... a lot of us are tweaking our hearts out to get it fundamentally working!

 

le:

Fundamentally working? Sounds a bit dramatic

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

I'm not sure "pushback" is correct. 

 

 

First off I like the voting, great idea Tom... As for my transition I'm not out of the woods yet as I have to buy another computer, secondary HD, and most of all a screaming video card.

 

I shied away from FSX because I don't have time for the hassle of tweaking. I don't have time to invest in major hardware to get FSX running properly. I'm actually getting quite the savings with P3D v2 than I would have gotten trying to go to FSX.

 

As far as what P3D v2 offers over FSX is simple, if it looks like your tricked out version of FSX out the box imagine how it's going to look with add-ons applied. People aren't comparing default FSX to default P3D v2, if they were the light bulb would come on as to what it will become. We did this same thing with FS9 years ago. I didn't get it years ago until I saw FSX in it's full glory 4-5 years ago.

 

Advantages of P3D v2 over FSX:

 

1. Perforemance (there's growing pains here I guess but it seems people have to unthink FSX and buy another video card)

 

2. No tweaking of hardware and the FSX software

 

3. Active support from LM on a level we've never seen from MS

 

4. Being built to be a sim not a game

 

5. New visual features like Bloom by default

 

6. If ever you need to change hardware re-installing without tweaking to the new hardware get's you up and running faster

 

7. Will be compatible with whatever OS version comes out from MS over the years LM is developeing this solution (FSX by contrast might not work past W8.1, who knows)

 

8. Easy transition of current FSX only add-ons to P3D v2 (developers just need new installers and in some cases minor tweaks to their products. Far easier than going from FS2k2 to FS9 or FS9 to FSX)

Edited November 26, 201312 yr by n4gix
Removed excessive quote!

 

 

Advantages of P3D v2 over FSX:

 

Oh come on i had to comment, you haven't even purchased it...  Q-Flyer (who has purchased it) pointed out he had spent most of the day making changes just like it takes me a day or so to reinstall FSX and get it running.

 

I mean i am interested in P3D and the future but i wouldn't come up with a list when i had no personal experience of the software.

 

 

 

2. No tweaking of hardware and the FSX software

 

Yep true, you don't need to tweak FSX if you are running P3D, but then you don't need to tweak X-Plane if you are running FSX...  I believe that Q-Flyer as already mentioned made clear he had to tweak his setup, not unlike FSX.

 

 

 

4. Being built to be a sim not a game

Err OK, but still the same core program as that game FSX right?

 

 

 

7. Will be compatible with whatever OS version comes out from MS over the years LM is developeing this solution (FSX by contrast might not work past W8.1, who knows)

 

How do you know that?  What if Windows 8.2 breaks something and LM's customers (the important ones) say they don't want to upgrade, my organisation still uses Windows XP, we might not move to Windows 7, many applications that we use are web based and still only run on IE8.  Seriously do you think LM are going to rush to support Windows 9 with a new 'tele-tubby' interface the important commercial customers are never going to use?

 

 

 

8. Easy transition of current FSX only add-ons to P3D v2 (developers just need new installers and in some cases minor tweaks to their products. Far easier than going from FS2k2 to FS9 or FS9 to FSX)

 

Yeah true, because it's pretty much FSX (a game apparently) with a DX11 bolt on and only remains the case so long as they stick with the same FSX engine, no 64-bit etc...  Any significant changes and all your addons are dead in the water.

What about those companies that aren't going to provide consumer licenses, PMDG, FSL?  We have a vague pledge of commitment and a mention of a more...shall we say robust pricing structure; people complained that the 777 cost $90, do you fancy paying $200 on P3D...assuming you buy it?  Obviously the prices are  pure conjecture on my part

 

Seriously, it's nice to see P3D getting this response, but really, it's a service pack for FSX

Fundamentally working? Sounds a bit dramatic

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

Thanks!   :smile:

 

===================

 

Well Dillon, as you saw in the other thread, I have all my showstopper bugs nicely worked around and am now loving the new platform.     Just goes to prove that in this hobby, 12 hours is a loooong time!!  :lol:   So maybe you're right after all.      See you in the P3D2 skies!   :cool:

Now we might actually be getting somewhere.

 

Now first, I realize you weren't speaking only to me with your descriptions and list of P3D2 "pros" as it were, but I am going to reply as if you were.

 

You mention P3D2 vs a tricked out FSX. My FSX...really isn't all that tricked out ! I have very few enhancements installed, and of those, most of them have more to do with color, than with detail. For example, I have water effects in FSX to the far left. No matter how many textures/animations etc people have come up with, it still looks terrible IMHO. That's not meant as a critique of the work people have done, I just see it as lipstick on a pig, no matter how fine the lipstick is, it's still a pig. I did install replacement water textures to desaturate the color a bit, but that was as far as I went, and I'm not looking for anything else.

 

I have spent...oh I'd say a good $300-$400 on airport scenery for FSX. Most of them are currently uninstalled. I have a few very basic enhancements for facilities that have especially poor representations by default, and use ADE to enhance others to bring them up to date, and that's it. Not looking for anything more here either. I was in awe when I first installed FSDTs KJFKv2. The performance and level of detail they've achieved is almost unbelievable...a feeling which for me, lasted about a day. The quality of the product didn't change of course, I just decided it wasn't the direction i wanted to go.

 

......

 

I will describe two types of simmers now, and I am well aware that there are many variations and "shades in-between", but humor me for a moment.

 

The first type I will describe, spends more time looking outside than in. He or she is often very close to being able to suspend disbelief completely. Because of this, every visual enhancement that can be had, helps improve his or her experience with the sim. This simmer really notices the details of the virtual world on the other side of the glass, and especially notices when they aren't quite right. High quality shadows, cloud resolution, pop-in or lack thereof, all of these things have a significant impact on this simmer's ability to enjoy the experience.

 

The second type only ever really looks outside when there isn't a button to push. Clouds, water, whatever, as long as it's in the approximate location that it should be, they are satisfied. For this simmer, the experience is almost entirely about the machine he or she is "operating", and the outside world is just a backdrop. 4096 textures, DX11, instancing...these things are only as valuable as far as they can be used to improve the fidelity of the machines themselves.

 

I am definitely closer to one of those two types than the other. I'll give you three guesses to pick which.  :biggrin:

 

Now adding to what I said before, I of course understand that those two stereotypes couldn't possibly cover all of us, and if I had to guess, the majority are probably somewhere in the middle. I am only trying to offer a different perspective. I don't hate P3D. I don't love FSX. I just personally need more than what is currently offered to consider it a worthwhile investment.

 

Will the situation be different in 3-5 years ? I should certainly hope so ! I just don't feel the need to make choices for that time now, and if in that time frame nothing surfaces to compel me to switch, I'll happily continue using my FSX.V until the wings fall off.

 

 

I shied away from FSX because I don't have time for the hassle of tweaking. I don't have time to invest in major hardware to get FSX running properly. I'm actually getting quite the savings with P3D v2 than I would have gotten trying to go to FSX.

 

Dillon

The Major (in your words) hardware needed to get FSX running is still needed in P3Dv2

This version of P3D is no magic bullet, it still needs good hardware to run.

Please accept that the majority of us have had FSX running really well for years now, how else would the third party developers have survived to still be around for the arrival of this new sim?

P3Dv2 is no different, tweaking is needed, this is still FSX after in a a DX11 wrapper.

 

Looking forward to your impressions once you have it on your new $700 PC

Dillon,

You will not run P3Dv2 well on a $700 machine.

 

Two years after FSX was released we had the hardware to run it well, but you refused to believe it.

But the facts are that the majority of simmers have been enjoying FSX for many years now.

P3Dv2 is FSX with a DX11 rendering engine bolted on, it needs a very good Video card to get the most out of it, preferably a GTX 780.

There's $500 gone out of your $700 before you get round to buying a high end CPU and MB.

A 680 will work just as well and cost less.

 

Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk 4

Seriously, it's nice to see P3D getting this response, but really, it's a service pack for FSX

 

 

There's nothing wrong with a service pack,  FSX needed it... 

Thanks!   :smile:

 

===================

 

Well Dillon, as you saw in the other thread, I have all my showstopper bugs nicely worked around and am now loving the new platform.     Just goes to prove that in this hobby, 12 hours is a loooong time!!   :lol:   So maybe you're right after all.      See you in the P3D2 skies!   :cool:

 

 

Great to hear you up and running.  Yes I read the other thread and was happy for you.  

Dillon seems to be the punching bag of choice on this topic, even though most of you know he's right in most of his observations.

 

You know what this and other discussions around here regarding P3D remind me of? The old/new Battlefield versus Call of Duty franchise. You've got fanbois to the right, fanbois to the left, but when someone interjects a semblance of levelheadedness concerning a product that differentiates to that of the collective, then let the non-relevant side discussions and veiled personal attacks ensue.

 

Of course that goes for anyone that sees V2 as some sort of miracle, which it isn't, not in the least. It still has a myriad of issues that have found their way from 1.4 into 2.0, and no one is addressing that. The official P3D forums are awash with the same bug reports, crashes, and errors that were prevalent in 1.4. So you'll excuse me if I don't jump on the bandwagon and drink the Kool-Aid. Maybe in some months V2 will be where it should have been upon release, and maybe they'll charge us for a patch to fix those issues, or maybe they won't, I don't know. What I do know is that every game or sim has two sides, those sides being the haves and have-nots.

 

What I do find disparaging is that instead of offering a free or paid upgrade to V2, they decided to instead charge full price for what is essentially a major patch. So the question presents itself - What is to stop them from doing the same for other updates? Food for thought.

What I do find disparaging is that instead of offering a free or paid upgrade to V2, they decided to instead charge full price for what is essentially a major patch.

 

Replacing the DX9 graphics engine with a new DX11 one is stretching a little beyond even a "major" patch.  I don't seem to recall Microsoft offering a free or reduced-price upgrade from FS9 to FSX.  Heck, MS charged a fee for what's certainly a minor patch (Acceleration) in comparison to what LM has done.

 

LM is right in-line with standard software industry practices, and they were up-front about it from the first mentions of P3D 2 last year.  "Point releases are free and major releases are paid" is hardly a new and disturbing concept.

 

 

There's nothing wrong with a service pack,  FSX needed it... 

 

You'll get no disagreement from me with that statement.  :rolleyes:

 

 

What I do find disparaging is that instead of offering a free or paid upgrade to V2, they decided to instead charge full price for what is essentially a major patch. So the question presents itself - What is to stop them from doing the same for other updates? Food for thought.

 

As consumers we all the choice to purchase or not.  Bottom line is that the franchise will continue and that is good for all.

Dillon seems to be the punching bag of choice on this topic, even though most of you know he's right in most of his observations.

 

You know what this and other discussions around here regarding P3D remind me of? The old/new Battlefield versus Call of Duty franchise. You've got fanbois to the right, fanbois to the left, but when someone interjects a semblance of levelheadedness concerning a product that differentiates to that of the collective, then let the non-relevant side discussions and veiled personal attacks ensue.

 

I don't see that at all.

 

Dillon made some great points, but it must be acknowledged, admitted he has not tried P3D yet, so it was understandable that some people challenged his assertions.    Dillon's an articulate, intelligent and experienced simmer and I didn't see him having any problem with the discussion or debate.

 

I think you're making something out of nothing to be honest, but that's just my view.     Neither Dillon nor those debating with him stooped to labelling people "fan bois" as you just did.  It was just a discussion; that you're making into something bigger.