maps data, Google Cloud and stadia technology? This would provide LR with the same foundations MSFS relies on…
For scenery images would be better ask Maxar, as it’s the provider. And for the buildings, MSFS uses an AI technology to create the 3D world from the images.
Definitely NO, because Google changes their API too often: I’m (still) using Adobe Lightroom 5, and the maps module using Google maps gradually stopped to function. Google thinks they own the world already…
Totally off-topic reply: Own the world… Just like Amazon, Apple, Microsoft… And Trump is pissed off when American companies are taxed or fined (for privacy reasons) but wants to block chinese companies for privacy/security reasons… great big tech… split them
Everyone: no political rants here – don’t make me take out the ban-hammer…
Sorry, I agree. should not have posted that here… Removal allowed of course
Is it possible/planned (for this version run or next gen) to have the spring loaded nosewheel mechanics developed on C172 to be available to other airplanes via Plane Maker?
They’re available already – have been since 11.35 or 11.40 I think?
Well done Ben, you’ve got a lot of support on this release it seems.
It appears MS2020 have gone for gameplay rather than simulation – their G1000 implementation is terrible. Would you consider focusing on bringing out the most realistic G1000 implementation now so true simmers focus on X-Plane (every small plane has G1000 now it seems).
Just downloaded 11.50r1 from Steam to my 2018 MacBook Pro.
The program hangs right at the “Starting application…” screen and eventually crashes. Pulled all plugins to no effect.
This is the first problem I’ve had with 11.50 (aside from security errors) and I’ve tried almost every public beta version.
Bug reported.
Hi Ben
There was bug reported regarding the issues with ybbn and the new parallel runway that has just opened. New navdb updates show no map data in the laminar g1000/fmc/430’s etc when selecting an approach or departure. Will there be a fix in time for 11.50?
This version is no longer working for me with the Metal api.
With older beta vesions it was still running.
The loading screen hangs with the message ” Preparing world”
I have al graphic settings on low and installed a new copy of X-Plane.
p.s With OpenGL the sim is still working.
My system specs are:
iMac (27-inch, Late 2013)
3,4 GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i5
GeForce GTX 775M 2 GB
MacOs Catalina 10.15.6
Please file abug.
I have exactly the same behaviour. Also on a iMac 2013, but i7, GTX780 4GB.
I have filed i bug
I have two copies of X-plane, 11.50b17 and 11.50 RC1 both with absolut identical sceneries, aircrafts and settings.
In same situations, same conditions, flying with helicopters using HTC VIVE pro for VR the framerate in 11.50 RC1 decreases from 45 FPS to 30 FPS with a lot of stuttering.
I did not change any graphic setting any other parameters….
Please file a bug.
log files have already been sent
I filed the logfiles of both versions!
Could not find a place to mention how much i enjoy x-plane. I did recently buy MS FS 2020 to see what all the hype was about. Boy what a disappointment. I have a 5000.00 machine. I9, 128 ram. 3 m2 drives, rtx 2080 TI. water cooled and OCed to 5 ghtz. I have a fiber line to my house. gigabyte speed. Talk about jerking. My orthos look better and using orbtz overlays only, my scenery is much better looking and more real in appearance. Their aircraft are toy like and almost all hardware not compatible. The settings are numerous and confusing. The aircraft handle worse than in FXX. As a learning tool for new pilots, this program, game, is not up to the task. It appears MS 2020 will always be a game for kids, while x-plane is made for us real pilots who what to get better. You won’t using MS 2020. Again, thank you for a fine product that is expandable to our wildest dreams without breaking the bank and the ability to fly aircraft in the most realistic environment. paul g
Contrary to what people use to say, MSFS need a lot of work yet to be enjoyed by simmers.
That said, XP need a few upgrades too (global illumination and sun, 3D weather with live changes, and better default textures, mainly on airports with PBR), because it’s starting to look really outdated for a 2020 sim.
But yeah, for IFR XP is the best choice right now. I mostly miss an ATC… but…
I agree. About the scenery: we can already fix mesh and textures (Ortho). The problem is wrong placing of autogen buildings and trees. We have no way to fix it wihout help from Laminar Research. HD mesh gives only “little less bad” placing of autogen. It should be possible to find a solution with the help of current technology. AI is not licenced to MS.
If you are running DomConnect in MSFS you will Experience stutters. This is a known issue.
Suggesting that MSFS is just a game for kids is your respected opinion. However us real world pilots totally disagree.
You keep consuming too much CPU. It gets too hot. Stuttering. It looks better but with too much stuttering. NVIDIA 446.14 … The last ones, 452.06 / 451.67 / 451.48 plus estuttering … Until when ………………….. ?????
Discovered what causes stuttering when reading “dsf”, from one scenario to another. Follow failures from “dsf” to “dsf”…………………………………………………………………………..
So the problem is in you HD?
Without HDR it is better but, the “dsf” continues to read badly. Only the 2nd (2º thread)core is loaded all the time. I have lowered the voltage so that it is 30º c higher than the MOBO, which is at 36º c. Thank, Ronald…
It is an “engine” problem that, like Unreal Engine, nobody improves it. This one from Laminar is the worst. Outdated.
My SSD: Perfect
My MOBO Z97X: Perfect
My i7 4790 (4.4GHz): Perfect
My DDR 3 1600 MHz, CL7: Perfect
My Windows 10 Virtual Memory (SSD): Perfect
My Seasonic 1000W Platinum: Perfect
X Plane 11.50 … Some beta has fared better with stuttering, practically “0” with NVidia 446.14 on Vulkan. Now NO (11.50 rc1) and less with the last ones, in Vulkan and in OpenGL:
IT’S NOT ME, IT’S LAMINAR. It is not clarified …
STOP THE STUTTERING !!! and have a snack at MFS2020
Much less stable for me than B17. Already had two CTDs after a relatively long flights. The first one returned “Exception code: 0xc0000005” which is a memory access violation. The second one happened following the infamous blurry textures. I hope it wasn’t on my side. Best of luck.
I also experience conmstantly CTD’s after an hour of flying. This happened after upgrading from B17 to RC1. On B17 no problems.
There is one specific crash we know about in r1 that we have fixed internally that was quite common – it will be fixed in r2.
Noting ‘the other’ sim jets are fake, RC1 today was my first time on 11.50. And with the great Zibo. I only experienced one (minor) problem, and that is caused by Aerosoft not updating a faulty OBJ fiIe for EHAM. I’m not so interested in more FPS, but I very much disliked the stutters of 11.41. This one is amazing, some extra FPS, but way more important: no stutters anymore. Continue the excellent job X-Plane devs!
It seems that the shutdown of 11.50 RC1 will cause steam to crash
I play other games, it will not cause steam to crash, only 11.50 RC1
That is definitely the case! If I press the WMR button in my CR controller it crashes xplane immediately as well as Steam VR
Hi! A short heads up:
I had two crashes with Windows, when the built-in crash reporter did not activate.
Both seem plugin-triggered.
One was 124thATC (v2.0-a60) trying to program a STAR into the FMS, and the other was CRJ-200/plugins/CRJSE/win.xpl (de.philippmuenzel.crj200fe) from CRJ200 by Aerosoft.
I had the first bug reported already, the second just happened a moment ago.
Ben…
Austin and I have just agreed that with all that FPS improvement by Vulkan we can now have a user choice of resolution for the outside/FLIR camera! 🙂
Oh and the screen should be movable like the GPS.
Jokes aside, please.. can’t you try to implement some improvement?
Missions, missions, missions…
Hi All,
Indeed GREAT job! But…
RC1, unlike the last betas, takes a LOOOOOT to start, much like 11.4.
XP first crash in 8 months or so. RC1 crashed and the crash reporter crashed, i.e. the Send button did not work and finally the whole window disappeared.
Keep up the good work!
Florin.
Joe
Hi!!!
SO: Linux UBUNTU 20.04, tarjeta gráfica radeon rx570.
Drivers: amdgpu + mesa 20.3.0 (aco shader enabled)
Until beta 17, vulkan worked perfectly. On r1, the message “X-plane was not able to start using the vulkan driver, … update drivers” appears again.
All graphics drivers are updated to the latest version. And I insist that during the betas I have had absolutely no problems.
I thought that being a release candidate, it would bring improvements over the last beta.
In other Vulkan games it works perfectly.
Thank you very much.
Joe
hi Joe, maybe worth filing a bug?
Could be related to XPD-10997 which was worked on for rc1.
There seems to be a driver issue with older AMD Cards making screens in aircraft flicker with vulkan.
Is there some way for the team to get in contact with AMD about this?
On ATC amnesia: I had reported this since X-Plane 10, and I’m some what sad that this bug still isn’t fixed (I wrote anoter bug report a few seconds ago):
X:\X-Plane 11>find “wave file that doesn’t exist” Log.txt
———- LOG.TXT
0:05:04.551 E/ATC: Tried playing a wave file that doesn’t exist: ‘King’
0:05:04.551 E/ATC: Tried playing a wave file that doesn’t exist: ‘Air)’
0:07:57.680 E/ATC: Tried playing a wave file that doesn’t exist: ‘field_in_sight.opus’
0:08:09.821 E/ATC: Tried playing a wave file that doesn’t exist: ‘checking_in.opus’
0:09:40.368 E/ATC: Tried playing a wave file that doesn’t exist: ‘cleared_to_land.opus’
…and several more…
Also note that part of the “wave files” seem to be Opus actually, and others like “king” don’t look very much like audio files at all.
On “Black smoke” performance (That kind of black smoke that is generated after a crash): The smoke completely killed the frame rate for OpenGL, and it also kills the frame rate for Vulkan. Maybe the smoke is just “too complex” to render in time when the plane is viewed from the outside.
I don’t know, but the gurus should.
Hey guys,
I, like many others, found that RC1 has been crashing much much more than b17. Been tearing my hair out trying to find out what it is – it seems like X-Plane can’t handle scenery heavy areas anymore. Watching my RAM, I see it rapidly filling up before X-Plane crashes. b17 could handle these areas with no problem.
I’ve submitted a bug report and am just wondering if this is known on your end? Want to get back to flying 😀
Thanks!
We found one particular crash that is more frequent in r1 – file a bug and we can send you the thing we think will fix it once we see your crash – or just wait for r2.
Cheers, filed a bug earlier today. Looking forward to R2.
I have submitted bugs via the bug reporter on the sim crash, I have put my email on there a time or two as well, do you mind sending me the fix to try? Thanks!
Sounds promising. Any ETA on r2?
I have been having crashing issues with rc1 as well that I did not have with b17, and I just filed a bug report. Any ETA on rc2?
I seem to be getting a lot more crashes with RC1 over b17 also. It appears on longer flights (over water) when I start to hit land and its loading in the Ortho and a few airports the sim will crash. Upon checking the log.txt I have a bunch of DSF load times and scenery loading in. I’ve completed these same flights in 11.41 and b17 many times before with no change to either sim.
Sadly the latest release has introduced a new major problem.
I use the HP Reverb for VR.
If I accidentally press the WMR button on either controller I get an immediate CTD.
I installed a second copy of xplane to test this…. no problems at all until I installed 11.5cr1.
Given that VR is the main reason why many users are not switching to MSFS I hope that this gets sorted out quickly.
Given I had no problems whatsoever with the final beta this is very frustrating.
I have logged this ad a bug.
Please file a bug.
I had done already.
I use the HP Reverb as well. I have had no problems with CTD on RC1.
Interesting that you have no problems.
I did a second install of X-Plane. No problems with the WMR button. However as soon as I upgraded to RC1, pressing that button results in instant CTD and crashes Steam VR.
It could even be something related to video card software. At one point I couldn’t use VR at all during the beta. I believe it ended up being due to the GPU Tweak II software that I was using to over clock my graphics card.
To be honest YouTube “MSFS FLIGHT DYNAMICS” and you’ll see that it flies like GTA V so no, not everyone as you claim use Xplane for VR, as today MSFS is a game without game play and a simulator without simulations.
Cheers 🙂
Interesting that professional pilots using MSFS disagree with you. I have a pilot’s licence… I also disagree with you.
Ben, a few weeks ago I asked a question about what’s in store down the line and you hoped to make a post “soon”. Might you be able to comment on future features, XP 12 or let us know if such news is expected this year? 11.5 RC1 is running well. thanks.
Yes, that would be very interesting. As you said, even an announcement when there will be an announcement would be interesting.
Yes would be much appreciated on my end as well. Really keen on getting some additional insights on your future plans. I love XP! ❤️
just filed a bug, CDT in VR –=={This application has crashed!}==–
Minor minor bug, not sure if it’s version related.
Text is a bit off it’s place
https://i.postimg.cc/3w0JnxqN/x-plane-misplaced-text1.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/nhv374Fh/x-plane-misplaced-text2.jpg
Wish list: can we have the picture of the joystick “movable” so we can actually see the bindings “behind” it please?
The joystick picture is covering so we can’t see the axises …
https://i.postimg.cc/CLC8smqX/x-plane-misplaced-picture1.jpg
Regards
Please file a bug. Make sure to tell us your OS and include a screenshot of your rendering settings.
Windows 10 pro, build 19041.450
Resolution 2560×1440 (standard)
I figured out it is when I use another font size (16) than the normal (14).
I also use 150% user interface size (same at all 3 choices though).
Very disappointed that the latest iteration (r2) failed to address the crash in VR that occurs as soon as I press the WMR button on my controller. It would seem that X-Plane crashes Steam VR. As soon as Steam VR crashes this, in turn crashes X-Plane.
I have reported this as a bug but, clearly, this has not been addressed.
VR is, at present, one of the main reasons why I am sticking with X-Plane. 11.5 is superb except for this one issue. However, if MSFS are able to implement VR as well as Laminar have then, as soon as the serious aircraft models start appearing, I fear X-Plane will be in trouble. This would be a tragedy.
Come on Laminar, get that VR experience perfect!