It's the old question... "Does size matter?..." 

 

Some will say it does, others "No way..."

 

All I can say is that:

 

1) FSX is still my preferred civil flightsim, all things taken into consideration;

2) One of the best EVER sims I used (actually two) during my recent hiatus through Combat Flight Simulation, is plain 32 bit and DX9, and puts any of it's competitors ( in terms of graphics ) light-years aways - IL2 BOS;

I nominate Poppet for the Voice of Reason. I like the name Poppet too.....don't know why but I do.

 

Cheers

P3D Pilot: Well I'm sticking with P3D because I heard LM's new sim will actually be 65 bit!

I nominate Poppet for the Voice of Reason. I like the name Poppet too.....don't know why but I do.

 

 

When I first starting interacting with Poppet on here I couldn't get that scene from Pirates Of The Caribbean out of my head:

 

 

Sorry Poppet 

 

 

It's the old question... "Does size matter?..."

God No,  I'm easy going, a great listener and believe in the therapeutic healing powers of cuddling   :rolleyes:

 

That's hilarious Matthew lol    

 

Maybe because i only tip around in little planes but i really don't understand folks fascination with 64 Bit or maybe its because i just don't understand *Period*  Its the latter i think. 

 

The only grip i have with with P3D is the way P3D handles antialiasing and the dreaded gauge shimmering,  so above anything else i would really like a proper Nvidia Profile for PD3.

 

Apart from that i'm happy. 

It's the old question... "Does size matter?..."

 

Some will say it does, others "No way..."

 

Only if you need a yard stick.

 

 

 

God No, I'm easy going, a great listener and believe in the therapeutic healing powers of cuddling :rolleyes:

 

That is a very good outlook - approach.

 

Regards to all,

I really do not belive, never did, on the Holy Grails of 64 bit and DX11/12.  Well, I do believe in the "miracle" of DX10 mode when it comes to FSX, but guys, IL2 Battle of Stalingrad is a 32 bit sim, with DX9 graphics, and is way ahead of any other sim I have used in terms of graphics, smoothness...

 

Provided one "respects" the limitations imposed by a simulator designed around 2005/2006 and doesn't want to put the burden of each and every detailed scenery, add-on aircraft, ATC module, AI aircraft, Weather... on top of it, FSX, and in particular for me FSX:SE, is more than good, and indeed as always offered me a lot more of joy than X-Plane7,8,9,10...

 

..... and doesn't want to put the burden of each and every detailed scenery, add-on aircraft, ATC module, AI aircraft, Weather... on top of it, FSX, and in particular for me FSX:SE, is more than good,....

 

OK I understand your willingness to compromise in order to get the best fluidity, but heck, with that cut-rate list of eliminations, Id rather not simm at all

The moment we are all on-board with 64-bit we will be back to the 32-bit limitations within 6 months guaranteed. This is because some developer will think it is a good idea to model a 777 airliner with 400 3D animated people on board enjoying the flight with smiles and stewardess walking up and down the aisles and people queuing to use the toilet.

Who wants to bet that Captain Sim will be the first to do this 

 

But seriously, having more resources means the developers will find a way to fully utilize them and before you know it we are pushing the envelope once again.

 

The moment we are all on-board with 64-bit we will be back to the 32-bit limitations within 6 months guaranteed. This is because some developer will think it is a good idea to model a 777 airliner with 400 3D animated people on board enjoying the flight with smiles and stewardess walking up and down the aisles and people queuing to use the toilet.

 

Yep :smile:. Compare software created today e.g. Adobe PDF viewer, and the version from say 1995. That thing is so full of bloat and the executable is bigger than my entire disk was in 1995 but it's basically the same program just much slower. Having lots of disk space and memory has made developers lazy. 

I agree with that to a point, but it isn't like any of us could go back to the flight simulation of 1995 and be satisfied. Making efficient use of the available resources is a problem, but there are gains. Bigger is never better than Smarter, but it does seem that many of the better developers have gotten as smart and efficient as they can get under 32 bit.

Funny thread. Sheds different light on it.

 

Im just hoping for 64 bit so I dont have to keep dialing my detail sliders back all the time despite wanting nice visuals and actually put them up because my system can handle it. If that day comes, then we can be like xplane simmers in that conversation and forget all about the purpose of 64bit. OOM will be a thing of the past.  or maybe it will be between  FSX SE simmers?

So far my only so-far-so-good solution to keeping a lot of high quality addons and avoiding a late OOM on approach is to mute the outside model entry in the model folder for the PMDG 777 that I now fly

Once we all have a 64 bit sim (whichever one it is), and are still not satisfied, we'll be looking for the next holy grail.....

 

"What we really need is a sim that supports 32 bit floating point SOUND!". :smile:

 

...such is human nature.

The emergence of a 64 bit version for X-Plane got me interested in that again BUT only for a while then   dropped it in favor of P3D for its quality

 

64 bits of crap is just more crap