FSX-MS To FSX users on the fence for P3D 2.5

[Kangaby 14]

Compared to the five bucks I paid for FSX:SE, it looks expensive. I don't need a commercial simulator with the attached commercial price tag, so I'm backing the FSX:SE horse. If it turns out I've wasted my five bucks, then so be it.

[robert young 2,897]

The two things that P3d achieves that FSX can't are the vibrancy of the scenery and cloud shadows. Internal shadowing is now not a factor because FSX now has very nice cockpit self shadowing with the DX10 fixer which works very well on my pretty ordinary system and if anything it is better than P3d's unless you have the graphics and cpu capability to run DSR and SGSS at the same time.

 

P3d can look breathtakingly beautiful in some sceneries. It offers a much more vibrant colour and shade spectrum. You can tell this because you actually have to adjust FSX monitors or screen colours in Nvidia Control panel after running P3d because using the same settings makes FSX look washed out and bland whereas P3d looks alive.

 

I think the most significant step LM can make to persuade more to embrace it is to sort out the heavy taxation of the system with the way shadows are rendered in the VC, and to provide an option not to aliase clouds, which gives a huge negative fps hit on all but expensive systems and graphics cards. In particular P3d does not cope with Sparse Grid Supersampling very well. While it does not necessarily affect frame rates directly, what it does is to make the flight model less responsive and view panning very sluggish in the VC unless you have quite expensive hardware. I can run FSX with 4x or even 8x multisampling AA and 4x SGSS with virtually no hit at all, but even 2x MSAA and 2x SGSS in P3d means I have to turn off VC shadowing to get reasonable performance.

 

Shimmering is also a factor in P3d. Using identical settings there are visible shimmers in P3d's VCs compared with FSX. There is no doubt that to get the same detail and shimmer free look you have to spend more on hardware in P3d compared with FSX.

 

Central to the above is for P3d to find a way to provide more flexibility on options and to work with Nvidia so that Inspector settings can help with optimisation.

 

To make P3d more attractive to new users, those options - offered as sliders or switches switches in the GUI - should be similar to those provided by Steves brilliant DX10 fixer.

 

Meantime a lot of people are running both sims and they will continue to do so until some developers uniformly stop charging ridiculous amounts for crossover products by calling them "professional" (a euphemism for absolutely nothing!). While aircraft do have to be adjusted in many cases, they don't need to be completely re-designed and I think it is a shame that some authors are seeking full price for what looks to be exploitative reasons. Well done Aerosoft for not doing this with its Airbus series.

 

I don't think it's fair to compare the base price of P3d to the sale price of FSX-SE. The latter is a mass-market exercise designed to sell at supermarket prices with a view to selling DLC. P3d will never be, and doesn't intend to be, a mass market "game".

[gmoneyprs 2]

One thing that no one seems to mention is that when P3D inevitably breaks some of the addons (which is fine; it's a work-in-progress), some developers don't ever seem to circle back and fix their "P3Dv2.X" releases. For example, an airport may have been released on or about v2.3 but since v2.4 or v2.5 have been released, the effects, lighting, etc. have been broken and the developer has moved on...

[AviatorMoser 353]

P3d can look breathtakingly beautiful in some sceneries. It offers a much more vibrant colour and shade spectrum. You can tell this because you actually have to adjust FSX monitors or screen colours in Nvidia Control panel after running P3d because using the same settings makes FSX look washed out and bland whereas P3d looks alive.

 

This I liked about Prepar3d, so after I was done testing P3D, I downloaded SweetFX to add more vibrancy and HDR to FSX. Looks much colorful now.

[willywonka 36]

This I liked about Prepar3d, so after I was done testing P3D, I downloaded SweetFX to add more vibrancy and HDR to FSX. Looks much colorful now.

The difference is that HDR in FSX can be mightily unstable!

[BrianG 12]

I don't have enough interest in this hobby to spend anymore money and time on new addons or platforms, only to be momentarily wowed by the "newness factor," then bored again after a couple days, only with a much lighter wallet.

I fell into that trap spending lots of $$ hoping something new and promising would spark my interest as it did when I was new to all this. New addons, platforms, utilities, etc.... hold my interest less and less as time goes on. Haven't fired up my sim in months. So I'll stay with my FSX that I never turn on anyway.

But I enjoy reading Avsim in place of the hobby itself. So with that said, I thank the OP for this thread. Makes interesting and fun reading.

 

Best,

Brian

[robert young 2,897]

More vibrancy to FSX? Why!! That's what kept me from moving on from FS9. It's so OVER colourful and fake. And P3D is more so again? No thanks.

 

I've flown in real life - up to solo Nav flights - and can say two things. One, if you hadve asked me about 'cockpit shadows' after a flight in the Piper Warrior, I would've said...um....what shadows? Can't ever remember if there were any so I don't rate that essential.

 

And the colour and visuals displayed by FS9 for terrain - especially using GEPro or Evo - feel far more natural then FSX ever has. Lower resolution and all. Which means not a lot either in the scheme of things.

 

 

Sounds like P3D is a dud.

 

Hi Jon,

 

I don't think "vibrant" actually means over-colourful or over-saturated and I didn't mean that at all. What I meant was that P3d demonstrates a much higher colour and shade dynamic range, and that is achieved without the somewhat artificially imposed contrast and saturation imposed by things like HDR or bloom, which I personally find very artificial, unless it is tweaked carefully to look more subtle. You can turn down saturation and contrast on your monitor so that any sim is less saturated in over-done colour.

 

The perception of shade and shadow in real aircraft can be suspended when you are concentrating on flying (in sunshine) because the eyes adapt. On a flat 2d screen, the shadowing is much more obvious when it appears. If you have any doubt how clear shadows are in a real cockpit have a look at this video:

 

[Wobbie 940]

A few things that one tends to forget:

1. P3D is NOT an upgrade of FSX/FSX:SE

It MUST be regarded as a totally separate & 'new' sim, where there might, I repeat, might be some add-on compatibilities with those of FSX/FSX:SE

Have we all forgotten the move from FS9 to FSX, & the moaning that went on with compatibility issues?

 

2. Do not compare Steam's special pricing with normal pricing! We all know, or should be understanding of marketing?

 

3. Do realise that FSX as we know it, is dead & buried.. Long live FSX:SE!

 

4. Of course, we also must realise that FSX:SE is marketed as a game by Steam, & as a training tool by Dovetail!

Rob, I was just wondering how Steam's reduction/special pricings on the add-ons affect the developers? They obviously have to take a knock & have no negotiations as to their renumeration?

(a 50% knock?)

If that is so, then I do so appeciate your disgust with their treatment.

[aceridgey 330]

Don't get me wrong but I think a lot of the nay sayers are people who have never sat with a copy on their harddrives. It seems like some of you are basing opinion on YT videos etc. (Remember how much video capture effect performance?)

 

I am now on Steves DX10 fixer and doing the scenerios of a gatwick circuit in the 777 again and again and again,,.

 

To be at the moment p3d has better performance and much more vibrant colour (DX11 is much better than DX10)

[Tomaz Drnovsek 441]

I recently switched from FSX to P3D after I upgraded my system (4790k + GTX970). I must say I'm very happy with my decision. Of course, there are a few things that bother me.

 

1. No exclusive full screen mode therefore no 1/2 refresh rate sync. Because of that I get some sort of microstutters, especially when turning or looking through the side window even though I get 50+ FPS. I got the same thing in FSX but managed to eliminate them with 1/2 refresh rate sync. Right now I doubt we'll ever get this in P3D which is disappointing.

 

2. Some companies charging a lot of money for the exactly same product. I'm really disappointed in PMDG and A2A (because I own a lot of their products). They won't hesitate to give you reasons why they are doing this (it's for professional use yada yada yada) but those reasons don't make much sense since a lot of other companies are offering upgrade paths or even give free updates. I know they are a business but I can't loose the feeling they took advantage of the situation.. on our expense. I'm not saying they should give P3D versions for free.. a reasonable upgrade fee would be nice. To buy the whole PMDG fleet once again.. well, do the math.

 

3. We (flight sim community) are not the target market for P3D therefore our opinions and wishes don't matter. I was reminded of that several times when discussing exclusive full screen mode and the lack of it, for example.

 

But again. Even knowing all that I'm, as I already said, very happy with my decision to switch.

[Christopher Low 5,433]

I completely agree regarding the P3D pricing issue. Whilst I do not know the licensing issues surrounding the P3D version of the NGX, I was somewhat disappointed that I had to pay the same amount of money all over again for the base package and the expansion pack (since the 600 and 700 are the ones that I am most interested in). Maybe it had something to do with their Boeing license? Whatever the case may be, I was rather hoping that I could have exchanged my FSX license for a P3D license at a reduced cost. It was never going to be a deal breaker for me, but then I do not need any other PMDG products at this moment in time. Obviously the total cost for others will be rather steep if they also want the 777 and JS41.

 

It's worth noting that the current version of the P3D 737NGX is advertised as "for personal use only". Quite interesting with respect to the "full price because it's for professional use" discussion.

[Wobbie 940]

I say again, regard P3D as a separate sim! It is NOT an upgrade to FSX. How on earth can one expext a discount for 'upgrading'?

It is NOT, unlike other sims, sold as a game, so you must expect a difference as to marketing of add-ons.

[Tomaz Drnovsek 441]

I say again, regard P3D as a separate sim! It is NOT an upgrade to FSX. How on earth can one expext a discount for 'upgrading'?

It is NOT, unlike other sims, sold as a game, so you must expect a difference as to marketing of add-ons.

 

I agree it's not the same sim but the addons they are selling are, in most part, exactly the same. All they did was to make the installer point, instead to FSX folder, to P3D folder.

Some developers are not sharing your opinion since they are offering upgrade prices.

[IFR7700 228]

Until I see a thoughtful, unbiased comparison. from a user who knows what they are doing. who has run DX10 and FSX, and P3D, I'll stay with my FSX (DX10).  I've never been happier with a simulator and mine looks damn good at the present time.  I bought FSX SE because it was on sale for $5, but it is sitting in a corner, probably never to be used.

 

I'm still not happy with the P3D EULA, I feel like I'm being manipulated.  I don't like that.

 

If Steve had not developed the DX10 "fixer", perhaps I would have a different mindset.  Thanks again, Steve.

[Anxu00 176]

I say again, regard P3D as a separate sim! It is NOT an upgrade to FSX. How on earth can one expext a discount for 'upgrading'?

It is NOT, unlike other sims, sold as a game, so you must expect a difference as to marketing of add-ons.

PMDG is treating P3D like Windows versus Mac OS.  Separate platforms separate price.  Would you go to MS and ask for a discount if you have bought an Office license for windows but now on the Mac OS?  The P3D version of the 737 and 777 are native and trust me, because P3Dv2 is evolving, it will cost PMDG much more to support versus FSX, FSX-SE.  You paid what you want to pay, may be some day I will wake up and wonder what's the H* did I just plunk a pile of money on, but for the moment at least I can concentrate on flying versus tweaking and wondering why 1000 of HW investment was all bull with FSX and DX9, which is like ancient.  Aside from my new GTX980, my i7-2700k CPU is almost 4 years old, ancient but still works fine.  This hobby is way too expensive, but compare to the real cost of a PPL and airplane renting or owning, I would say it's still way cheaper to get my flying fix ;-)