Where is P3DV2.3 better than FSX Dx 10

[Christopher Low 5,353]

 

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.

 

Ah, yes...I was forgetting. P3D is for serious training purposes, not entertainment :wink:

[SolRayz 392]

P3D is really coming along well too. Remember that v2.0, 2.1,2.2 all left much to be desired. IMO v2.3 has really come around. There is still work to do, but with the way LM is improving this sim with every iteration, we should all be excited for the future.  

[rparson99 32]

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

Ditto, all truly great products in their time but at last they are ready now for the museum!... Or respectfully.. "hall of fame ".

 

Also, I would suggest that Lockheed is worthy of your support. What they are trying to achieve is in the best interest of the flight sim community. If you support Microsoft then admit that Microsoft is no longer supporting you!

If you support FSX then recognize that p3d is a variation of FSX still under development. Why begrudge the support?

[twojastara 85]

Main differences to me:

• no more graphics artefacts
• its smoother and I have more fps
• I can use maximum autogen - no more issues with autogen "popping up"
• MUCH better visuals
• I don't need to pay for "fix for DX10", "fix for performance", "fix for fix for smth"
• I don't need to tweak anything anymore
• I can use ALT+TAB and open any program in background without fatal error

[charleslee201 19]

i bought p3d the day it came out , i have the 3 sims , my post was to ask a simple question : what is the so huge difference compare to FSX DX10 when flying ,and no swimming , like most of you i said bye to fsx and stayed with p3d, then after a couple of problems , waiting like faithful dog for better days, came back to FSX DX10 last version   and found that it was almost the same  with of corse no OOMS ... I am always faitfull to p3d but ...im not putting my head into the sand here   

Main differences to me:

• no more graphics artefacts
• its smoother and I have more fps
• I can use maximum autogen - no more issues with autogen "popping up"
• MUCH better visuals
• I don't need to pay for "fix for DX10", "fix for performance", "fix for fix for smth"
• I don't need to tweak anything anymore
• I can use ALT+TAB and open any program in background without fatal error

Hi i am skeptical about your answer

on my rig FPS are the same

autogene pop ping out is almost none existant

tweaking is minimal with the new interface

never had a fatal error or a OOMS and VAS usage is far less

LOD is not locked

im not defending dx 10 juste want to be honest

[mike2060 4]

All AI aircraft now cast shadows! Yay!

[rparson99 32]

Well clearly you see the visual difference which is no small feat due to dx11 implementation. The same for performance... Which has more depth in scale. But one cannot ignore that it is still fsx at the core. So until all areas are updated or rewritten, there will be similarities. Hopefully, your Sim experience will improve with the updates.

[Arnold Bruce 0]

@Charles Le,

 

I think, for the most part, you've essentially answered your own question.     When you get right down to it, P3D is FSX rebooted with extra bells and whistles, but with no real performance gains.      Cloud FPS performance in P3D is worse than FSX, and continual lack of Nividia driver support with P3D guarantees sub-par anti-aliasing for the foreseeable future.     And then one must contend with compatibility issues with all the add-ons purchased for FSX; indeed in a lot of cases you will have to purchase a separate license.     Not fun.

 

I don't hate P3D, and I'm certainly not a die hard ###### of FSX by any stretch of the imagination.     I'd switch platforms in a heartbeat if I personally felt there were enough significant gains in visuals and performance over FSX.       There is just no clear distinction that justifies the hassle and expense of porting everything over to P3D when FSX + DX10 is such a great experience at present.      Again, FSX and P3D are the exact same 32-bit simulation engine, so performance miracles are simply not going to happen.

 

Also, I'm not convinced P3D has the long term viability to justify investing in it.      What exactly are Lockheed's goals that will assure P3D's continuing profitability?     Are LM selling enough copies to both military and civilian training entities to make further development of P3D a fiscally sound prospect?      What I don't understand is LM's current overtures to the 'entertainment' (we here) market, while specifically forbidding 'entertainment' utilization of P3D.      This certainly seems like a confusing contradiction, and one must wonder if LM are simply trying to circumvent their usage license from Microsoft by appealing to the entertainment sector in a legally surreptitious fashion.    

 

In other words, are LM's real profits coming from we simmers or the military/civilian training sector?     This is an issue again because of long term product viability.      Microsoft have now licensed the entertainment version of Flight Simulator to another company altogether, while LM supposedly continue to focus on 'professional' usage.       Yet, why is LM going so far out of their way to embrace established 3rd party FSX developers and seemingly the entertainment sector as well?      When you go to the LM P3D site right now, for example, there is an Orbx Scenery banner on their webpage.      Are LM's professional usage clients buying up 3rd party add-ons or is P3D cashing in on licensing products for the 'entertainment' sector (which they are supposedly forbidden to do).     Confusing.    

 

Will the new FSX 'entertainment' licensee eventually cry foul and legally challenge LM for violating their own license from Microsoft by not fully adhering to their 'professional' usage only licensing, and if so, how would this effect the entire situation in terms of we 'entertainment' folk who invest heavily in P3D?      

 

I'm sorry, what was the question again?    

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

Do we have windshield rain effect in P3D ?

That is a feature of specific 3rd party aircraft, but not the sim itself.

[Arwen 289]

 

 

Will the new FSX 'entertainment' licensee eventually cry foul and legally challenge LM for violating their own license from Microsoft by not fully adhering to their 'professional' usage only licensing, and if so, how would this effect the entire situation in terms of we 'entertainment' folk who invest heavily in P3D?   

 

LM did not purchase a license to FSX . . . LM bought a license to use Microsoft's ESP (which is a commercial development platform).

[SolRayz 392]

I'm sorry, what was the question again?

 

Shhh..just go with it.

[Christopher Low 5,353]

If I was going to compare P3D with any graphics mode in FSX, it certainly wouldn't be with DX10. As I have stated many times in the past, FSX in DX10 mode was graphically inferior to DX9 mode on my old PC. Whether that would be the case on my new PC is a moot point, because I have upgraded to P3D now, and I have no intention of installing FSX ever again. I may well discover a few problems along the way (since I haven't actually test flown P3D yet), but I am prepar3d to work my way through them.

[twojastara 85]

 

Hi i am skeptical about your answer

on my rig FPS are the same

 

autogene pop ping out is almost none existant

 

tweaking is minimal with the new interface

 

never had a fatal error or a OOMS and VAS usage is far less

 

LOD is not locked

 

im not defending dx 10 juste want to be honest

 

 

Sure, but I am honest. That was my personal experience. For me FSX is gone for good. Maybe I had all those issues because of some specific hardware configuration? I don't know. FSX kept crashing all the time, I had to keep looking for some "magic tweaks" all the time.

 

Some of people here keep writing that they are not seeing much improvement in visuals. I really don't know what you are comparing (default P3D vs default FSX?), because I am carried away with v2.3. Here are some of my screenshots from ORBX New Zealand:

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/449142-orbx-new-zealand-in-v23/

 

This looks like a dream to me.

[greggerm 312]

 

 

...but I am prepar3d to work my way through them.

 

[TrafficPilot 121]

Have any of you guys previously used FSX with the DX10 fixer?

 

I'm getting the feeling alot of new P3D users are coming straight from the "old" (non DX10) FSX which I agree is "state of the ark" (graphically) now.

 

Yes also hate the "new" P3D spinning clouds. Yet another graphical distraction to put me off flying in it.

 

The reason I said the P3D autogen looks awful is because it stands out more than the FSX DX10 autogen. That isn't natural.If I'm "real-world" flying I can't see individual trees 5 miles away. Can you? May be if they're on a hill but not on flat ground. This is the reason people are complaining about the Level of Detail radius being reduced. It hasn't been. It's the fault of the P3D autogen. Reduce your visibility to 5 nm or less and it looks lovely. But that defeats the point of flying VFR surely?

 

I'll keep tweaking in p3D when the runtime errors allow me to. Hoping the new ASN beta will help with FPS in overcast weather. Shall find out when I install it tonight