32 minutes ago, J van E said:

It simply is one of the biggest problem of the P3D engine. And it will stay a problem until LM changes the engine. The way scenery works in P3D is one of the reasons I am flying in another sim now. 

Don’t have this issue. Just nearby the aircraft when turning sharp it needs 2-3 seconds to catch up..

32 minutes ago, GSalden said:

Don’t have this issue. Just nearby the aircraft when turning sharp it needs 2-3 seconds to catch up..

Ah, yes, I should correct myself: I was talking about scenery loading late and close by or catching up, not scenery staying blurry all the time. I also never had scenery staying blurry forever. The obvious late loading of scenery is one of the reasons I fly another sim now.

Edited July 31, 20187 yr by Guest

Did anyone report this to LM , as I do not see a thread about this...?

Yes there is a thread about autogen loading which could be an issue also regarding texture loading...

http://www.prepar3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6312&t=130120

Not sure if this is related...

Edited July 31, 20187 yr by awf

Yeah ... great ... typical LM. Deny the problem for YEARS then lock the thread when it reaches 5 pages.

The so-called "new" lighting model is pretty porked as well. Most other sims (and even "War Thunder") have better aircraft lighting than P3D.

To be honest, I think P3D is rapidly losing ground against its primary competition (AFS2 and XP11). It wouldn't surprise me if P3D joins the other "dead ducks" (FSW etc.) in a year or so's time. They seem to spend months tweaking irrelevant details in the GUI but leave the core code alone.

3 minutes ago, Adamski_NZ said:

Yeah ... great ... typical LM. Deny the problem for YEARS then lock the thread when it reaches 5 pages.

The so-called "new" lighting model is pretty porked as well. Most other sims (and even "War Thunder") have better aircraft lighting than P3D.

To be honest, I think P3D is rapidly losing ground against its primary competition (AFS2 and XP11). It wouldn't surprise me if P3D joins the other "dead ducks" (FSW etc.) in a year or so's time. They seem to spend months tweaking irrelevant details in the GUI but leave the core code alone.

While I agree with you completely Adam, is it not really to do with the primary purpose of the platform which prioritizes their attention?

 P3D is primarily a training platform for commercial and military outfits and on that basis, aesthetics and lighting is not particularly a priority.  XP11, AFS2 are pleasure platforms and therefore address - as a priority item - what casual flightsimmers find appealing.  I think this is the reason behind the inertia we are seeing.

27 minutes ago, ErichB said:

While I agree with you completely Adam, is it not really to do with the primary purpose of the platform which prioritizes their attention?

 P3D is primarily a training platform for commercial and military outfits and on that basis, aesthetics and lighting is not particularly a priority.  XP11, AFS2 are pleasure platforms and therefore address - as a priority item - what casual flightsimmers find appealing.  I think this is the reason behind the inertia we are seeing.

At the risk of derailing this thread further 😁 I agree with you ... BUT .. that begs the question as to why they allowed the larger sim community access to the product.

Anyway - as someone in the LM forum pointed out - if P3D is used in some sort of a weapons simulation, you'd need to see the target wouldn't you?

30 minutes ago, ErichB said:

While I agree with you completely Adam, is it not really to do with the primary purpose of the platform which prioritizes their attention?

 P3D is primarily a training platform for commercial and military outfits and on that basis, aesthetics and lighting is not particularly a priority.  XP11, AFS2 are pleasure platforms and therefore address - as a priority item - what casual flightsimmers find appealing.  I think this is the reason behind the inertia we are seeing.

Plus : all professional Flightsims use multiple highend pc’s for 1 view per pc instead of multiple views per pc .

And they do not have all the eyecandy that we are having. 

They are focused on procedures and not sightseeing...

39 minutes ago, Adamski_NZ said:

To be honest, I think P3D is rapidly losing ground against its primary competition (AFS2 and XP11). It wouldn't surprise me if P3D joins the other "dead ducks" (FSW etc.) in a year or so's time.

v4 will be a "dead duck" after v5 is released. 😀

2 minutes ago, Adamski_NZ said:

Anyway - as someone in the LM forum pointed out - if P3D is used in some sort of a weapons simulation, you'd need to see the target wouldn't you?

2 minutes ago, GSalden said:

And they do not have all the eyecandy that we are having. 

They are focused on procedures and not sightseeing...

Precisely my point.  General aethetics, autogen and lighting are not priority items.

1 hour ago, ErichB said:

P3D is primarily a training platform for commercial and military outfits and on that basis, aesthetics and lighting is not particularly a priority.

 

32 minutes ago, GSalden said:

And they do not have all the eyecandy that we are having. 

They are focused on procedures and not sightseeing...

 

29 minutes ago, ErichB said:

Precisely my point.  General aethetics, autogen and lighting are not priority items.

Then why are 99% (if not 100%) of the improvements that LM has made over the 'FSX code' related to aesthetics, graphics, lighting, etc...? Everything LM has done so far has been about visuals and performance. Name me one thing that they added that has to do with the actual simulation of flight (apart from of course some airplanes, which btw seem to be added for simmers like us because I can't imagine a real pilot learning to fly a plane in one of those default planes). 

If these things aren't priority... what the hell is?!?

Edited July 31, 20187 yr by Guest

43 minutes ago, J van E said:

Name me one thing that they added that has to do with the actual simulation of flight

That's a fair point.

43 minutes ago, J van E said:

Then why are 99% (if not 100%) of the improvements that LM has made over the 'FSX code' related to aesthetics, graphics, lighting, etc...?

You win . 

These are improvements from our perspective though - and lets be honest - alot of improvement was desperately needed  - otherwise we would all be in another sandbox. 

It doesn't change the fact that their client priorities will, by the nature of their end goal, be different - although we would ultimately see benefit.

Having said that, I just had one of the best weekends of simming in a long time.  Three long-hauls (>8 hours each), no sim crashes, no autogen issues, superb lighting (PTA).  I'm pretty happy that 4.3 has settled down for me.

3 hours ago, J van E said:

 

 

Then why are 99% (if not 100%) of the improvements that LM has made over the 'FSX code' related to aesthetics, graphics, lighting, etc...? Everything LM has done so far has been about visuals and performance. Name me one thing that they added that has to do with the actual simulation of flight (apart from of course some airplanes, which btw seem to be added for simmers like us because I can't imagine a real pilot learning to fly a plane in one of those default planes). 

If these things aren't priority... what the hell is?!?

In the Professional world they do not use all those addons that make it look more real , like photoscenery or custom AG packages.

Less addons = less problems = smoother performance 😎

Edited July 31, 20187 yr by GSalden

1 hour ago, GSalden said:

In the Professional world they do not use all those addons that make it look more real , like photoscenery or custom AG packages.

Less addons = less problems = smoother performance 😎

Er... I am not sure what that has to do with what I said...? 😉 Could well be that the pro world doesn't use all those addons but graphics and (related) performance have been the only things LM has been working on. So those clearly ARE the priority. I don't see anything that LM has done that concerns 'procedures': it has been all about 'sightseeing' (meaning graphics).