Should We move to P3D?

[hychewright 46]

I have both sims and I agree, it requires a lot of time to keep both platforms going. "For me" I'll most likely go to P3D full time when things get sorted out. I like the idea of smoooth flying, stable and less autogen pop ups. I fly P3D more often these days. Everyone has to make their on decision. 

[Superdelphinus 718]

Why is everyone talking about it like it's one or the other and you have to "switch"? Computers can have multiple programs installed you know right? You can easily have FS9, FSX, P3D, XPlane etc all on the same computer.

Amen to that, and you'd be mad not to (cash funds notwithstanding). All of them have their pros and cons, though I don't have fs9

Absolutely. Setting up FSX plus all the tools is a time consuming, irritating process. And in the end you realize that the 100GB partition that you dedicated to it is far too small for all your addons or that something went wrong somewhere.

 

If P3D is a similar PITA (no idea, have never touched it), one sim is more than enough.

Arguably i could agree that you might choose between fsx and p3d (certainly over the next 12 months or so), but I definitely think it's worth having x plane as well. It's a completely different wonderful sim, and is also a very clean installation

[liketofly1 11]

Well, I moved, and I'm not looking back ;-))  Now I'm just waiting for the PMDG stuff to come to to P3D.... but I'ts just soooooo much more Joy if you don't receive OOM's and CTD during Approach or any other freely choosable point by destiny....

 

Only to warn the ones who would like to try..... FSX legacy stuff - if not patched or adjusted for P3D - does cause problems in P3D - with very few exceptions to this rule :-))

[Sam 68]

What is all the stuff about tweaking as a pain?

 

Is it me or is it just about getting it done and then move along..

 

I'm gonna start co running p3d next month and slowly move to the platform

[Manny 1,293]

I have both...and I am using P3D more and more and FSX not so much. P3D v2.2 also starts much quicker than FSX (FSX is on SSD, P3D on regular HD).

 

Sometimes FSX is better...can't pin point what it is that I like FSX...but the PMDG 777 really pulls me to FSX.

 

I stopped buying addons for FSX thats for sure. I am only looking into investing for P3D now.. Addons not certified for P3D v2.2, no buyie!

[kevinh 409]

Well, I moved, and I'm not looking back ;-)) Now I'm just waiting for the PMDG stuff to come to to P3D.... but I'ts just soooooo much more Joy if you don't receive OOM's and CTD during Approach or any other freely choosable point by destiny....

 

Only to warn the ones who would like to try..... FSX legacy stuff - if not patched or adjusted for P3D - does cause problems in P3D - with very few exceptions to this rule :-))

P3D is still limited by 32 bit addressing so will suffer from OOMs just as badly as FSX when high memory demand addons are used.

 

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

 

I don't understand the demand from some for something new when something old still works very well. A new sim engine will have new problems to deal with. FSX is a mature product which is well understood.

[GHarrall 494]

 

 

P3D is still limited by 32 bit addressing so will suffer from OOMs just as badly as FSX when high memory demand addons are used.

 

Whilst it is still a 32 bit application, LM have optimized the autogen to reduce VAS on average by 550mb in 2.2

 

So it wont OOM as badly as FSX at all.

[kevinh 409]

Whilst it is still a 32 bit application, LM have optimized the autogen to reduce VAS on average by 550mb in 2.2

 

So it wont OOM as badly as FSX at all.

That only increases the VAS available by 548 MB. Approximately 15% improvement. The 4 GB limit is still there.

 

You can make similar improvements in FSX by reducing autogen settings. Autogen can look awful so reducing it can improve things.

[Alec 370]

Believe me, P3D V2.2 is much better in regards to OOM than FSX. And Lockheed has already said they're working on optimizing further into other areas of the scenery. This only changed the vegetation!

[vp49p3 216]

I've got both simulators on one PC.  I had FSX set up to the point I didn't want to try anything else and Reality XP 530/430 Unlimited is great--wouldn't fly without it.  Then I got into P3D v2.2 when VOXATC became available for it.  Once I got my settings right, I was blown away by P3D v2.2. Today I flew the Otter from Monterey Peninsula to Yosemite in ORBX Northern California, with FS Pilot's weather engine.  The volumetric fog in NC was nothing like I'd ever seen in FSX.  Neither was the horizon, which looked so much more real than FSX.  Coupled with the cloud and cockpit shadows, lack of autogen popup and almost no OOM's, I've made the switch to P3D v2.2.  Really miss my Reality XP, but its loss isn't enough to go back to FSX. 

[liketofly1 11]

P3D is still limited by 32 bit addressing so will suffer from OOMs just as badly as FSX when high memory demand addons are used.

 

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

 

I don't understand the demand from some for something new when something old still works very well. A new sim engine will have new problems to deal with. FSX is a mature product which is well understood.

 

Well, you might not understand this demand, but trust me.... FSX is not working sooooooo well compared to Prepar3Dv2.2 ... and with all due respect, the big benefit of Prepar3D IS that ist not new.... but an evolution to FSX!

[kevinh 409]

Well, you might not understand this demand, but trust me.... FSX is not working sooooooo well compared to Prepar3Dv2.2 ... and with all due respect, the big benefit of Prepar3D IS that ist not new.... but an evolution to FSX!

I don't doubt it does, and it builds on existing infrastructure so there is some commonality. Because LM have the source code they can fix many limitations inherent in FSX.

 

I really meant those saying a completely new sim engine was a better idea. Reinventing the wheel isn't always the best way forward.

[davjg 32]

It does not matter whether its FSX/P3D or Xplane as far as I am concern even if its FS9. What really should matter the most is your favorite developer for your aircraft. In my case, I prefer to fly heavies and PMDG is for me, therefore FSX is where I stay, the rest come second such as scenery/airport and weather etc......I can tell you, I love the latest of the latest in flightsim, but what good is it when my preferred developer/aircraft isnt going anywhere, not now at least. Again, this is my opinion, no scenery or airport or anything else will make me go anywhere else. Good luck with your choices.

 

David

[kevinh 409]

 

 

almost no OOM's

That doesn't mean there won't be any when more heavy duty addons become available. I never used to get OOMs in FSX until I got the NGX.

[MorsAbAlto 19]

I feel your pain Kevin.

 

My recent comeback to flight simming was more or less shot down by FSX freezing without error. An issue which occurs more frequently with the NGX than any other aircraft that I own. I am holding off purchase of the 777 because of the general impression I get from reading the forum, that OOMs are a huge problem with it. Because of its large memory footprint. Even for simmers with over-the-top hardware.

 

What our hobby really needs is a simulator that takes recent hardware trends into account. 64 bit, multi-core optimization, use of compute shaders and modern, intelligent rendering techniques. My PC is getting more obsolete by the minute, but all the hardware overkill that is getting commonplace in flight simming would not be necessary with a proper programming architecture. Imagine the fidelity that could be archieved but is not, because of the obsolete software base.

 

Switching to P3D seems more like an expensive last straw to avoid OOMs to me, not a true evolution. LM can optimize P3D all they want. Unless they completely change the underlying code base, we will reach the next bottle neck in no time.

 

Unless some company is willing and able to deliver a new simulator engine from scratch at a reasonable price point to the consumer, there is no real reason to switch away from FSX for most simmers. There seems not to be much of a difference to me. Developers are under pressure to crank up the fidelity of their products more and more and they are hitting the hard limits of current sims left, right and center. More functionality, larger textures, better audio, and an increasing multitude of hacks to get around those limits. It's getting uglier with every product cycle. The development times are getting longer and longer with diminishing returns.

 

I would dare a company with the know-how to pull off a revolutionary, new engine to start a crowdfunding campaign. And once you have a successful launch, get some venture capital to create something amazing. Flight simmers are notorious for their deep pockets. So why not?

 

Oh well, I am daydreaming again... :rolleyes: