31 minutes ago, jabloomf1230 said:

Yeah the core is (still) pretty much the same. This is why these threads add nothing to the discussion of flight sims. 

I think discussing about flight-sims makes a lot of sense in a flight-sim forum. Not everyone has the same in-depth knowledge about the platform as perhaps you do.

I obviously know far less about the code behind P3d than you do.

2 hours ago, jabloomf1230 said:

I obviously know far less about the code behind P3d than you do.

I don't think anyone here knows much about P3D´s source code, which is proprietary.  What we are discussing are the results we experience on our flights, which are far closer to those of FSX than most would like to admit.

4 hours ago, GCBraun said:

it is clear that the core is (still) pretty much the same. Many problems that I used to experience with MSFS are still present in P3D and the whole Orbx TE drama is only making this more obvious to the masses.

If more in-depth structural changes in the underlying rendering engine are not made,

 

Hi everybody,

On 2/14/2019 at 5:11 AM, sloppysmusic said:

Where's Part 1?!?

Part 1 was this one: https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/544717-p3ders-understand-this-please/

But it seemed it was too hard to understand that it's better for every party of the community to help simmers stay happily with FSX instead of chasing them away by penetratingly trying to missionize them to P3D. First of all it's better for the vendors, publishers and developers. But it seems that some commercial members can't understand because they do not want to understand.
And now I was censored and got this hateful comment:

On 2/14/2019 at 1:40 AM, DaveCT2003 said:

Garbage post.  Should have been removed.  Admin is NUTS!

So it's not possible to clarify essentials for the community? That's bad, because it's mainly a problem of the commercial members, not mine.

Because so many people were unable to understand what I meant, let me add some facts and thoughts:

1.) Over years this boring and annoying massive missionizing: change to P3D, it's so much better.
But now you can read this:

https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/543447-orbx-textures-work-well-other-addons-textures-do-not/?do=findComment&comment=3910074
And it seems that these problems are not solved in P3Dv4.4., as you can read in the Orbx-forums (when comparing GB True Earth P3D versus XP11).
Why there was nobody so honest, when telling FSX-Users: "with P3Dv4 you can reduce your OOM-risc and therefor use more VAS-hungry addons" to add fairly "but pay ATTENTION, your photoreal landscape textures will get unsharp!"

Why? Looks like that they don't want to honestly help FSX-users but to sell more VAS-hungry addons? Think about it and answer yourself - I don't feel comfortable how obvious it seems to me.

2.) I try to understand the P3D-users: I think that many of the "Missionaries" compare the P3D they use now on their actual hardware with the FSX on their former hardware ten years ago.
But to be fair you must compare P3D with actual FSX (SP1+SP2, Acc Pack, Steam-Edition) on actual hardware.
Actual FSX (SP2 and further) is now running smooth, performant and reliable on normal nowadays hardware.
And there are several solutions how to reduce VAS consumption (SceneryConfigEditor, SimStarter), how to observe the VAS-consumption and a lot of other solutions to this problem so you can arrange with it.

3.) I have the impression that the community is dying more and more.  The simmers or let me say customers partizipate less and less in the forums and the social media managers and "influencers" are trying to dominate more and more, pushing the interests of the customers on their products to make more money. This need not to be bad, but it's getting worse if it's to much. In my opinion it's better to listen first, what the customer's want and after that fullfill their wishes instead of first developing and after that advertising and pushing in the forums.

To come back to my first posting in this thread: where are the pictures from the customers' flights from A to B?
You see a lot of pictures with Airport A, some pictures with aircraft in the sky with clouds and fog but without any landscapes to be seen and then a lot of pictures from airport B. So I ask myself: did this person really made a virtual flight from A to B? In my eyes these are advertising flights, not customer's flights. If the "missionaries" want to make good advertising they should make more "customer's flights" and less "advertising flights", if you understand what I mean. Instead of chasing customers away by penetratingly telling them that FSX is "garbage".
Thank you "my friend" @DaveCT2003 for this word. As a foreign speaker it's good to get some help

May I very friendly ask every P3D-missionary in this thread again to give me a link to your screenshots?
I'm very interested to see them.

Still happily awaiting . . .
Peter

 

Edited February 17, 20197 yr by Opterix
changed sh**storm into "hateful comment" because a Mod gave me a warning. Next time I would be suspended. ???

2 hours ago, Opterix said:

May I very friendly ask every P3D-missionary in this thread again to give me a link to your screenshots?
I'm very interested to see them.

Screenshots will not be posted here.  If anyone wants to see the quality of P3D (all versions), go to the screenshot forum and, in the Prefix, click on P3D and you will see every P3D screenshot taken by the membership. 

I have decided to lock this topic as it has been discussed enough and the OP is now trolling.  There were videos he requested and there was at least one link to a video posted.  Anyone can find more videos in the AVSIM Video Forum or conduct a search on the Internet for P3D, Prepar3D, P3DV4, etc., and videos will part of the searches.  Our members have adequately responded to his OP but now the OP is posting things as if he never saw what our experienced and knowledgeable members have posted. 

I think many of the members responded that they have no problems with FSX and many, like me, still use it on occasion.  Because others like P3DV4, as it is a 64 bit sim, is their decision and it must be respected much like many respect your desire to continue using a 32-bit simulator.

Please do NOT issue a Part 3.  Move on and do some research.