FSX-MS P3Ders: Understand this please!

[Opterix 58]

Hello,
(You might take this as an answer to this post

1. Can you imagine how many percent of the world's population can't or don't want to afford a 1080TI or at least a 1070 graphics card? Stuff like this - let's say gaming PC. Can you imagine even how many percent of USA's, GB's, French and German scholars and students can't or don't want to afford a gaming PC?
2. The people who still happily use their FSX have their reasons for this. And they have still found their compromises (or they use SimStarter or SceneryConfigEditor) to get sufficient fps and avoid OOM's.
3. Can you imagine a Porsche-driver (I don't think that P3D is a Porsche in relation to FSX, but if you like to hear this 😉 ) tells every car-neighbour in front of red traffic lights "Hey you, if you want to practise seriously car driving, then you need a Porsche", makes a hot wheel start and at the next red traffic lights you can meet him again, repeating his "Hey you . . . "
What would you think about this Porsche-driver?

Can you imagine a motortourism club? And can you imagine this Porsche-driver joining this club?
Surely every motortourism member will leave this club and join the bicycle-tourism club.
Bad times for the gasoline station and every car reparing station, if you understand what I mean.

4. And let me tell you this: in former times I was used to give my nephews, some friends and neighbours a FSX-box and a fotoreal scenery from Austria HD, France VFR or MegaSceneryEarth as a birthday-present. I even started giving presentations about flightsimming in clubs of friends at the club's annual meeting. You know there are a lot of clubs in Germany: hiking clubs, cycling clubs, cultural clubs, home associations and so on.
But I will stop this "marketing" for flightsimulation now and I can tell you why.
I'm pi__ed off because every new FSX-beginner gets told in _every_ FS-forum that FSX is old stuff, you need P3D, a better graphic card, a highpotential PC and OrbX-landclass-sceneries as basic equipment.
And when they follow these advices they are deeply disappointed that they hardly could find their village in the flightsim. In my screenshots they had found their own house and every attractions in the surroundings. This falls back to me. Why? They are disappointed and because they can't be angry about all these anonymous missionaries in the forums they are angry about me.
I don't want to loose friends anymore by convincing them that flightsimming could be a very nice hobby for them.

Summary: imho the FSX ist still a good flightsim to get a nice start in flightsimming: flight school, missions, FSX is available in a lot of languages, you get a lot of aircraft addons and a lot of photoreal sceneries in payware and freeware. And our community needs to get more (and younger) members. So please let the beginners enjoy their FSX for one year, two years or as long as they want to get "fixed" by flightsimming. When the time is ready they might change to another flightsim. If they want to.
Please help the beginners to get a most enjoyable FSX related to their interests, instead of telling them that they need another sim if they want to make serious flightsimming.
Show them the ways to avoid OOM's instead of telling them, that OOM's are 32bit inherent.
Tell them the about Highmemfix=1 and LOD_Radius (the only two necessary tweaks imho) instead of telling them, that you don't need to tweak with P3D.
Let them spend their money (and the money of their Grandparents, uncles and aunts) in photoreal sceneries (this is what the people expect in our days) instead of buying a new graphic card, new PC and landclass-sceneries. They will do this on their own if they like to do.

And always remember, please: the FSX-beginners are the customers of the future. If you want to have affordable FS-products in the future, you should not chase these customers of the future.
That means: to make FSX-beginners happy and satisfied with staying with FSX and therefore staying in flightsimulation should be the job of every developer, every publisher / vendor, every FS-magazine-editor, every forum owner and every member of the flightsim-community who wants to have good and affordable products in the future.  It's NOT the job of the elder FSX members who happily enjoy all these fine FSX-products of the past 12 years and who can easily live without FS-community, being bored and chased off by the P3D-missionaries over several years.   

I hope everybody got the idea and I'm not misunderstood.
Let everybody feel well and happy in our community
Peter

 

Edited November 5, 2018 by Opterix

[scottb613 1,188]

Hi Peter,

LOL - I can appreciate your sentiment... I was an FS9 holdout when people were telling me the same about FSX...

Specifically addressing the hardware requirements which I believe are a tad overrated - I've been running my P3D on an old Sandy 2700K@4.7Ghz and a GTX970 for years - with all the usual suspects of addons - and it does quite well - almost surprisingly so... While I haven't formally compared - I suspect the same hardware would not handle FSX this well... It's not your latest and greatest box by any means...

Regards,
Scott

[FDEdev 955]

Exactly.  Every P3D version runs better than FSX on identical (and barely up to date) PCs. Especially if you are using Win7 and up.

Furthermore don't forget about the various, partially incompatible, FSX versions people are using. FSX +SP1. FSX +SP2, FSX +Acceleration and FSX SE.

 

Edited November 5, 2018 by FDEdev

[ckyliu 1,749]

Lots of Avsim hardware posters seem to live charmed lives.... I see countless topics where a user will post proposed specs up or a proposed budget and ask if it will be okay, which is immediately ignored by most replies who just automatically suggest the latest i7 plus a GTX1080 and if questioned on the cost effectively say they're essential and  if you can't afford them you shouldn't be flight simming!

Unfortunately P3D is saddled with the same scenery as FSX out the box, but a simple global texture replacement like Orbx Global or Ground Environment X is all that's really needed to sharpen either simulator, after that everything is on the basis of what kind of flying you're doing. I'd certainly say P3D is the future and although FSX makes a cheap entry point to introduce people, anyone who's wanting to go next level and starting to look at quality addons (which I would say most Avsim posters are) may as well jump on P3D sooner rather than later.

I'm running P3D more than fine on 5 year old machine, i5-2500k with a GTX980 and with plenty of addons too (see my profile), I'm sure it would run fine on a GTX970 or 1050 if I sacrificed some graphic quality. Despite what some people would have you believe, P3D will run just as well as FSX for the same graphics quality with the same hardware, in fact it might run a bit better with its optimisations (and no tweaks necessary).

Edited November 5, 2018 by ckyliu

[Pineapple_Wizard 42]

People seem to have the misconception that P3D runs worse than FSX or requires stronger hardware. That's not really the case unless you are really trying to push the sliders all the way to the right. I have run both P3D v4 and FSX on my i5 4690k and GTX 960 system and without a doubt P3Dv4 runs way better. Only difference is that P3D has the potential to have more strain on your system as you can now run way more without having out of memory errors. I use very similar, if not more addons than I did in FSX and still have better performance and better visuals. P3D is just a slightly better/more optimized version of FSX. I think the ONLY reason not to upgrade to P3Dv4 is because of some addon developers charging extortionate amounts for P3D versions of the same product.

[Opterix 58]

What do you mean with "P3D runs better"?
Do you mean: without a lot of default aircrafts like Trike, Bell206, Standard-Cessna, Cessna 208 Caravan, Beaver, Grumman Goose, Segelflieger, Learjet, CRJ 700, A321, 737, 747?
Do you mean without flightschool and missions? Only in English? Not more in their mother language.
This is better?
Do you mean P3Dv4 with cloud shadows and cockpit shadows, dynamic lighting and later PBR runs better with the identical PC? Why to change to P3Dv4 if you can't use all these new features?
Do you mean P3D with the newest P3Dv4 aircraft addons and P3Dv4 scenery addons runs better with the identical PC?
What about the blurries a lot of P3Dv4 people suffer from and report this here and in other forums?
Com'on guys, I think you know exactly what I mean.

This is the way the discussions goes in every forum - I don't want to discuss it here again.

Let me say it clearly:
If somebody is happy with FSX and fine photorealistic sceneries in high resolution you can imagine how disappointed he will be to get blurries with P3Dv4. And miss aircrafts, flightschool, missions and menues in mother tongue and the uge amount of available addons.
To be disappointed is no good condition to be happy. And not to be happy with the sim is no good condition to stay in this hobby. So: if you urge someone to change to P3Dv4 you have a high risk to loose a FS-member instead of getting a new P3Dv4-user.
But this is not _my_ problem, this is the problem of those who strongly wants to get new P3Dv4-Users. 
It's up to _you_ to make a fair discussion, not up to me.

I don't mind anymore if the happily FSX-users are bored from these discussions and leave the forums and the community. I can understand them now.

This is all I wanted to say.

 

[HighTowers 1,434]

The ones who refuse to move on from dead FSX or FS9 for that matter are the same as those who refuse to upgrade their VHS tape recorder, or their 70lbs CRT TV, or the restaurant that thinks 80s decor and food is still good.  They are all afraid of change. There will always be Investment. Thats what a hobby does, but in order to make progress, we have to make that sacrifice.   Your machine is very likely able to run P3D as some have mentioned as well as or even better than FSX. Its about conservative settings. For sure by reducing the settings even, you will still be at the same level as FSX.   And the biggest bonus of all, never having to worry about an OOM ever.  No matter what you throw at it. 

Its just hard to come to terms with change.  But the reality is, not much addons for FSX are being made any more if any at all. Devs have moved on to bigger and better things, and improvements/optimizations. 

Happy Flying everyone. 

[Bjoern 1,157]

[Laughs in X-Plane about all the fuss]

After 11.5 years, it was finally time for a change, although I do miss MSFS' ATC and AI.

Edited November 5, 2018 by Bjoern

[Opterix 58]

@HighTowers :

You are not argueing like a friend or partner of other community members, you are argueing like a vendor. Keep on going chasing the FSX-users away. As a vendor you will not profit from this.
Neither will any developer take profit from chasing FSX-users away.
Is this so hard to understand?

 

[CB_Pilot 54]

1 hour ago, Pineapple_Wizard said:

I think the ONLY reason not to upgrade to P3Dv4 is because of some addon developers charging extortionate amounts for P3D versions of the same product.

... or it might just be that I’m content with FSX and really don’t see any need to change to another?

I don’t mind the debate - really, I don’t - but sometimes it’s worth remembering that some of us are simply happy with what FSX gives us.

The main thing is that we’re flight summers - and happy!

[threexgreen 3,139]

I don't get what these two threads are even about. Have your opinion and let others go their own way. I don't care if someone else switches over to P3D or stays with FSX, not my business.

Weighing in on the topic, I wanted to say that it seems the OP in this thread is more the 'older' type of simmer who enjoys FSX's flight school with the Kings and missions and default aircraft. Years back I was that same type of simmer. Now I'm obsessed with realism and can't find peace without a study-level real-world-pilot-tested aircraft addon and the newest payware airport scenery. Going this way P3D will be a better choice due to the aforementioned perks of better performance and overall improvement over FSX. Doesn't mean FSX is dead.

Edited November 5, 2018 by threegreen

[FDEdev 955]

35 minutes ago, Bjoern said:

[Laughs in X-Plane about all the fuss]

After 11.5 years, it was finally time for a change, although I do miss MSFS' ATC and AI.

Just a few minutes ago I finished testing (and deleting again) xp 11.30b2. You still can't do a crosswind take off and/or landing in a moderate 30kts crosswind, neither in the 737 nor the 747, or fly in heavy turbulence.

I'm trying (including designing planes and flight models) x-plane since version HSR decades ago and still, after trying it, I've always came back the the 'other' sim.

Still way to go to 'leapfrog MSFS (LM)' as Austin claimed for many years.  

Edited November 5, 2018 by FDEdev

[Opterix 58]

10 minutes ago, threegreen said:

 Years back I was that same type of simmer. Now I'm obsessed with realism and can't find peace without a study-level real-world-pilot-tested aircraft addon and the newest payware airport scenery.

Ah, you got the idea! But only up to 50%.

I'm convinced no FS-beginner will think in this way: "can't find peace without a study-level aircraft addon".
So lots of P3D-simmers forgot how they came into this hobby. They argue as every FS-beginner should feel like themselves. This is not a good condition to give advices.

Let the FS-beginners have the chance to develop until they "can't find peace without a study-level aircraft addon". Let them go their own way. Help them by going this way - their own way.
Don't urge them to go _your_ way. Then both sides will loose.

[FDEdev 955]

For beginners the Aerofly FS2 flying game would be a much better (and much better looking and super smooth) choice IMO.

Edited November 5, 2018 by FDEdev

[cobalt 798]

39 minutes ago, HighTowers said:

The ones who refuse to move on from dead FSX or FS9 for that matter are the same as those who refuse to upgrade their VHS tape recorder, or their 70lbs CRT TV, or the restaurant that thinks 80s decor and food is still good.  They are all afraid of change. There will always be Investment. Thats what a hobby does, but in order to make progress, we have to make that sacrifice.   Your machine is very likely able to run P3D as some have mentioned as well as or even better than FSX. Its about conservative settings. For sure by reducing the settings even, you will still be at the same level as FSX.   And the biggest bonus of all, never having to worry about an OOM ever.  No matter what you throw at it. 

Its just hard to come to terms with change.  But the reality is, not much addons for FSX are being made any more if any at all. Devs have moved on to bigger and better things, and improvements/optimizations. 

Happy Flying everyone. 

I have never said this before on a forum, but I will say it now. This is absolute garbage, based on ignorance of the facts, There are reasons why FSX, updated with addons, is more widely used by far than any other sim. To assume that those who do so are simply luddites afraid of change is laughable and silly. It is also pitiful. I feel truly sorry for High Tower.