?

 

OK I'll clarify:

 

Account #1. The above posters ARE NOT running default scenery.

 

Account #2. A maxed out FSX user WILL NOT see an "almost unbelievable performance increase" if switching to FSX SE.

 

Therefore both of your statements stretch reality to it's limit. 

The option is there, it doesn't work?

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

I hope Dovetail will be able to up the contract of distribution with Microsoft. Even with the fixes they provided it is still FSX10. I have MSFSX working rather well in the way I have my add-on's configured. My VAS is managed and working for long flights.  I did purchase the Steam Edition but I uninstalled it because of weird interaction with my MSFSX version causing the terrain.dll errors as the Steam Edition decided to copy all of my personal graphic settings and add-on scenery BGL files folders ( Empty ) in the Enable mode from the MSFSX program which was on its own separate drive.

 

I wound up having to re-install the MSFSX as well.  I am still a Loyal FSX customer even though PD3 has been better on the eyes. We need to either get a updated contract allowing PD3 to make a Game Version of the product or Dovetail to up their contact allowing for a better platform. FSX has always been designed for the masses so if you just want to hop in and fly or learn to be a real virtual pilot you can. 

 

PD3 and X-plane were not developed for the masses. We need a program that keeps our third party developers happy and continue to grow. You can say what you like about FSX but it is still the most used of all PC home simulators ( at least for now ) 

Account #1. The above posters ARE NOT running default scenery.

 

Thought I recognized one of them but no big deal. My statement still stands though, if you use default then no need to go FSx-se

 

 

Account #2. A maxed out FSX user WILL NOT see an "almost unbelievable performance increase" if switching to FSX SE.

 

 There is plenty of scientific proof in the way of side by side Vids showing massive performance increase especially in VAS usage. Just use google

 

In my case the peformance increase includes a big boost in FPS as well

 

Please tell me you have tested FSX-se right? you do have a copy ?

 

 

Let's be truthful on both accounts here.

 

You expect far too much given  the topic of this thread. 

 

I've read everything from no impact to maybe a 10-15% increase in FPS plus a small improvement in memory management. My experience with FSX-SE has been that the improvement is on the low end of that scale. It's still FSX, just in a new suit and a pair of freshly polished shoes.

I have made the conversion to P3D exclusively.  FSX of any flavor, I think, is fading into the distance. 

For me a flight in FSX boxed from FSDT CYVR-KLAX all sliders right except water and autogen got me an OOM before take off

 

Same flight in FSX-se = flight completed! This is simply a massive improvement

 

The switch is a game changer

Let's be truthful on both accounts here.

He was. Still in denial eh Jim ?

Not for me either , P3D and X-Plane take up enough of my money and resources - thank you.

I did and am very happy with it.

He was. Still in denial eh Jim ?

Yep, YouTube videos are always true!

I'm all in on FSX:SE (uninstall boxed version) and I'm happy with the result. No science, but feels solid, quick and a pleasure to fly.

For me (I speak only for me) the switch is *not* a switch. I have FS1 through FSX, MS Flight and FSX-SE, P3D, XP10. I have been simming since FS3 came out so I have many PC systems, some very old that still work running Windows 3.0. As a matter of fact I was running the latest FSX-SE beta patch on my exact same PC that I did the FSX-DVD beta testing on and SE ran very smooth with full max graphic settings ( yes AI, bloom and Water) with the exception of DX10, going no less than 15 FPS at KSFO, KJFK, EDDF, LFPG and it was stable for 95+ straight hours.

 

It may be good to wait until DTG releases the final patch to see if some more compatibility issues are fixed and how that patch has performed before making a decision, anything can happen.

 

Performance wise SE beats DVD into the ground on 3 separate PC's of mine using Win XP, Win7 and Win10 tech preview. It is amazing to me to hear users say their performance is worse in SE compared to DVD, not saying they are misleading, just wondering how that can be knowing what I have seen with my PC's. 

 

I'm not going to say this is going to be the case for everybody, but if one has been a simmer long enough to have a mass amount of add-ons then its likely that there is more than 1 PC available. FSX-SE is not so expensive that its going to break the bank. But at the same time this SE version is relatively new to the community and Dovetail is going to have to earn respect and earn customer support. I usually give the benefit of doubt and give a chance to any company with announcements of a new simulator, that's why I bought XP8 years ago and I did not feel an 8th version should be so bad (lacking) for the price, but I learned. I have a review copy of XP10 and I still don't like its lack of seasons, terrible weather and menu systems, its attention to railroads and highways *before* airports are detailed (my opinion based on facts). I mess around with it on occasion but I don't like it much.

 

Its very likely that when LM comes out with a 64bit version then I will buy a PC for that. If Dovetail makes a 64 bit simulator then I will get a PC for that. I usually don't choose between simulators I try to support them all unless there is blatant deception on the part of the marketing of the product or if it has limitations that I wont live with; Aerofly and Hangsim (too geo limited for me this day in age) come to mind, I may still get them if there is a bargain bin sale of sorts. I had Fly! and was on the beta test for Fly2. I had Flight Unlimited 3 and both ProPilot versions, even 747-400 Precession Simulator, Sublogic ATP and UFO. I wanted them all and found no need to switch to one or the other.  

 

This is not a cheap hobby and it does not have to be limited to 1 sim or version. You must love simming to be able to remain with it. Lately it has been difficult not to hate this hobby with all the OOM reports, updates/drivers that break things, NVidia's cold shoulder, and prices that seem to take advantage of simmers. But when I was able to fly for 4 straight days to highly detailed airports I saw great hope for the future. I'm blessed enough to keep up/current.

 

Maybe, just maybe Mr. Bruce Artwick will come back in some way and save the day for us. Everything was fine until MS marketing and budgets (that ACES in the end would not stand up to) messed up the good progress that Sublogic set in motion.    

 

 

I wound up having to re-install the MSFSX as well. I am still a Loyal FSX customer even though PD3 has been better on the eyes. We need to either get a updated contract allowing PD3 to make a Game Version of the product or Dovetail to up their contact allowing for a better platform. FSX has always been designed for the masses so if you just want to hop in and fly or learn to be a real virtual pilot you can.

 

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?

Account #2. A maxed out FSX user WILL NOT see an "almost unbelievable performance increase" if switching to FSX SE.

 

Actually, in all my testing, it is precisely the maxed out users who will benefit from FSX-SE. If you'd like to visit my cockpit and actually see the comparison you'd be welcome. I've already had several visitors who all agree.

 

You cannot have a real view on the subject based on factual evidence because you already admitted that your system is pretty basic with no complex add-on airports, which is where the pressure on performance occurs. So why on Earth do you persist in denying what others report?

 

Pete