fsx-se Are people making the switch to FSX Steam?

[Gypsy Baron 10]

Unfortunately, the Direct Connect feature does not work, at least not in the officially released FSX:SE version. I have not downloaded the recently released Open Beta version, but did not see the Direct Connect feature listed in the "fixes" assocaited with the Beta version.

Al

 

As I fly exclusively on line via direct connect to the DTP servers, FSX-SE in its current state is not usable. I only have it installed (on a 2nd user account) for beta testing purposes.

 

  Paul

[Pete Dowson 558]

Because when I read people talking about "performance" I think FPS and/or the lack of FPS jumping up and down. Others will call that part "smoothness".

 

I consider the lack of OOMs, terrain.dll and d3d.dll crashes "bug fixes", not "performance increases".

 

Almost yes to both of those, though smoothness to me is lack of any jitters or pauses whatsoever.  Variations in frame rates I don't notice at all unless I watch the numbers -- providing only that the overall flow is always smooth.

 

With FSX-MS in order to retain something approaching smoothness and to stop the "blurries", I used frame rate limits and even that Fiber Optimizer program from FSPS, which was quite effective for me in FSX. I also used the Traffic Optimizer program to delete AI traffic in the distance when the numbers were over 150 or so (and that was with MyTrafficX set to only 50%).

 

All that helped with FSX, certainly.

 

But with FSX-SE I have dispensed with frame rate limits. Those now range, according to me FSUIPC logs, from 35 to 200 or so, but always smooth. I get no "blurries", that I've noticed. My traffic is now at 100% and my airports and skies are fully populated.

 

It is all these impovements that I call "better performance and smoothness".

 

On the other point, I am one of the lucky ones who has never experienced OOMs, Terrain.DLL or G3D.dll crashes, so whilst I appreciate these fixes in FSX-SE (especially because i have been able to remove the G3D and Terrain DLL patches form FSUIPC), they never really affected me in any case.

 

The improvement in VAS management in FSX-SE probably helps me now too, though I can't quantify that.. I never suffered from OOMs in FSX, but I noticed the remaining VAS getting lower and lower all the time. So much so that I only ever flew one flight per session, always completely re-booting between. With FSX-SE it is noticeable that the VAS free goes up as well as down, so maybe, when I actually get time for more than one flight in a day, it will be no longer necessary to re-boot in between.

 

I do hope this clarifies the meaning of my statements about FSX-SE to your satisfaction. Perhaps one day you might actually try FSX-SE on a heasvily loaded system and then be able to give us an opinion from a more knowledgeable standpoint?

 

Regards

Pete

[darrinward777 0]

It is part of the licensing agreements that, as Dovetail has the FSX re-distribution license, it is the gaming version of FSX!

Also, as Lockheed Martin has the pro/commercial version of FSX, known as ESP, there will be no gaming version coming from them. Eventually a 64bit version of P3D.

 

So, for gaming, stick to Steam.

 

Hope that clarifies.

Popcorn time?

I know Lockheed Martin said they were not interested in a gaming version but in time maybe they will contract one out so they can continue with  pro development. You are correct and if PD3 get a 64 bit version going, that's when I will make the switch. I will even build a new PC for the occasion !  

 

With the steam version I just did not get all that great of an improvement ( I have a lot of money tied up in MSFSX) and I feel the survival of FSX is a 64 bit version. Sadly I think Dovetails hands are tied at least for now. We can only hope

[smakar 0]

 

 

but then I had a corrupted OS W7

LOL - that's exactly what happened to me, so when I re installed Windows I installed FSX-SE solely - and I LOVE it, because I was suffering from OOMs, especially on pay-ware airports, photo-sceneries and PMDG aircraft at the same time.

 

My wife must be influencing me because I couldn't justify the cost of a regular Professional license for P3D; I had no problems justifying the sale price of FSX-SE.

[ctiger 49]

LOL - that's exactly what happened to me, so when I re installed Windows I installed FSX-SE solely - and I LOVE it, because I was suffering from OOMs, especially on pay-ware airports, photo-sceneries and PMDG aircraft at the same time.

 

My wife must be influencing me because I couldn't justify the cost of a regular Professional license for P3D; I had no problems justifying the sale price of FSX-SE.

 

I must say I wasn't LOL when that happened, but after several days I finally got things up again. I am now a happy camper with FSX-SE.  My wife knew I wasn't too happy during that time. She kept saying "you got a problem with your little flight simulator?"

[PC Pilot Dave 3]

I must say I wasn't LOL when that happened, but after several days I finally got things up again. I am now a happy camper with FSX-SE.  My wife knew I wasn't too happy during that time. She kept saying "you got a problem with your little flight simulator?"

 

 

That made me LOL! I appreciate the overwhelming feedback to this thread and I think I may try and make the jump to FSX-SE this weekend (time permitting).

[MichaelTurner 5]

I won't be switching just yet.

The elimination of the terrain.dll crashes that I was getting with every flight is hugely encouraging but I am now worried the the next update might just be the first of many with ensuing confusion and non functioning addons.

 

I think I will wait another six months or so until the situation settles down and then perhaps do a complete FSX SE only reinstall following the promised free Windows10 upgrade

 

As it is I have the box version plus 400GB of addons working very nicely with the only problem being OOMs when pushing the system to its limit by flying from say Earth Simulations Guernsey via London VFR over Horizon photoscenery to ES Isle of Man.

[gtrbarbarian 1]

I run P3D almost exclusively now...although, yes, I did see VAS management and FPS improvements in FSX:SE. I was running the full orbx global+vector and running complex aircraft...

I now only go back to fly the Flight1 B200 King Air, due to Flight1's refusal to migrate to P3D.

 

Both products are pretty rock solid compared to boxed FSX, where I was getting CTD's -alot-.... graphically they are pretty comparable if you are using Steve's DX10 fixer in FSX:SE....

[robert young 2,897]

I run P3D almost exclusively now...although, yes, I did see VAS management and FPS improvements in FSX:SE. I was running the full orbx global+vector and running complex aircraft...

I now only go back to fly the Flight1 B200 King Air, due to Flight1's refusal to migrate to P3D.

 

Both products are pretty rock solid compared to boxed FSX, where I was getting CTD's -alot-.... graphically they are pretty comparable if you are using Steve's DX10 fixer in FSX:SE....

 

Except that Steve's fixer gives much better internal shadows in FSX/FSX-SE compared with the jaggy ones in P3d which also give a large fps hit whereas there is almost no fps hit in Steve's work. I Hope LM can sort this one out as I know a lot of P3d users see shadowing as an important part of it.

[Capt Speirs 52]

 

 

She kept saying "you got a problem with your little flight simulator?"

 

As long as that is all she is calling little.  :o  

[ctiger 49]

As long as that is all she is calling little.  :o  

Absolutely, if she knew all the payware ($$) I have invested in FSX and FS9 it is really a HUGE flight sim.  But being married for over 50 years I hardly ever question her hobby investments (lol). 

[virtualstuff 754]

No I won't for several reasons, have bought the steam edition 3 months ago just to see what the fuss is about...

Except that Steve's fixer gives much better internal shadows in FSX/FSX-SE compared with the jaggy ones in P3d which also give a large fps hit whereas there is almost no fps hit in Steve's work. I Hope LM can sort this one out as I know a lot of P3d users see shadowing as an important part of it.

 

Well I disagree they are just both off and I find the DX10 shadow version was very FPS
expensive regarding performance in the contrary with P3D ;-)

Also you can manipulate the shadows more in the P3D version for performance to via the in gui simple sliders

[fluffyflops 1,847]

Na I've been into fs since 2001. I honestly think my fs has never been better. I'm having more fun with fs now than I ever had.

 

With all the addons, fsx for me has never been better. It would take alot to drop fsx and install stream or p3d

[robert young 2,897]

No I won't for several reasons, have bought the steam edition 3 months ago just to see what the fuss is about...

 

Well I disagree they are just both off and I find the DX10 shadow version was very FPS

expensive regarding performance in the contrary with P3D ;-)

Also you can manipulate the shadows more in the P3D version for performance to via the in gui simple sliders

 

I agree neither of them are perfect. What I discovered today is that in P3d, setting fiber frame etc to not be minimum but around 0.15 to 0.2 rather than ridiculously low, has regained a lot more shadow quality and also stopped the frame rate hit quite so much. I also cannot run P3d with more than 2x sparse grid sampling without it impacting on performance. Odd because in FSX this makes no difference at all. While the frame rate just about holds up I notice that panning views are delayed and sluggish.

 

View panning (delay or lack of smoothness thereof) has for years been a very good indicator of how well the sim is running and is just as useful as the raw frame rate count. An instant pan response seems to be analogous to a decent and smooth frame rate.

[virtualstuff 754]

I agree neither of them are perfect. What I discovered today is that in P3d, setting fiber frame etc to not be minimum but around 0.15 to 0.2 rather than ridiculously low, has regained a lot more shadow quality and also stopped the frame rate hit quite so much. I also cannot run P3d with more than 2x sparse grid sampling without it impacting on performance. Odd because in FSX this makes no difference at all. While the frame rate just about holds up I notice that panning views are delayed and sluggish.

 

View panning (delay or lack of smoothness thereof) has for years been a very good indicator of how well the sim is running and is just as useful as the raw frame rate count. An instant pan response seems to be analogous to a decent and smooth frame rate.

 

Correct I have it at 0.2 because I don't like the penalties with 0.01 and as you said it makes no sense to go that low.

as for AA DSR could be an option. shadow size could be made smaller in the config file.

AA (MSAA isn't applied on clouds so performance gain, but as soon you throw SS grid sampling to the party it will go downhill fast with more cloud layers .

I have both 512 size and higher quality of the shadow map.

Correct about the pan response (always my main test local) and frame rate, what I found on my system what

makes it smooth is:

- lock FPS external at 35

- unlimited FPS in the gui

- VSYNC off...

 

AA is the weak point I find personally in P3D (never found it great in FS either but it was and is better quality)