After a 5 minute flight, I can say that FSW is very nice.

I'm not sure why there's a large difference between what I'm experiencing and what others have stated, but this looks nothing like vanilla FSX; much nicer in all respects.

Anyway, back to checking out my new toy.

6 minutes ago, Raven9000 said:

 What exactly would you like them to consider? If a game  takes up whatever size it does with all its content  that's the size., Nothing to do about that . If you have a crappy Internet connection that's your problem to solve not  the game developer's or distribution platform's... 

There's no reason for that.  I started my download at 1201 and I'm at 15%, so yes, it might be helpful to look at breaking the download into pieces for lower bandwidth users.  Until you work for Valve or DTG, to make comments like this is uncalled for.  

Ive finally got the AA looking better through the usual methods and turned the LOD up in the CFG and it looks quite nice. Id love to see more FPS but considering the scenery density, its quite a smooth game. 

Has anyone tried dropping in some FSX scenery and adding it to, it looks like the folder structures are pretty much the same.

http://www.toposim.net/blog/2017/05/17/flightsim-world-and-toposim-continents/

After a 1 hour flight I like it. Good performance and nice looking planes and landscape. 

 

17 minutes ago, Raven9000 said:

 What exactly would you like them to consider? If a game  takes up whatever size it does with all its content  that's the size., Nothing to do about that . If you have a crappy Internet connection that's your problem to solve not  the game developer's or distribution platform's... 

Thanks for insightful comment. If it was intended to slap me down, well, you failed. Enjoy your day.

Not taken the plunge yet, may wait until the weekend to get more of a feel but the reception here seems to be on a three way split vote:

1. It's tripe.

2. DTG can do no wrong - best sim ever.

3. Ah well early access give them a chance.

With regard to #3, just bear in mind this is DTG we're talking about here. As a veteran train simmer bear in mind that Railworks still has many issues at it's core and in the DLC which have never been fixed. Train Sim world came out with serious optimisation issues and has physics issues that make the 10,000 tonne freights uphill in Notch 1 of Railworks look good. Now it may be this is an all new team with an entirely different mindset than the train sim devs, but I wouldn't count on it.

Also can those who have applied for a refund confirm this has been processed? My understanding is early access on Steam specifically excludes the possibility of getting your money back.

Though it's been a while, I do recall my first install and flight with FSX, coming from a long background of FS releases. It was different, blurry and no where near the much-loved FS9. Then it slowly grew on me as the hardware progressed.

Thus FSW startles me when I started it, but I did think that it looks better than Dovetail's Flight School. It's a different product, with a different look than FSX or P3D. But I'm more tolerant of change in my older years, strange, but true.

At "sliders far right" it blurs in the distance. Wow, just like FSX did/does, just like P3D does.

I flew the Vans RV-7 and it was enjoyable. Going to spot view and mouse-looking around, I see a different take on the world from what's been going on for the past 10 years. I think I may learn to like this new view and will resist the urge to have a negative view of either past, present or future. Each should be enjoyed for what they are.

Sorry guys, FPS are crap...just un-installed sticking with FSX SE!

49 minutes ago, JohnH90 said:

Did you manage to get the AA looking good? If so how?

Yes, just added fsw.exe to my existing P3D profile in nvidia inspector. I saw you managed too, in the second post. I can upload my NI profile if you want, but i guess you already have one. I like FSW has kept FSX structure becouse most of our settings / tweaks will work i belive(i'm going to test that now). 

I don't know about FPS complaints, mine are ok with high settings and PC which don't meet published requirements

Just trying out the missions. Not sure i'd call a pan pan on an engine failure! Its not too bad now i've messed around a bit. The sky colours are a bit disappointing but the ground stuff looks quite nice. Not bad for 20 quid, im going to keep this and see what happens in the next few months. Yea its not P3d with all of the add-ons etc but lets see.  

I don't think its too bad. I get better performance than on FSX, I always used to have a big FPS dip near the ground and this doesn't happen here. My PC is below recommended spec and I still get about 45 fps in clear weather and 25fps in foggy weather. The scenery looks ok. Can't work out how to start on the ramp, only on the runway! (and clues??). 

 

Certainly didn't blow me away like X Plane 11 has done (now that is a work of art!) but its a good starting point for a new strand of flight sim development probably for a more casual market than most folk on here. 

if you really want to see the beauty of this game ,take off in a stormy weather ,looks amazing 

6 minutes ago, littleterry said:

if you really want to see the beauty of this game ,take off in a stormy weather ,looks amazing 

Oh yea it does. Its almost as if the game was made for this setting. The lighting looks right in this mode. I just wished it looked as good in the other weather. 

I agree with the above two comments.    Certain areas of the sim have been well developed and are a leap for this core sim, much work needs to be done in other areas.   The T-Storm, rain, wind, and live camera effect is really good.   I have no performance hit with the spectacular rain on the plane effect - if they can continue to make class-leading advances in other areas of the sim, it will develop into something spectacular.   It will be interesting to see the upcoming developments in the next few months.

Edited May 18, 20179 yr by Barfly
typo