Aerofly FS 2 has two drawbacks

[Guest]

Drawback 1

 

There isn't much to do about it on the various forums. Due to real life obligations I often spend more time on the various forums than I do actually flying. With FSX, P3D and XP11 this wasn't a problem at all: enough to talk about! I could enjoy myself online all day long. However, hardly anyone is talking about Aerofly FS 2 and that's a shame. Not only because it makes my days boring :wink: but also because it is worth being talked about.

 

Drawback 2

 

Smoothness is all that counts in flightsims. To me an fps above 20 in FSX/P3D/XP11 was quite nice already and when it was around 30 it was smooth to me. I was very happy that an fps 30 was smooth to me because usually fps didn't get much higher. However, you can throw all that 30 fps=smooth crap out of the window because I'm not buying it anymore... Boy, did I fool myself. Now I have experienced what REAL smoothness is in Aerofly FS 2 the other sims seriously don't cut it for me anymore... I started XP11 today and lowered really all kinds of settings and still it didn't become as utterly totally smooth as AFS2 is... which is a bummer because due to this my old sims can hardly satisfy me anymore now...! They look jerky and stuttering in comparison! The last few days I've only been flying the default Aerofly FS 2 Airbus in the southwest US and, yes, of course a lot of things are lacking but that smoothness... seriously... what a difference does it make. And despite its limitations it all looks beautiful, the sun is really shining out there, during descent the mountains glide by as if they are real... Screw that 30 fps=smooth... 120 fps: THAT'S smooth!

[Chocorua 112]

Great post, lol.

[FlyIce 354]

I just discovered there is at least one place you can go 60fp in XP11 at max setting with nice scenery: LPMA. I downloaded the island scenery from X-plane.org.

 

I totally agree with you. The instance I hit full 60fps v-sync, I was into a different world - the real world. The glass smooth fps coupled with photo-real scenery + 3D autogen is incredible. 

 

But unless you have a 120fps monitor 60fps is as high as most people can experience. My old 4K TV supposedly can do 1080 at 120fps, but I haven't figured out how to make it do.

[Guest Mik75]

I wish you the best of fun, and many hours of enjoyment in your new sim!

[Simmo W 24]

Yeah J, im lovimg it too, so schmooooth!! And quick to load. I've barely flown any sims the last couple of yrs, but this sim has brought me back

[MarkW 1,490]

Isn't part of the high frames simply the lack of addon high end airports, aircraft, etc, etc.  If ( and I think its a big if) that all gets added we will probably just be back at the same place.

[Arthur42417 193]

Isn't part of the high frames simply the lack of addon high end airports, aircraft, etc, etc.  If ( and I think its a big if) that all gets added we will probably just be back at the same place.

take away traffic, atc, weather, ai, etc from fsx/p3d and xp11............and you get Aerofly FS3 with 1000fps   :smile: 

[Ed_S_Pilot 227]

Isn't part of the high frames simply the lack of addon high end airports, aircraft, etc, etc.  If ( and I think its a big if) that all gets added we will probably just be back at the same place.

 

 

Thats what i was thinking today. After AF2 starts getting more integrated stuff will it start bogging down? 

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

There are probably some differences in efficiencies for the graphics engines employed by the various flight sims but they all have to contend with Windows and the associated video driver for the specific hardware. It's the addons and IQ settings that make a big difference.

[Guest]

Isn't part of the high frames simply the lack of addon high end airports, aircraft, etc, etc. 

 

 

Of course it is! You don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure that one out. :wink: And I know things will change in the future. However, specially compared to FSX/P3D the core engine simply is more up to date and future proof. The way FSX/P3D for instance loads scenery simply sucks and that difference will stay. I also know the devs like to make all addons developed by others more a part of the core sim itself, intergrate them more tightly or so, and I think performance will benefit from that too. But apart from all that: the question is if everything that FSX/P3D/XP11 offer will ever be in Aerofly FS 2. One of the important things the devs wanted is a sim that you can quickly start, set up and fly in. It serves a different purpose than other sims. I don't need everything there is in other sims in AFS2. But we'll see how it all turns out! The fact that this is the newest flightsim engine around helps a lot. 

[harrry 322]

It ses not support virtual airlines so not worth flying

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

Newest is not necessarily most advanced. I continue to shake my head at the comments about graphics engines because none of us has access to the actual code. It's a wonderful topic about which to speculate.

[Guest]

Newest is not necessarily most advanced. I continue to shake my head at the comments about graphics engines because none of us has access to the actual code. It's a wonderful topic about which to speculate.

 

 

You've got a point there.  :wink: Still, one of the AFS2 devs said 'I think the FSLabs A320 would run quite a bit smoother on the Aerofly FS 2 engine'. Which is of course interesting.

[nealmac 260]

Good thread Jeroen. And you are absolutely correct, framerate is everything. No exceptions. You can have all the addons and tweaks in the world with sliders maxed out to the right, but if you have a slideshow, it's all for nothing.

 

I'm going to be honest, I haven't tried AF2. I'm very interested in it though. I follow this forum quite a bit but I haven't posted in it until now. I love the fact that people are reporting that it runs smoother than P3D/FSX even on mediocre systems. There's only 2 things putting me off right now, and they are 1) the lack of places to fly and 2) the lack of addons. However, it's very early days yet and I'm sure this will improve in time. It looks like a sim with a promising future.

[Guest]

I love the fact that people are reporting that it runs smoother than P3D/FSX even on mediocre systems. There's only 2 things putting me off right now, and they are 1) the lack of places to fly and 2) the lack of addons. However, it's very early days yet and I'm sure this will improve in time. It looks like a sim with a promising future.

 

As others have hinted already: the two things that put you off right now are the same two things that may perhaps stop things from running smooth... :wink: But I'd like to look at if from the positive side (unlike I did in the beginning LOL) and I also think it is a sim with a promising future. Right now I am flying from KPHX to KLAX in the Airbus (in managed mode) and the world looks beautiful down there (not so amazing with photoreal at FL360). As I said elsewhere, the default planes at least LOOK awesome (unlike some default planes in other sims), And with LiveATC in the background it kinda feels okay to me for now.  :wink: