plane icon Welcome to Microsoft Flight Simulator’s SDK Q&A Platform!

You have questions regarding the SDK? DevMode Tools? SimConnect? You would like to submit an idea for future improvements, seek help or exchange knowledge? You’re in the right place.

In the upcoming flighting, we've changed the behaviour of the content.xml file. If your addon uses this file, please read this article!

Please take a moment to read the platform’s guidelines before you get started!


SonantAlpaca avatar image
SonantAlpaca posted XCodr_Designs commented

Changes on content.xml behavior

We've made some changes in the way we handle packages order ingame. If you have created add-ons that modified the content.xml file, they may not produce the expected result anymore.

The content.xml file used to list all the scenery packages, and the game loaded them as they were sorted in the file.

Now the content.xml's structure is the following:

    <Package name="package1" priority="2"/>
    <Package name="package2" priority="1"/>

By default, the order is the same as defined in the VFS, but in this .xml file you can use the priority system to define which package goes first. (priority 1 is loaded first, no matter what the package position is in the .xml.)

There is no need to edit the .xml file directly: a tool is available in the Experimental section of the menu.

Please note that this isn't available on Xbox at the moment.

10 |10000

Up to 5 attachments (including images) can be used with a maximum of 4.8 MiB each and 23.8 MiB total.


thank you very much for this excellent new feature - I guess this is real the right way, but one question - why will the content.xml file not be re-build during the startup?

How should the customer know, which package must be which priority when the customer should build this file manually? You write, this file should not be added any longer - excellent but who and how will be created? Only thru the "re-order tool" in the experimental section in the sim?

Also, when you use this tool - what does negative priority values mean?

Third question - what was happened with the active-attribute, does this never exists? What when I don´t want to de-install a package, when I only want to do de-active it temporary or permanently?

Thank you very much,


1 Like 1 ·

That's interesting

But now we need to know how the VFS is ordered (because content.xml as per release notes is ignored)

It should be

fs-base stuff

Official folder (lexicographic order)

Community folder (lexicographic order)

Is that correct?

That's some crucial info that maybe @Nocturne can add to

So, if I want my add-on (that is gonna be a Community one with the name a-mamudesign-whatever) to to be loaded between fs-base and official the only way is to use the priority system , correct?

While if I want it to be loaded in the lowest priority in Community I don't need to do any changes major changes, correct?

And any community add-on with the name starting with zzz- will be loaded on top of everything else, regardless of the moment in time that is installed on the harddrive

Thanks for your help!

0 Likes 0 ·

Hello! I have a task to get the VFS order fully documented for the full public SU10 release.

1 Like 1 ·

The VFS follow some rules to find the order:

  • Package Families rules: TiedToExe => Mandatory => Local => Official => Community => Edition
  • Package Name: sorted alphabetically
  • Package Dependencies: the lookup makes sure we always insert a Package prior to the ones that depend on it, as mentioned in the Package Manifest (note: this doesn't offer any guarantee regarding circular dependency cycles, last arrived always wins)


1 Like 1 ·


two additional questions:

As in your example, which package will be loaded when now:
* `package2` will be loaded BEFORE `package1`
* `package2` will be loaded AFTER `package1`

Thats important because some package can overwrite some other packages ... and therefore the question.

what happened with the current content.xml file during the SU10 update? Will the file be deleted, replaced with the priority-attributes or will it be un-touched?

Thank you,


0 Likes 0 ·
Show more comments

I'm glad Asobo is moving in the direction of not making the user dive into an XML file in a hidden folder to edit the package priority, however the UI for the priority editor needs to be completely rewritten. I still don't fully understand the arrow logic, 99% of your customers aren't going to figure it out, and that's going to lead to ALOT of headaches for us developers.

The best design for the interface imo would be to simply have a table of packages, their priority number, and a increase priority and decrease priority button (see attached image). Then a message at top explaining how the system works. In addition, allow users to click the column to sort the display alphabetically, or by the assigned priority, so packages can be found easily, and order can be viewed easily.
In addition, it would be very useful for the SDK to give us a project level option to define our project's default priority. For example, a region pack could set a default priority of 3, a pack of generic airports (think X-Plane gateway style) could have a default priority of 2, and a custom airport, 1. Of course the user could edit later if needed, but at least it get's added to the content.xml at a sensible, likely correct place, which will cut down on technical issues and happier customers.

I hope you guys can consider these suggestions.

0 Likes 0 ·
tool.jpg (171.3 KiB)



SonantAlpaca contributed to this article

Related Articles