What's really going on with the FSX vs P3D Debates

[KingGhidorah 209]

One thing that always seems to get lost in the discussions is the hardware upgrade cycle.  One currently has a stable platform, working well, with officially supported planes in FSX, and they are satisfied, perhaps even happy.  In a year or two or three, when it comes time to rebuild the whole thing, and hardware that can take advantage of what P3D has to offer visually, at an affordable price is common,  then there will be more weight added onto the P3D side of the scale for one to consider.  P3D still has the same old 2006 era world, pretty much the same old flight modelling, so it really is about the visuals at this point, and being able to take advantage of them to the extent that it outweighs the currently great advantage in addon compatibility/official support/optimization with FSX. 

[ryanbatc 12,841]

FSX is Entertainment software and P3D is not.

 

Hehe I thought someone might bring that up....

 

I'll probably get a version eventually.... since beta testing sometimes requires a new sim!

[JSkorna 137]

I am currently enroute between ENVA and EKRN and P3D is entertaining me very well JIM

Whats even worse is that I am doing it in one of the entertainment payware aircraft that LM thoughtfully included for us

That's nice. Too bad you are not in training or a developer.

[N2056 33]

The key at this point is to sell as much peanuts, popcorn, and ice-cold beer to the crowd as I can before the inevitable happens... :Money Eyes:

[JSkorna 137]

LOL!! Please note that I used a CAPITAL E, designating a classification of something, not as an adjective, which describes something. 

[Hirdy2013 104]

Amazing how it always ends up this way.

 

Thanks to those who offered a response to my OP.

 

Was really only trying to understand what was dividing the community. Perhaps once P3D matures it might make a purchase more attractive.

 

Happy flying.

[RaptyrOne 1,407]

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

 

 

This is mainly because P3D is still a relatively new simulator which is yet to be supported by addon makers.

--------------------------------------------------------

 

P3D v2.2 flys on its own merit.  Vanilla stock, it has features that has not been seen in a M.S. based flight sim.  Add ORBX Global and regions...it becomes a work of art...

[guenseli 1,588]

 

 

FSX is Entertainment software and P3D is not.

 

Come on Jim, you should know to where such a sentence leads in the end.

Too poor, this topic will be closed, soon ...

:(

[Glynn 405]

 

 

That's nice. Too bad you are not in training or a developer.

 

Are you sure about that Jim ?

[RaptyrOne 1,407]

Come on Jim, you should know to where such a sentence leads in the end.

Too poor, this topic will be closed, soon ...

:(

Can someone PM me why before it is?

[pracines 823]

Back to the "debate" at hand, for me its not a matter of "entertainment" and I don't care about  legal terms of service mumbo jumbo. I don't need to care about TOS policies because I naturally follow them anyway. If there is a clause in a TOS that is "out to get me" then it will backfire on them. So I don't worry because I have no ill intention toward MS or LM. I'm just a simple simmer that will support the efforts of any company who's goal it is to enhance PC home flight simulation.

 

The real debate is about where LM is going to go with P3D. Since they wont tell us if 64 bit is going to be a reality, and since we can't see how PMDG planes are going to affect the VAS limit, I would wait to bother with P3D. If your out for an enjoyable flight with visual eye candy, DX11, in the default Mooney Bravo then its a treat if you have the PC up for the challenge. But if you only fly airliners and you are used to "mega" airport add-ons and PMDG jets flying on a schedule, all that eye candy will not matter because that 32 bit VAS limit is going to be breached time and time again.

 

If any simmer says that they can have full sliders ( yes AI traffic and auto gen at 100%) in FSX and fly to and from mega airports in say the PMDG 777, with out getting an OOM they are not being truthful. But Most of our PC's can handle this challenge, the problem is that neither FSX or P3D can allow for this because they are 32 bit. If P3D becomes 64 bit then all the sliders will be able to be maxed and the only issue will be frame rate which is a manageable and acceptable problem. This OOM and cutting back on the sliders stuff has to end so developers can freely develop and simmers can enjoy their experience based of the hardware they have or are willing to buy.

 

Being limited by 32 bit should not be our reality and this should be the hottest topic of debate in the most of the simming forums, sadly it is not seen as that big of a deal by the majority, but soon it will be and then it will likely be a disaster rather than just a problem. 

 

I will leave you all to debate this if you like.....

[CFIJose 5,485]

Reading this topic and many others leads me to conclude that more simmers are using P3D for scenery entertainmemt purposes and those who are keeping FSX are more interested in airplane/airport realism.

 

I enjoy these topics and reinforce what is really important.

 

I tried P3D and found out that I need a new video card to enjoy the new features and most of my addons don't work. SO, I'll stick with FSX.

[bic 44]

I think the primary problem is as usual is hardware.  My hardware is pretty good with FSX, but the video card suffers in P3D.  I'm waiting for the hardware refresh so for my birthday in September...

[Christopher Low 5,353]

Whether people use P3D for entertainment or not is irrelevant. LM know only too well that a large number of private customers will be using it for exactly that reason. However, all they need to worry about is to make sure that "not to be used for entertainment purposes" is specifically stated in the EULA or any other piece of legal documentation. They have been able to sell to home based customers by stating that the software can be used for simulation and training purposes, so they are covered legally. That is all that matters to them. If they really wanted to stop people using P3D for entertainment purposes (or stop them purchasing the Academic license when they are not really using the software for training), then they would have enforced it. The fact that they haven't speaks volumes, and makes any argument about this completely pointless.