Where is P3DV2.3 better than FSX Dx 10

[Guest]

 

 

Glad to see that Lockheed Martin have now ACKNOWLEDGED the R6025 runtime error issue that lots of people are getting using P3D. They say they can't reproduce the error but at least they're not blaming "any third party addons" for the crash.

 

This doesn't make any sense?  Zach has indicated they can't replicate ... if a developer can't replicate something how are they going to fix it?  How do you know that it's not 3rd party?  How do you know it's not a bad .NET installation?  You will start making progress with your R6025 when you stop looking for answers from LM.

 

Zach saying he's seen people reporting this error, does NOT mean it's an LM issue.

 

Anyway, there is ONLY one reason to start a thread like this in the P3D forum ...  and freequest pointed that out in his reply: http://forum.avsim.net/topic/449680-where-is-p3dv23-better-than-fsx-dx-10/?p=3059373 -- if you can't see the differences (there are many) between FSX and P3D V2.x then you are in denial or not human. 

 

I can appreciate people's reasons to stay with FSX or FS9 (or whatever they like) -- to each his or her own.  But to come and state endless inaccuracy about P3D really only shows product ignorance.

 

The real reasons:

 

1.  Don't want to spend the money to upgrade hardware

2.  Have spent years setting up FSX just they way they like and fear change

3.  They've reached their goals with flight simulation and don't need anything else

4.  There is a specific 3rd party product that doesn't work in P3D so they stay with FSX

 

All are valid reasons, but to suggest FSX is the same as P3D only shows ignorance and hopeless inaccuracy.

 

Cheers, Rob.

 

 

I will eat crow if somebody can show me one developer that has said we are only making products for p3d and giving up on fsx. I don't see that happening anytime soon if ever.

 

How would you like your crow cooked?

 

Do you see PMDG in FS9?  Lets refresh: http://www.flyaoamedia.com/aoa/fsx-vs-fs9/ ... history will repeat just as it did from FS9 to FSX.  The only real unknown is the speed of the market shift.  My hunch is it will take several years just as it did with FS9 to FSX.

 

Cheers, Rob.

[nathanpinard 0]

FSX will be on Steam, and there's no real information on what will be done with it past supporting multiplayer with it.

 

I feel that DTG may have a bit more ability to code and fix FSX than people think. They would need to fix all the immediate glaring issues before going on Steam. Otherwise it will be tore to bits.

 

Stutters, auto-gen popping, and any other "unfinished" looking mechanics have to be fixed before going on a platform that is subject to a lot of....crazy gamers.

[JTHORLACIUS 0]

 

 

 The only real unknown is the speed of the market shift

 

Could't agree more Rob.

 

The thing that I want to point out is that even if you see problems with P3D, you are talking about a platform that is being actively worked on. There is a group of software engineers/developers being paid to make it better, faster, stabler and did I mention better. FSX has a tons of add ons and can me made to look great, but the legacy code is stuck in it's tracks. 

 

I started with flight simulator in 1986 on Atari and have embraced every new version, I see no reason to stop with FSX. Good times!

 

Jon 

[Kuragiman 227]

Hassle free installation and no CFG tweaks required.  A little AM mask setting up and I am rocking upwards 90 FPS with moderate settings and shadows on, even in overcast.   This would have brought my FSX to its knees but its running so stupidly good right now on my rig that it makes me wonder what I did wrong with FSX.   The fact that I didn't have to spend HOURS/WEEKS tweaking to get these results sells P3D to me alone.   Tack on ASN, REX 4 HD and ORBX FTX Global and you have a simulation platform that looks as pretty if not better than FSX and actually runs good and is being developed/updated.  Not returning to FSX.  I am sold.

[Alvega 2,124]

Most people will not want to pay double for the same product just because of cloud shadows and lack of autogen popping.

 

 

First you say "P3D is graphically better than fsx in every respect" and then you say this in the quote? You must be kidding. It's not just cloud shadows and lack of autogen popping. The clouds are much better, the water is much better, the lighting is much better, the terrain textures are always crisp, performance is better. The volumetric fog alone is reason enough for me to leave FSX for P3D. There is no possible comparison between FSX (DX10 fixer or not) and P3D v2.3. Period.

[fiftysix 6]

..... I've even forgot what 'Bufferpool' does.

 

Is that when you try to cram too many people into a swimming pool or something? 

[Guest]

 

 

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

 

Ehm... afaik the fliying part of FSX is the same in P3D so,,, why should you stick with FSX for simulating flight and why with DX10...? I also don't get the 'autogen is rubbish' part. The autogen itself is exactly the same but now it just doesn't popup like it does in FSX (and what a joy that is!).

 

Or do you simply mean to say FSX with DX10 is better for you because it runs better on your PC? On my PC P3D blows P3D out of the water when it comes to performance (and taking into account all the extra graphical features P3D gives me and which I can actually use!).

[dgraham1284 92]

Almost every reason given he doubts. I don't understand. Why ask if everyone is lying to you? Troll?

[Novation 534]

Bizarre argument, even if posed as a question.. If for whatever reason you prefer FSX DX10/9 or whatever, then simply use that and don't worry about P3D.

 

If like me, you think: cloud shadows, volumetric fog, HDR, pop free Autogen etc. add to the experience and feeling of flight, then embrace the platform.... or run both, which I still do.....However, I can't get anywhere near close to this in FSX.

[nathanpinard 0]

It's a valid question. He just wants to know what the real factor is that P3D is better. The videos don't do any sim justice. Even on Twitch source quality you still don't see the full quality you see on your own computer. And some videos even blur a bit to hide the edges.

 

For anyone that has FSX and tons of addons, I wouldn't switch just yet. The market has to shift. P3D has to be a thing for devs to support constantly and consistently. And while P3D is based on the same engine, it's going to get more different as time develops, and it won't be a simple port over like some addons get now. Which means some, if not most devs, will charge seperately for it.

 

For anyone like me, that is just getting into flight simming. P3D is ideal. It's a clean slate that I can start from.

 

XPX hopefully will get into that realm as well, but there is a vast difference in developing addons for XPX vs. P3D. XPX getting on steam may change things a bit. It may even beat P3D due to the licensing issues.

 

For me P3D has these benefits:

 

- HDR lighting that doesn't require an addon.

- CFG that doesn't require massive tweaks

- Smooth performance you can get without addons like Fiber Accelerator

- Volumetric Fog, which looks pretty fantastic.

- DX11 support, which gets you smoother performance, shadows, and really great night lighting (with ORBX arguably, the default lighting is like FSX)

- Constant support

- Possible 64bit conversion later on

- Developer isn't exactly new, or lacking money. In fact I'd say they just hired the previous devs and said "Here, keep doing what you were doing"

 

Here are the cons for me compared to WHAT I'VE SEEN with FSX:

 

- Lack of addon support from specified addon developers like PMDG

- Cost of addons due to license

- EULA issues (you know what I'm talking about)

- The scenario dialogue is a bit lacking for P3D. FSX is better.

- Many addons that work with FSX the devs are gone, and don't seem to be coming back.

- P3D is forever changing, therefore devs have to keep up with P3D updates, causing bugs and other issues.

 

That's all I could think about currently.

 

NOTE: I didn't add anything due to nVidia support, because I refuse to believe nVidia isn't supporting P3D. They are just late on it. The next update will have the tesselation fix (that has already been stated before)

 

Also note: FSX development could change depending on what Dovetail does to it, so it isn't dead.

[charleslee201 19]

 

Thank you Rob, that nice ,i will reminber this, you really love p3d... sorry about my post if it hurt your beta tester feelings ,we do not spend the time that you do, testing , you probably dont fly much, do you ? , my post is a simple question that you have taken to much persanally , excuse my ignorance MASTER ...

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

 

 

I can appreciate people's reasons to stay with FSX or FS9 (or whatever they like) -- to each his or her own.  But to come and state endless inaccuracy about P3D really only shows product ignorance.

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

 

Rob, this is the first 'post production of FSX 'anything' that has me waiting for all my paid-for ORBX products to go triple-install. The minute that happens.....FSX is being retired.  Every time I fire up P3D v2.3....the smile gets a little wider on my face.  The sky....(amongst other things, like performance, etc) whether it be truly Dawn, Day, Dusk, Night...is awesome to behold in their stock treatment of it...and such a sheer joy to tly through. The HDR treatment is GOLD!   I think that if someone can NOT see 'in-your-face-and-slapping-you, stark differences between FSX (even FSX DX10 Steve Fixer, of which I run,and only run FSX with...), then they truly should keep flying FSX, and not need to consider P3D.  Nope....

 

P3D v2.3 was the definitive moment for this guy, to say....'we have moved on....and there it is on the monitor....'.......

 

Mitch 

[riccardo74 36]

I was waiting for this thread for a long time, because I was not convinced to get P3d 2.3. But after 5 pages of posts and after many videos on youtube I decide ti give a try to this new platform. I just bougth right now Prepard3d 2.3

 

I am FSX DX10 (SteveFX fixer) and Fiber Accelerator user, quite happy with FSX, not all maxed out, due to limit of my hardware, but I've found the right compromise to fly my PMDG MD11 and NGX in FSX, I got quite good smoothness (during takeoff and landing) and reduce microstutters to minimuns with this new tool Fiber Accelerator. The only thing was annoyng me with FSX is autogen popup and some stutter during final approach phase, so....why not test this new 2.3 version?

 

I'm installing 2.3 now and let you know, I don't want to make FPS comparison vs FSX, I'd like just to achieve the smoothness and real flight sensation I had only with XPX, using my FSX addons on P3D.

[jimmy64 43]

 

 

I've even forgot what 'Bufferpool' does.

Placebo!

[devgrp 1,233]

I recently installed 2.3 and while it is very smooth out the box I get great fps like, that comes to an end once there is good amount of cloud coverage. I still fly fsx for my pmdg planes and I must say I get great performance at some of the hardest hitting airports with cloud and all. I would like to use p3d for my GA flying but the fact that the clouds kill my fps is not helping.

 

It seems like I have to have clear weather for a smooth flight. My computer is pretty beefed up. I7 4770k running at 4.7ghz, gtx 780 and 16gb ram.

 

All the addons I installed in p3d works. Only thing left is asn. I just want the cloud issue resolved