A well made and very interesting first look video!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mo3N9ryiRhM

Good video. I was really surprised to that the PC the reviewer used is more capable than my own, better CPU, GPU and much more ram, yet I get constantly higher frame rates in P3D  with more AI traffic, AS 16,Orbx FTX scenery,  A2A aircraft or Helicopters, Q400, F1 GTN, etc. etc.  Wasn't impressed at all with the performance of something that quite frankly,, at times doesn't look as good as FSX, Gama doesn't look right, black level way to high, 

8 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

Good video. I was really surprised to that the PC the reviewer used is more capable than my own, better CPU, GPU and much more ram, yet I get constantly higher frame rates in P3D  with more AI traffic, AS 16,Orbx FTX scenery,  A2A aircraft or Helicopters, Q400, F1 GTN, etc. etc.  Wasn't impressed at all with the performance of something that quite frankly,, at times doesn't look as good as FSX, Gama doesn't look right, black level way to high, 

Love glasses :-)

2 hours ago, Tim-HH said:

A well made and very interesting first look video!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mo3N9ryiRhM

Interesting video indeed. Now I know for certain I won't eve try it.

I have just had a conversation on FB with other guys who tried my suggestion to raise the LOD to 6.500000. They were actually pleased and surprised as to how this greatly improved their visual experience with negligible to zero impact on performance compared to the default setting. This is one of the expected benefits of 64 bits. Raising the LOD bar on 32 bit always had a predictable impact on performance, meaning lower FPS with microstutters and minutes of survival before an OOM.
I have just tried the Sandane mission with the DA-42 which ends in Koblenz, Germany. Not only the default terrain is incomparably better than FSX thanks to the Orbx addition, but I have noticed a great leap forward also compared to the same mission in Flight School.
A friend of mine posted minutes ago a screenshot in another forum which proves how, unlike FSX, the load now is mostly put on the GPU instead of on the CPU.
Opinions are opinions, tastes are tastes, they are not made to be discussed, only accepted. But to say that FSW is looking worse than FSX is simply untrue. A lot of work has been made.

14 minutes ago, barrel_owl said:

But to say that FSW is looking worse than FSX is simply untrue. A lot of work has been made.

The problem here is that even if it looked as 'good' as FSX does, it still won't do it for me. Each has their own preferences and for me generic landclass scenery is something of the past. What I am trying to say is that it's not good enough that FSW equals or slightly surpasses FSX. It should have blown FSW out of the water. Name me ANY regular game that is being released today that is looking 'as good' or slightly better than any game that has been released in 2007. There are none. The world has moved ahead but a great part of the flightsims has stayed behind. Compare any 2007 game to any similar 2017 game and you will see a difference. Compare FSX with FSW and you will see a change in color (not always for the better) and raindrops (to put it a bit harsh). It just isn't enough for a flightsim that has been announced as NEW and THE FUTURE. Marketing blah blah blah.

18 minutes ago, J van E said:

The problem here is that even if it looked as 'good' as FSX does, it still won't do it for me. Each has their own preferences and for me generic landclass scenery is something of the past. What I am trying to say is that it's not good enough that FSW equals or slightly surpasses FSX. It should have blown FSW out of the water. Name me ANY regular game that is being released today that is looking 'as good' or slightly better than any game that has been released in 2007. There are none. The world has moved ahead but a great part of the flightsims has stayed behind. Compare any 2007 game to any similar 2017 game and you will see a difference. Compare FSX with FSW and you will see a change in color (not always for the better) and raindrops (to put it a bit harsh). It just isn't enough for a flightsim that has been announced as NEW and THE FUTURE. Marketing blah blah blah.

The problem with all of your statements about FSW so far is that you are basing your conclusions on others' reports, videos and impressions instead of trying yourself the product and drawing your own conclusions based on your own experience. I am not suggesting you should buy or blindly love FSW, nor I am suggesting that you should believe me and not listen to other negative feedbacks. But - if I can tell you this is a friendly manner - if you had spent only one third of the time you have spent here in the last three days to express your negative views about FSW actually trying FSW, you certainly had a much more solid base of data now to draw your conclusions. Data and facts instead of pure assumptions and speculation.

Moreover, the "Compare any 2007 game to any similar 2017 game" argument simply does not add up here. You do not have to believe me, read again what Rob Ainscough replied to you yesterday about how different flight simulation is compared to other games like GTA V and why we will probably never enjoy such level of graphics in a flight simulator. Add to this that, as a niche, we can hardly hope for someone to show up and invest a lot of money to create a new worldwide simulation from zero with state-of-the-art technologies. This would require years, not to mention the time before developers would start releasing addons. There is a reason if after years we are still using FSX, P3D and X-Plane, even with their known limitations.

3 minutes ago, barrel_owl said:

The problem with all of your statements about FSW so far is that you are basing your conclusions on others' reports, videos and impressions instead of trying yourself the product and drawing your own conclusions based on your own experience. I am not suggesting you should buy or blindly love FSW, nor I am suggesting that you should believe me and not listen to other negative feedbacks. But - if I can tell you this is a friendly manner - if you had spent only one third of the time you have spent here in the last three days to express your negative views about FSW actually trying FSW, you certainly had a much more solid base of data now to draw your conclusions. Data and facts instead of pure assumptions and speculation.

Moreover, the "Compare any 2007 game to any similar 2017 game" argument simply does not add up here. You do not have to believe me, read again what Rob Ainscough replied to you yesterday about how different flight simulation is compared to other games like GTA V and why we will probably never enjoy such level of graphics in a flight simulator. Add to this that, as a niche, we can hardly hope for someone to show up and invest a lot of money to create a new worldwide simulation from zero with state-of-the-art technologies. This would require years, not to mention the time before developers would start releasing addons. There is a reason if after years we are still using FSX, P3D and X-Plane, even with their known limitations.

Food for thought....

16 minutes ago, barrel_owl said:

The problem with all of your statements about FSW so far is that you are basing your conclusions on others' reports, videos and impressions instead of trying yourself the product and drawing your own conclusions based on your own experience. I am not suggesting you should buy or blindly love FSW, nor I am suggesting that you should believe me and not listen to other negative feedbacks. But - if I can tell you this is a friendly manner - if you had spent only one third of the time you have spent here in the last three days to express your negative views about FSW actually trying FSW, you certainly had a much more solid base of data now to draw your conclusions. Data and facts instead of pure assumptions and speculation.

Fair enough. It's downloading now.

7 minutes ago, J van E said:

Fair enough. It's downloading now.

Wow. Thanks God we were not discussing about Samsung S8....

Edited May 20, 20179 yr by barrel_owl

1 hour ago, J van E said:

The problem here is that even if it looked as 'good' as FSX does, it still won't do it for me. Each has their own preferences and for me generic landclass scenery is something of the past. What I am trying to say is that it's not good enough that FSW equals or slightly surpasses FSX. It should have blown FSW out of the water. Name me ANY regular game that is being released today that is looking 'as good' or slightly better than any game that has been released in 2007. There are none. The world has moved ahead but a great part of the flightsims has stayed behind. Compare any 2007 game to any similar 2017 game and you will see a difference. Compare FSX with FSW and you will see a change in color (not always for the better) and raindrops (to put it a bit harsh). It just isn't enough for a flightsim that has been announced as NEW and THE FUTURE. Marketing blah blah blah.

I wish all you folks with the harsh criticisms would put things in perspective  You do realize how long ago DTG acquired the rights to the FSX code do you? If ten years ago, you have a point. Now you don't, as DTG has been working on this for a year or two. I think it's a lot better then the first release of that other FSX spin off, P3Dv1. Now that looked exactly like FSX and it took LM a couple of years to get to v3, which still resembles FSX a lot. (I'm talking about virgin installs here, so no addons). FSW is not even at v1, it's still in development, but that argument somehow won't come across. (I mean this besides the fact whether you like the FSX engine or not).

Edited May 20, 20179 yr by Rimshot

33 minutes ago, J van E said:

Fair enough. It's downloading now.

I'll be waiting for your biased judgement

1 hour ago, barrel_owl said:

Wow. Thanks God we were not discussing about Samsung S8....

Hm, well, I had rather bought an S8...  

Download has finished. Pretty quick. Hopefully I will have the time this evening to give it a go. I will try not to say anything about my findings before I gave it some serious time.

@J van E Looking forward to reading your thoughts

4 hours ago, J van E said:

Now I know for certain I won't eve try it.

++1