I have noted good and bad comments reference the new release, and the positives seem to be lighting and aircraft models, I just wonder if DTG had made FSX-SE 64 bit including all the features it had, even including the old default a/c would everybody been happier, as really the only problem people seem to have with it was vas related, all the other limitatioins were got round by ectremely clever external developers, andespecially under the constraint of 32 bit application. I think the danger may be now that it is 64 bit the constraints are off and there may be a danger of bloating exceeding Ram.

33 minutes ago, changi11 said:

all the other limitatioins were got round by ectremely clever external developers

Well, no, not all. The horrible way the scenery works and loads is still there in FSW. Things popping up and morphing, it's totally immersion killing. And while FSW is 64 bit things still pop up and morph and change and Dovetail even LOWERED the default LOD...! But at the same time I get your point: I do indeed think that a lot of people would have been very happy is FSW would have been FSX at 64 bit and nothing more. Unfortunately they changed things (not always for the better) and even removed very basic functions. Which I find very odd.

They really need to add the G effects or head bob effects back into the cockpit. Its a minor thing but as their brilliant rain effect show, its minor things that make a huge difference. 

They really need to add the head bob effects back into the cockpit. Its a minor thing but as their brilliant rain effect show, its minor things that make a huge difference. 

Jeroen I totally agree  about the scenery, but for us that have P3D,FSX, etc we have got used to the scenery, maybe it was a tall order to have a new scenery engine I just think that if somebody introduces a new flightsim it should be groundbreaking, I'm not too worried about the cost considering how much I have spent since 1983 if it is a major improvement, we will see no doubt.

JohnH90 things like g-force and head movement could be added easily as long as developers have easy access.

Tony

Apologies for the double post, i realised the two were different things. I was getting more at the head movement. Sorry but small stuff like that should be in from the start in my opinion. I really do hope DTG the best, im a massive fan of train sim and as much as people shoot it down i think its great. Lets see how this goes. I got my refund but i may purchase if i see improvement.

Textures do seem to load faster. Least the cockpit and external plane textures. There used to be a fallback texture used when the textures weren't completely loaded. Least in FSX.

Perhaps since it's 64-bit, they just keep that in memory now, instead of constantly loading and unloading it when you fly.

It is lod radius and texture popping and bloom effect on scenery thats a disapointment, I would have been very impressed if they had included vector coastlines it certainly would have added to the realism.

26 minutes ago, changi11 said:

we have got used to the scenery

Yes. True. But pardon my language and it is not meant personally but that is STUPID. Why settle for something that is, let's face it, crap while you can get something better?! Why do so many FSX-based simmers settle for mediocracy? If you don't demand more you will never get it. Of course I am happy for everyone who is happy with the outdated FSX-way of dealing with scenery that FSX-based sim offers but I sure am not happy with that.

Jeroen it was'nt taken personally, if it helps to understand my thinking I have P3d, Aerofly Fs2, X-plane 10-11, so Fsw is only a looksee for the future possibly. What I personally want is excellent lighting and scenery visuals, good 3d cockpits, and AI. The onl;y way I can get all these is with 3 simulators at the moment, but I live in hope.

Tony

1 hour ago, changi11 said:

I have noted good and bad comments reference the new release, and the positives seem to be lighting and aircraft models, I just wonder if DTG had made FSX-SE 64 bit including all the features it had, even including the old default a/c would everybody been happier, as really the only problem people seem to have with it was vas related, all the other limitatioins were got round by ectremely clever external developers, andespecially under the constraint of 32 bit application. I think the danger may be now that it is 64 bit the constraints are off and there may be a danger of bloating exceeding Ram.

There is no danger of bloating that exceeds RAM in a 64-bit application, unless the sim just doesn't allow full use of the memory.

Remember, 64-bit is not just a doubling of address space compared to 32-bit; it's mahoosively more address space to work with. If you have the chips installed to support it.

For reference, the 64-bit sim I mostly fly uses the vastly larger amount of RAM mainly for scenery pre-loading, and to handle high and ultra-high resolution terrain mesh. The flight model, weather, aircraft plugins and high-res aircraft textures are just piddling around in the lower 8 gigabytes of RAM.

Even if those things get more complex in the future, it's not going to be a major stressor for RAM space. Not with Windows 10 Home supporting 128 GB, and Windows 10 Pro supporting 2 Terabytes of RAM. And that's not even the theoretical limit with a 64-bit address space; it's just what current Windows versions support.

Current 64-bit flight sims don't use anywhere near that much RAM. I haven't seen a need to have more than 32 GB of RAM in my current system for XP11, mainly for UHD terrain mesh, but also for headroom with other programs running in the background. But that huge address space is there in the operating system if we need it in the future. All 64-bit flight sims should support add-ons fully using that address space.