June 24, 20169 yr I agree with everyone else, P3D is the way to go, especially if you have a new machine you are building. With these shader tweaks we've gotten the last few months, it looks absolutely fantastic. Allen, flight sim lover and AA-5 Traveler owner
June 25, 20169 yr No regrets at all. As a matter of fact I have FSX on a WD Raptor drive....I am thinking of formatting the drive as I can't remember the last time I ran FSX. CK I still run with FSX (DX10 Steve's Fixer), as I really like the waves changing with wind direction. Having said that though, I really do use most of the time now, P3D v3.2.3 as the main M.S. based platform. It runs great, looks great (Orbx Central v2.0) and it is the first version that I can say, has me using it more than even a 50/50 use-of-time for both FSX and P3D. No regrets at all. I could delete FSX, but with such cheap storage these days...I don't see why I would. Sometimes, you just want to fly something else for a change-up... Ses
June 25, 20169 yr Running P3D v3.2 Professional for about 2 months now. Equal or better than FSX in every respect. Handed my FSX setup down to my kids, will never go back . Just go easy on the eye candy (sliders) as it is still 32bit and OOM (VAS limitations) are ever present if you over do it. Some are the default aircraft are a bit of a joke though, almost insulted that LM sees it fit to include them. GregH Intel Core i7 14700K / Palit RTX4070Ti Super OC / Corsair 32GB DDR5 6000 MHz / MSI Z790 M/board / Corsair NVMe 9500 read, 8500 write / Corsair PSU1200W / CH Products Yoke, Pedals & Quad; Airbus Side Stick, Airbus Quadrant / TrackIR, 32” 4K 144hz 1ms Monitor
June 25, 20169 yr Sounds exactly the same as FSX. Think I'll stick with fs9... FS9 and FSX convinced me to quit flying PC flight sims until MS Flight came out. When Flight was ditched I quit again until P3D 2.5. To me FS9 and FSX are like living a horror story compared to P3D.
June 25, 20169 yr I fly the Aeroworx King Air, iFly 737/747 in fs9 that hit the actual aircraft numbers perfectly. It's a Flight simulation. Not kids look at how pretty the cartoon graphics and avatar guy looks simulation. So makes no difference to me as long as the aircraft I fly perform as to the real thing. Probably just me, I don't like using windows 95 anymore either.
June 25, 20169 yr Sounds exactly the same as FSX. Think I'll stick with fs9... I hear FS2002 is even better! Cheers, Bert AMD Ryzen 5900X, 32 GB RAM, RTX 3080 Ti, Windows 11 Home 64 bit, MSFS 2024
June 25, 20169 yr Shadows around trees? Great for the train simulation guys out there I guess.... How about shadows under clouds or Rayleigh scattering, guess you don't miss those either in FS9 Jon. Lets face it, Flight simulation has moved on and for the better. Enjoy your 256x256 ground textures and limited detailed rendering distances, I think the rest of us will be happy for you.
June 25, 20169 yr All those shadows look over done. No loss. I do actually. My 256 look better then my 1024 orbx textures. And FSX ALWAYS overdid the distance rendering. Too unnatural. As you seen in the screens, FS9 perfectly replicates the realistic horizon and distance. Only X-plans betters it. The other two fall far short in that regard. Shame, they could've been something. But like you said, it IS a 'Flight simulation'. And exactly how I use it. The only thing I saw FS9 simulate well in the many 1,000's of hours I flew it, was crashes to desktop, planes falling through holes in runway and taxiways, lockups, and stutters, and flying into the middle of large clouds and being able to clearly see the ground in the middle of the cloud. Other than that it wasn't bad in it's day, which is long gone.
June 25, 20169 yr Having read that, I'd go so far as to say you've never owned fs9 at all. I've never known that by anybody anywhere anytime. Only thing I've seen close to the above is when I read the FSX/p3d boards. Yep, advancement indeed... Oh please. Don't make up stuff trying to prove your point that an obsolete piece of software that most simmers moved away from years ago, is still viable today. And don't accuse me of lying trying to defend your silly position either. If you don't like P3D, why are you hanging out on this forum by the way, just to churn up discord?
June 25, 20169 yr FS9 perfectly replicates the realistic horizon and distance. Only X-plans betters it. The other two fall far short in that regard. Not any more Jon, P3D now has Rayleigh scattering just like Xplane, you should really keep up with developments, and the hobby just keeps moving forward, better textures, weather, 3rd party aircraft. Check this out Jon
June 25, 20169 yr Oh, dear Lord...... Christopher Low AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D CPU / 64GB DDR5-6000 RAM / 12GB Nvidia RTX 4070 Super GPU / Gigabyte X870E Aorus Elite Wifi 7 / 1+2TB Samsung Evo Plus M2 Nvme UK2000 Beta Tester
June 25, 20169 yr Well, please. Don't make up stuff trying to prove your point that an obsolete piece of software that most simmers moved away from years ago, is still viable today. And don't accuse me of lying trying to defend your silly position. If you don't like P3D, why are you hanging out on this forum by the way, just to churn up discord? Bob, it's our fault for feeding him, just humour him and he will go away.
June 25, 20169 yr Anyway, let the guy fly FS9! For me (flying MSFS since FS5.0), P3D v3 is the most feature rich - I've got no regrets...I've managed to port most FSX addons to it I'd say you need a relatively modern PC to run it well (very subjective), but all in all it runs well on my 2500k 4ghz / GTX 970 I'd also check out XP10 - beats out P3D in some areas (and lacks in others) | My Liveries | FAA ZMP | PPL ASEL | | Windows 11 | MSI Z690 Tomahawk | 12700K 4.7GHz | MSI RTX 4080 | 64GB 6000 MHz DDR5 | 500GB Samsung 860 Evo SSD | 2x 2TB Samsung 970 Evo M.2 | EVGA 850W Gold | Corsair 5000X | HP G2 (VR) / LG 27" 1440p |
June 25, 20169 yr That is one of the most unappealing vids I've seen. My fs9 smashes that into next week. Of course it does Jon, we are all pleased for you really.
Create an account or sign in to comment