fsx-se FSX: SE. A Dead End?

[jcomm 5,929]

Totally agree! 64bit is essential for any sim to move forward. For me P3D is not an option until it's 64bit.

 

 

While I can see your point, and although I was also an X-Plane 10 user and supporter ( still am, kind of, more for the 3pd community contributions than for the sim itself... ), truth is XP10 never game me as near the experience I get from FSX when using some more complex aircraft types, or simply flying around, even in default scenery and weather, enhanced, ok, by ORBX FTX Global and Steve's DX 10 fixer, nor could I get a smoother ride in XP10 as I am getting in FSX SE !

 

And, another great sim recently released, that:

 

- is 32 bit;

- uses DX9

 

is, albeit the many critics by the user community, by far the best ww2 flightsim platform I have used, given the smoothness, the graphics, the AI, the quality of the flight dynamics ( making a joke of the best add-ons for either FSX or X-plane ! ) and even rivaling easily with my other preferred platform - DCS World - that one already 64 bit too.

 

Honestly 64bit and DX10 do not make a flight simulator, oh no they don't!

 

Ah!  Yet another example - how could I forget it??? MS FLIGHT - 32 bit and DX9 ;-)

[nikaslan 9]

truth is XP10 never game me as near the experience I get from FSX when using some more complex aircraft types, or simply flying around, even in default scenery and weather, enhanced, ok, by ORBX FTX Global and Steve's DX 10 fixer

 

That's exactly my point. If X-Plane had the complex addon aircraft, scenery, enhanced weather that FSX has, we would not be here talking about Dead Ends. Yes, it needs beefy hardware, but so does P3D which currently, being 32bit, leads also to a dead end in the form of OOMs and the need to turn down the settings.

[gtrbarbarian 1]

Deadend? Not from my perspective ... After years running fsx only now with the steam edition can I run it near its potential. I'm running all of my addons and completing long flights without oom or just completely random ctd from clicking on this or that without the alignment of the stars and the universal energy. Vas usage is obviously managed better ..and no matter what the shift-z frame rate counter says..This thing runs smoother. Does it still take a hardware investment? Yes. But that's the price you pay for a well performing sim. We've never had better addons...and they keep coming and keep getting better. Dtg has breathed new life into this hobby because although we've had wonderful addons, before fsxse the core sim was too unstable to take advantage (imho) of all that 3rd party addons had to offer. I think the future is bright even if there is no new sim released in the future.

[GCBraun 2,392]

I'm running P3D 2.4 almost daily since mid December on a mid to high end system and never had a single crash or OOM. I always check the VAS usage after every flight and the highest I got was 3.2gb.

 

Aircrafts that I use: Aerosoft Airbus, CS777 and a famous 737 that shall remain unnamed.

Addons: FTX Global, REX and OpusWeather

Airports: Dozens mostly from Aerosoft, Taxi2Gate and FSDT

 

From what I've read here, I believe any OOMs on Prepar3d are related to other addons such as Vector, OpenLC or Orbx regions. Since I only fly tubes, I don't need those. The visual quality and realism that I can achieve is incredible, imho. For me, there's no looking back to FSX. Waiting for the next simulator from Dovetail.

[hychewright 46]

I have FSX MS and P3Dv2 loaded on separate drives and enjoying them both. Sure, they could be better, however for me it is all about having fun !  Everyone has a goal as to what they won't out of a flight sim and that is what makes our hobby so great. We learn a lot in these forums from those simmers who explore into each flight sim and share their opinions as to what they experience. I personally don't see a dead end to any of our sims that are available to us..........Just my opinion

 

Best Regards

 

Lamar Wright

[Sirxamoc 22]

For me I am Primary - P3D  but I am starting to load those planes that I can not on P3D to FSX-SE.  I see good things so far coming, that is good!  Since their latest patch, I have found quite a few things now work, such as exterior lighting for some aircraft.  So I would hold judgement until it looks like they cannot deliver the goods!

[AviatorMoser 353]

It is great that Dovetail has re-released FSX:SE to a whole new bunch of gamers/simmers. This has to be, & is good for our expanding hobby. It has introduced flight simming to a brand new market, & maybe there are a new bunch of potential developers being introduced as well?

 

Imagine what would have been it Dovetail had taken a leaf out of Lockheed Martin's book when they released P3D & changed the default aircraft & gave us formally payware ones?

 

It would have really been great & would have diferentiated FSX:SE from normal FSX, if Dovetail had added some different aircraft. maybe there were licence issues?

 

Um, YEAH!

 

There were definitely license issues with Microsoft that disallowed DTG from doing so!!!

[KingGhidorah 209]

I don't think I would have used the term "dead end" myself, but when I look at my usage of FSX over the last year or two, and how my willingness to buy content for it has gone almost to zero, I have to concede that it doesn't excite me very much anymore.  When I get excited about flight simulation, it has recently been things like DCS.  When new things get released for FSX, and people are all pumped up about it, I read about these things on Avsim, and maybe want to want them, but then so frequently decide that I don't need them, that they aren't good enough, or that they are too similar to what I already have. 

[joandreas 3]

Well can post a question and reply from facebook.

 

Hum, no answer to my questions...

1. Is the next Flight sim will be build with FSX engine or Microsoft FLIGHTSTORE engine?

2. I really want a boxed version of the next FS that doesnt need Steam to play!

 

Microsoft Flight Simulator X: Steam Edition We currently own the updated Microsoft Flight game engine. Some sections of this engine are based upon the FSX engine. At the moment it is far to early to say whether we will use this engine or a different one for a new aviation simulator. Likewise we can not say whether this simulator will use Steam. At the moment we are focused on working with Microsoft and other developers to bring content to FSX: Steam Edition. - Martin

[fogboundturtle 2,708]

That's exactly my point. If X-Plane had the complex addon aircraft, scenery, enhanced weather that FSX has, we would not be here talking about Dead Ends. Yes, it needs beefy hardware, but so does P3D which currently, being 32bit, leads also to a dead end in the form of OOMs and the need to turn down the settings.

 

hmmm. X-plane has nothing ?

 

Worldliner 777, 757 and A350 are very complex addon aircraft.

Enhanced weather : Skymaxx pro + Real Terra Haze with FLywithLua

Enhance scenary : Mesh HD V3

 

P3D manages OOM better than FSX:SE imo, it also offload more work from the CPU to GPU. Its not perfect but it's better. I think once we will see PMDG on P3D, people will migrate over. It would be ever better if they were on X-plane 10.

[mgh 89]

There were definitely license issues with Microsoft that disallowed DTG from doing so!!!

 

Perhaps you can tell us what  the "definitely license issues" are -  given that only Microssoft and DoveTail know them?

[KingGhidorah 209]

fogboundturtle, PMDG is certainly one of the issues that has kept a lot of people from migrating over to P3D, myself included, but when it becomes a reality, and if it ends up costing another $100 to $200 just to fly NGX in that sim, I know that I'm going to be making a very frank cost-value assessment with myself. My enthusiasm for FSX has been waning for a long time, and year ago, I would have assumed I would be on P3D by now, but I'm still not convinced it is such leaps and bounds over FSX at this stage of it's development to jusfify having to repurchase old addons, or pay a premium price for what is largely the same airplane, as we have seen with a few developers.  We'll see how that goes and what the benefits of that might be and after so much having been written on P3D, by supporters, opponents, people who are awestruck by it, and people who are unimpressed, it is still not at all clear to me. 

[CB183183183 9]

I'm very happy to see FSX:SE get people excited about the hobby and stir some buzz.  There are a wide variety of simmers and I think it's good that we now have 3 good platforms to choose from.  As someone who has a pilot's license and wants to fly high fidelity aircraft with realistic system programming and practice real world procedures, P3D more than fits the bill.  But I also understand there are folks out there who are more casual and just want to fire up a bird, get flying, and enjoy the eye candy.  

 

I see Dovetail taking FSX:SE into more of a casual simmer platform and there should be numerous add-ons that will be released over the years that will grow the hobby. It's not a bad thing and I think it will attract a larger audience.  Lockheed-Martin will stick to the training market because that's what they do best.  They don't need to cater to every simmer's taste because they are a large and very diversified company with a number of revenue generating sources other than P3D.  X-Plane seems to be taking the reins as a fantastic developer's playground and I have seen a dramatic increase in the number of freeware sceneries and aircraft released for the sim.  

[fogboundturtle 2,708]

FSX in a nutshell

 

[devgrp 1,233]

P3d might use the gpu alot more but VAS usage still suck. With ftx England and a few of the orbx eu airports with vector and openlc, I run oom while loading the flight with the a2a Cessna 172. That has never happened in fsx ever. I can even fly the ngx and 777 and not run oom if I dont change views. I fly alot of tubelinners but I also fly low and slow and I dont want to give up my scenery to avoid oom in p3d