Hi if you rule out the cloud shadows , wich is a fps nightmare ,

im asking myself where is the benefit of P3D 2.3.

Steve dx 10 fixer has a very low VAS usage compare to P3d 2.3 , vc shadows etc.

 

Has much has i want to love p3d 2.3, im at the point of asking myself where is

this simulator going , sure there updating it , but to me it seems like there looking every where to get more perfomance, and its not really impressive . i do not know how much rabbit they can get out of this hat ,i WAS optimistic

about p3d upgrading this 32 bit software , not reaaly sure a the moment since peoples have ,and my self having problem with it (big and small) , make me think FSX in the old days before dx 10 fixer ,

 

compare those 2 sims and tell me ...

Here is a little taste of what I think is the answer to your question. You will not see this in FSX DX10 fixer or not. Not the FPS:

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B4aX5Q3-OT6kRkNYNzBrVFNKS1U/edit

Here is a little taste of what I think is the answer to your question. You will not see this in FSX DX10 fixer or not. Not the FPS:

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B4aX5Q3-OT6kRkNYNzBrVFNKS1U/edit

yep your right , nice ... but just climb to 2500 , 3500 and look at that water then you got another thing coming ...

 

cheers

Here is a little taste of what I think is the answer to your question. You will not see this in FSX DX10 fixer or not. Not the FPS:

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B4aX5Q3-OT6kRkNYNzBrVFNKS1U/edit

 

WOWZA

 

Thanks for sharing that.

yep your right , nice ... but just climb to 2500 , 3500 and look at that water then you got another thing coming ...

 

cheers

Wait... you challenged someone to show you something that you couldn't get in FSX with DX10... someone showed you and your response is essentially "Yeah, but ignoring that..."

 

Seriously? LOL

 

 

Hi if you rule out the cloud shadows , wich is a fps nightmare ,
im asking myself where is the benefit of P3D 2.3.
Steve dx 10 fixer has a very low VAS usage compare to P3d 2.3 , vc shadows etc.

 

I'd say not alot.

 

If you want pretty pictures go with P3D. It's being continually developed so maybe one day it will work properly for everyone.

 

If you want software that simulates flight, stick with FSX and DX10.

 

I've near enough given up trying to get P3D to look half decent. Autogen is rubbish and looks worse than FSX with DX10. AA filtering etc is awful. I can run FSX with DX10 maxxed out with lots of cloud layers in ASN and still get 60-80fps.

 

In P3D (alternative) clouds look nice (the default ones look terrible) but at 6fps it defeats the point of trying to fly in them. Cloud shadows? To be honest I rarely notice them flying real life VFR. If there are lots of them then I shouldn't really be flying VFR in the first place. Terrain shadowing pops in and out if you move your POV just slightly. All very off-putting.

 

As you can tell I've just ditched P3D and gone back to smooth realistic flying using FSX and DX10.

didn't know I was challenging in my post   .....never did understand why so much  detail in the water , we are flying has I remember not swimming ...


TrafficPilot   thanks for your honest answer:  I got r6025 error also did you ever fix yours ...by the way :rolleyes:

I'm running both dx10 and v2.3 and to be honest, I have them running very well and roughly the same performance wise. Albeit, TrafficPilot is correct, the lack of proper AA is a real shame, but I disagree on the autogen looking worse. I'm not sure I follow. Looks pretty good to me.

 

For me, its the annoying spinning clouds, an occasional poor performance in overcast that's a shame. Also depending on the cloud height, I'll notice cloud shadows and low clouds/ground fog spin when panning with trackIR as well. Horrible! However, on the upside, popping autogen is a thing of the past and quality interior shadows, cloud shadows are really stellar features. Awesome sun effects at dusk and dawn looks quite amazing too. All stuff I miss when I go back to dx10. :(

Let me guess...you guys are running the sim with no 3rd party add ons...right?    It must be the case!!!  ...and if so, I encourage you to broaden your selection a bit to really glimpse the possibilities.  But if not, Oh well....maybe there will be a version that meets your satisfaction in the future...for as you say, its constantly being updated.

60-80 fps?

 

On what settings exactly?

I think the water also looks superior from altitude in P3DV2.3. I am currently uploading the entire flight that that clip came from. The flight is from FSDreamteam CYVR to ORBX CYSE over ORBX PNW. The transition from the different types of rendering for the water as the aircraft descends is also amazing in my opinion. The wind is 25kts gusting to 32. I think once you see the entire flight you might be persuaded:-)

I will post the link tomorrow once the upload is complete.

 

 

n P3D (alternative) clouds look nice (the default ones look terrible) but at 6fps it defeats the point of trying to fly in them. Cloud shadows? To be honest I rarely notice them flying real life VFR. If there are lots of them then I shouldn't really be flying VFR in the first place. Terrain shadowing pops in and out if you move your POV just slightly. All very off-putting.

 

I'm using ASN and just made a flight in Orbx's PNW in the evening with partly cloudy skies (real world conditions and time) and had a consistent 35 to 45 FPS, with no shadow popping at all. So perhaps it just may be your system or your settings that are at fault, and not so much P3D. Oh, and AA filtering looked fine to me.  This last flight was about as realistic as any that I've had with any flightsim.

 

 

As you can tell I've just ditched P3D and gone back to smooth realistic flying using FSX and DX10.

Well have fun with that; personally I'd rather stick with a sim that is still being supported and updated by the developer.

 

 

This last flight was about as realistic as any that I've had with any flightsim.

 

That matches my experience. P3d is easily now the leader.

Do we have windshield rain effect in P3D ?

   I got sick and tired of messing with shaders, some effects working some not. Some add on scenery losing textures at night. Dx10 gave me more problems than it solved, and performance was less than dx9. I came to the realization that FSX w dx10 was, is, and always will be, broken. It was time to move on to a bigger, brighter future, not stuck in 2005/06.

   I understand there are those folks having r6025 errors with P3D, and are frustrated. I get that. I just hope that someday, your issues will be resolved and that you take the chance to experience the sensation of really flying that P3D is capable of giving. It's more than just the flight dynamics, or hdr, or ground shadows, it's the combination of all those things being presented in a fluid manner. Sesquashtoo said it best, "It's breathtaking."

  And yes, 60fps is very possible.

 

  Jazz

 

just my .02c  FSX now resides in my desk drawer beside FS9, and XP.