Prepar3d v2.5 vs X-plane 10.35

[TBurd01 3]

I chose P3D over XP for a number of reasons:

 

1. Developer support for P3D seems bigger and better to me than XP. XP has great support, but it has a much smaller team behind it. XP is built on newer arcitecture, but I expect P3D to improve a lot more. P3D v3+ has the potential.

 

2. Stock to stock, P3D wins in my book. The XP autogen is total rubbish, not to say P3D is perfect, but even stock P3D is better than XP upgraded with stuff like UrbanMaxx. I've flown in a bunch of XP airports that can't even get the layout of the pavement correct. Missing and/or improperly placed taxiways, light posts running across runways. P3D gets the layouts right and even adds some stock buildings, which are really good for stock placement (I'm comparing to real world small airports). The runway terrain in XP is absolutely awful and will launch your plane and cause you to crash. Another biggie is that P3D also has seasons, where as X Plane is just constant summer.

 

3. Oculus Rift. There is already 3rd party support for P3D, with native integration planned for when the retail version comes out next year. XP has said they'd like to have Rift support, but until the Rift supports Open GL, that's just a pipe dream.

 

4. Orbx, REX, Active Sky, etc. XP to my knowledge only has REX basic. It does have some really awesome freeware mesh/textures though. P3D also does (Free Mesh X). For the total environment, P3D definitely takes the cake.

 

The only huge thing XP has for me which P3D lacks is helicopters. The payware helis in XP are said to be amazing, and confirmed by real pilots to be very realistic. I dream of the day when I can fly a realistic helicopter with real controls and Oculus Rift. I really would love it if Open GL eventually got Rift support and came to XP, but I am more confident however in P3D getting more realistic helicopters in future versions than XP getting Oculus Rift (and scenery on par with P3D payware options).

 

I am also really looking forward to the new DTG sim. The potential is very high, these guys could win the current and future market if they do things right.

Edited September 6, 2015 by TBurd01

[jcomm 5,881]

XP is cheaper. a lot cheaper, for a same scenery experience, actually better, specially at dusk / dawn / night...

 

More credible weather effects...

 

More details to explore in terms of flight dynamics, if one knows how to...

 

It runs smoother with Aerowinx PSX than P3D or FSX, using the XView plugin - a must for me.

 

It lacks content in some areas... but just like P3D, it's an ongoing project.

 

Rotary wing far better than default FSX / P3D. 

[Wobbie 937]

Apple vs Windows, Android vs Microsoft, chicken vs beef.

Different strokes for different folks. :-)

[bic 44]

When I was at the convention last June, there was some mention from Austin or someone about switching from OpenGL to DirectX.  The phrase seemed to hint at a limitation of OpenGL.  No one laughed about it, so it seemed like it was not a joke or maybe no one got it?

[yidahoo 365]

When I was at the convention last June, there was some mention from Austin or someone about switching from OpenGL to DirectX.  The phrase seemed to hint at a limitation of OpenGL.  No one laughed about it, so it seemed like it was not a joke or maybe no one got it?

 

There is one simple reason X-Plane will not go to DirectX. They would lose 30% of their customer base, thse that use Apple and Linux. I believe Ben Supnik wrote recently they are looking at the newer graphics engines but thats a long way in the future.

[alpha12125 213]

When I was at the convention last June, there was some mention from Austin or someone about switching from OpenGL to DirectX.  The phrase seemed to hint at a limitation of OpenGL.  No one laughed about it, so it seemed like it was not a joke or maybe no one got it?

Well its more a design philosophy then a hint. Basically X-Plane 10 is now 4 years old. Laminar has the philosophy that they will stick to the original specifications of X-Plane 10, this means that bascially any OpenGL function that came out later than this date will not be used in X-Plane 10. So all new performance enhancing functions are not used in X-Plane 10.

[jcomm 5,881]

I guess that was certainly a joke, just as Austin once joked about MS FLIGHT.... At the time I didn't find it nice, but I understood him latter... he was right ...

[mtaxp 666]

Well its more a design philosophy then a hint. Basically X-Plane 10 is now 4 years old. Laminar has the philosophy that they will stick to the original specifications of X-Plane 10, this means that bascially any OpenGL function that came out later than this date will not be used in X-Plane 10. So all new performance enhancing functions are not used in X-Plane 10.

 

10.30 and 10.40 had some really major code for modern OpenGL , so stuff are actually changing in this term.

They do it for future perfromance improvements and new features... we can't when it'll come , but they are preparing for this.

V10 still has at least xx.50 and xx.60 IMO ... which means at least 2 more years (they release a new big version every 1-1.5 years).

 

So the conclusion is that there are many things yet to come in V10.

[jcomm 5,881]

10.30 and 10.40 had some really major code for modern OpenGL , so stuff are actually changing in this term.

They do it for future perfromance improvements and new features... we can't when it'll come , but they are preparing for this.

V10 still has at least xx.50 and xx.60 IMO ... which means at least 2 more years (they release a new big version every 1-1.5 years).

 

So the conclusion is that there are many things yet to come in V10.

 

+1

 

You're on spot !

 

And yes, OpenGL is a very sound graphics platform. Regarding the future of XP10, I am also expecting that timing regarding a new version, and I believe we will still be even more positively surprised during the life cycle of XP10.

[fvfv 1]

I'm an x-planer since v9 which means I'm an x-planer for life, but our curiosity always takes us to different paths, so I thought I gave P3D a try:

 

I can't believe everyone here says P3d is not FSX.  THEY ARE THE SAME !!!!. Matter of fact they have the same Core Engine as P3d is just a rewrite of FSX.  I was extremely disappointed to find out the same skies, flat runways, awful frame rate and on top of it all, the default P3d installation does not have a SINGLE airliner.  Not a single one !.

 

I have tried to find a reason to give P3d a try. Since 90% of my time I spend it on VATSIM, These are must-haves:

 

Decent, Universal FMC that supports SIDs. STARS and most importantly RNAVS.  X-plane has X-FMC.  I'm still trying to find something for P3D that can be used on all aircraft without messing with panel.cfg files.

 

Airport navigator that shows my plane on the gate and tells me how to get to the assigned runway.  X-plane has AirportNavigator.  The closest thing I found for p3d is avilasoft EFB. not even close.

 

Good moving map. I use Plan-G and it seems to also work good with P3D.

 

I imagine if you are not flying on line you can live without these addons, but in general X-Plane is so much more better when it comes to dynamics and control.

 

It;s been 6 days since I installed P3D and tried to  make it as close to x-plane on plugins as possible.  Tonight I will need to reinstall P3d because it does not work any more 

[jcomm 5,881]

I'm an x-planer since v9 which means I'm an x-planer for life, but our curiosity always takes us to different paths, so I thought I gave P3D a try:

 

I can't believe everyone here says P3d is not FSX.  THEY ARE THE SAME !!!!. Matter of fact they have the same Core Engine as P3d is just a rewrite of FSX.  I was extremely disappointed to find out the same skies, flat runways, awful frame rate and on top of it all, the default P3d installation does not have a SINGLE airliner.  Not a single one !.

 

I have tried to find a reason to give P3d a try. Since 90% of my time I spend it on VATSIM, These are must-haves:

 

Decent, Universal FMC that supports SIDs. STARS and most importantly RNAVS.  X-plane has X-FMC.  I'm still trying to find something for P3D that can be used on all aircraft without messing with panel.cfg files.

 

Airport navigator that shows my plane on the gate and tells me how to get to the assigned runway.  X-plane has AirportNavigator.  The closest thing I found for p3d is avilasoft EFB. not even close.

 

Good moving map. I use Plan-G and it seems to also work good with P3D.

 

I imagine if you are not flying on line you can live without these addons, but in general X-Plane is so much more better when it comes to dynamics and control.

 

It;s been 6 days since I installed P3D and tried to  make it as close to x-plane on plugins as possible.  Tonight I will need to reinstall P3d because it does not work any more 

 

Now try Aerofly FS 2 and see the future :-)

[fvfv 1]

It looks awesome. but only .00000002% of the world. (California and Nevada).

 

Hoepully, as you said, it will be the future.

[Gypsy Pilot 29]

I agree with Froogle, X-Plane for realistic flight characteristics or P3D v3.3/Orbx/ASN for scenery.

It all depends on where your passion is.  

 

Me, I fly low and slow  so I can see the detail in all of that great scenery that I have spent so much money on

I can't help it, I am such a scenery ######

 

My first Orbx download was PNW and it opened my eyes to what a flight sim could look like.  That was a few years ago and things have just gotten better with each release.  

 

LM purchased the rights to FSX as a basic development platform for their commercial grade flight training simulators for airline and military pilots and they will keep improving it for years to come.  For them, it isn't a hobby supply business and unlike MSFS they are pumping a lot of money into their R&D program.

 

Orbx has spent millions of dollars in development cost to improve their products core designers platform which has allowed them to grab the lion's share of the scenery market.  

 

If I wanted to be a bus driver flying from major airport to major airport at FL35 where high detail scenery isn't important I would go with X-Plane, but I love great scenery so I am investing in P3D for flight, Orbx for scenery, and ASN for weather.

 

That is where my passion ls.

[jcomm 5,881]

Aerofly FS 2 for everything :-))))))

 

An A380 is comming along for the next weeks....

[SpiritFlyer 987]

After pondering the insightful analysis presented by some within this thread, I think there is a huge pending sea change that may swing things deep and wide in X-plane's favour, depending..

 

If P3D v4 and/or DTS Next are 64 bit but are not backward compatible for accumulated FSX and/or P3D version 3.x add-ons such as ORBX and Aerosoft etc., the hobby will divide, split and separate into various divisions along the following lines:

 

-FSX       (steady erosion of base, declining)

-FSX-SE (erosion of initial base and buy-in, declining)

-P3D 4.x (unknown but if bare and not backwards compatible, limited hobby growth)

-P3D 3.x (If static and/or officially unsupported or marketed, declining)

-DTS FS (Wild card, but if bare and not backwards compatible, limited growth but unknown)

-Other partial simulations, platforms (like Aerofly) and games breaking into the marketplace

X-Plane ( Will likely keep base, and increase market share from former FSX, FSX-SE, P3D v. 3.x customers)

 

So, all this change is likely to put rocket boosters under X-Plane if they aggressively pursue those who are negatively effected. In some respect the greater the chaos amongst the others, the greater the opportunity for X-Plane to jump in the driver's seat...maybe!

 

Just thinking...

 

Kind regards,