Most wanted in P3D V....

[swiesma 625]

Flight physics is also my #1.

Bascially you can align an aircraft on the ILS 10 NM out and just watch it fly a straight line to the runway. That's a bit boring at times.

[pgde 571]

6 hours ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

I'd like to see flight physics improved more than anything ... one of many books I'm currently reading and find really interesting:

I love the visuals in MSFS, but for P3D Vx flight physics is #1 on my list followed by weather #2 but I guess both are key since weather feeds the physics.

Cheers, Rob.

Rob -- for many years this was the 'bible' in flight -- https://www.amazon.com/Stick-Rudder-Explanation-Art-Flying/dp/0070362408

Edited October 17, 2019 by pgde

[rickgo 64]

48 minutes ago, swiesma said:

Flight physics is also my #1.

Bascially you can align an aircraft on the ILS 10 NM out and just watch it fly a straight line to the runway. That's a bit boring at times.

Are you talkng about flying on Rails? If so, you know it doesnt have to be like that. This is probably the 3rd time in the last couple of weeks I've heard that complaint. I

would give Ezca V3 a go..It will bring your plane back to life..I could not endure P3d without using this. I have seen  some recent videos and those planes are  fllying like they are on a greased rail.It is really painful to watch them and wonder why this aspect of p3d on rails is so etched in stone!..it seems to be a manifestation of ignorance.

I feel almost obligated to comment here since the "rails comment" is so misleading..and doesnt have to be that way.

                                           Rick

                                                                                                                                

 

[IanHarrison 525]

59 minutes ago, rickgo said:

Are you talkng about flying on Rails? If so, you know it doesnt have to be like that. This is probably the 3rd time in the last couple of weeks I've heard that complaint. I

would give Ezca V3 a go..It will bring your plane back to life..I could not endure P3d without using this. I have seen  some recent videos and those planes are  fllying like they are on a greased rail.It is really painful to watch them and wonder why this aspect of p3d on rails is so etched in stone!..it seems to be a manifestation of ignorance.

I feel almost obligated to comment here since the "rails comment" is so misleading..and doesnt have to be that way.

                                           Rick

                                                                                                                                

 

Are some people really complaining that their $5000 PC is not delivering what a $15 million Real life flight simulator can?

Really???????

[Amon1973 1,424]

On 10/16/2019 at 4:10 PM, Avidean said:

I don't think that it will take years for MSFS 2020 to catch up with P3D. I don't think the stuff that now works in Prepar3D will take anything like as much work to adapt to MSFS 2020 as starting from scratch would. Out of the box MSFS 2020 will have far better scenery and atmosphere than Prepar3D V4. Much of what is currently available for FSX P3D I believe will be portable to MSFS 2020. Aircraft, Airports. Much of the other stuff we use will become redundant. e.g. weather engines, camera addons, shader tweakers etc. I cannot see myself giving up Prepar3d or X-Plane and who knows what P3DV5 and XP12 will be like. I wouldn't be surprised if we see P3D V5 fairly soon. I don't think the MSFS 2020 is as far removed from FSX as one might think. So no I don't think we are looking at years here. It is clear that MSFS will have a legacy mode. So that's a dead give away that current addon aircraft will work in it. First thing I am going to do when I get my hands on it is dust off my FSX NGX and my FSX A2A C172 and see if I can't show horn them in there.😝🤣😎

The one thing that I would like to see from Prepar3D V5 is far better performance. 60+fps on the same settings that I currently get 30+fps. But that ain't going to happen!

I know the chance of my proposal happening is very unlikely but, in an effort to counter act to effects of what MFS will have on the user base of P3D, would it not be better in the long term for LM to offer a free upgrade to V5 for V4 users, we keep on hearing that us enthusiasts are not important financially to LM, if they done this they'd guarantee that the user base would continue on using P3D long into the future at this critical time.

[Buffy Foster 133]

Building in better multicore support has to happen for all those other things to happen, so that's what I want.

[F737MAX 5,734]

 

4 hours ago, swiesma said:

Flight physics is also my #1.

Bascially you can align an aircraft on the ILS 10 NM out and just watch it fly a straight line to the runway. That's a bit boring at times.

Doesn't have to be like that in P3D now.

3 hours ago, rickgo said:

Are you talkng about flying on Rails? If so, you know it doesnt have to be like that.
[...]
I feel almost obligated to comment here since the "rails comment" is so misleading..and doesnt have to be that way.

Correct.  I haven't used EZCA, but I do have ChasePlane, A2A's Accu-Feel and also bought RealTurb summer destinations to use in combination with Active Sky.

I definitely cannot align an approach on the ILS 10 miles out, let go and just watch my aeroplane land on the numbers, especially if the runway is anywhere near terrain.

Now, if only I could have done the same without needing so many add-ons...

[RTK1972 288]

On 10/17/2019 at 3:26 AM, Rob_Ainscough said:

I'd like to see flight physics improved more than anything ... one of many books I'm currently reading and find really interesting:

I love the visuals in MSFS, but for P3D Vx flight physics is #1 on my list followed by weather #2 but I guess both are key since weather feeds the physics.

Cheers, Rob.

Exactly Rob !

Edited October 18, 2019 by Jim Young
Removed excessive quote.

[Mace 1,948]

8 hours ago, swiesma said:

Flight physics is also my #1.

Bascially you can align an aircraft on the ILS 10 NM out and just watch it fly a straight line to the runway. That's a bit boring at times.

My P3D doesn't do that, for sure!  After a long tiring flight, sometimes I /wish/ I could line it up and forget it.  Usually my aircraft is moving around from turbulence and bumps, unless I get some unusually calm air.   I can even do my approach in Canada in the winter, and it looks like Canada in the winter.  :)

[Jim Young 2,356]

Although already mentioned, ATC, I would like to see an overhaul of the default ATC.  Commercial programs, like ProATC-X, are not aircraft/airport friendly in most cases.  Sometimes requires flight plans in a certain format.  Just a lot of different issues.  If P3D is going to have an ATC program, they need to make it better and get off of making more autogen, making add-ons compatible, etc.

[FPStewy 538]

On 10/17/2019 at 1:47 AM, Jean-Claude said:

ATC is for me a major priority in future P3D version(s), all ATC add-ons available on the market are certainly helpful, but honestly nowhere near the recording and montage quality of the original which should be updated and improved.

I can bare the Reality/F1 GPS but, I agree that the in sim ATC is the major factor for me now in flying but yet in P3D it's a pre-Internet Commodore 64 port from 20 years ago.

[DellyPilot 109]

On 10/17/2019 at 5:37 AM, IanHarrison said:

DellyPilot

 Work with ORBX to make True Earth actually work, it doesn't.

How does it "not work"? Mine is excellent.

Ok I dont want to derail this thread but actually the performance problems with TE GB South are intrinsic to the deep problems with the rendering and scenery engine.

At a very high level Orbx simply ported their Xplane 11 models to P3D, providing only 2 levels of scenery complexity, EXTREME or SPARSE. They felt it would be too laborious to provide the 6 levels of detail.

The long and short of that is that flying anywhere near London with what most consider normal settings (complex AC, 3 airports, Cloud, Shadows, Dynamic Lighting etc.) isnt possible even on a 2080TI 5.3ghz top end machine like mine.

After weeks of tuning, I found that disabling Hyper Threading due to the poor multi threading implementation and total reliance on Core 0 performance + a few other tweaks lets me run at medium settings ~ 25fps.

It is impressive at 4k to see 10s of thousands of buildings rendered but its just silly, this is not what you can see in real life (20m max vis) and the pipeline is very badly optimised because those buildings are not PBR so they arent lit correctly nor can the engine cope with any shadows without the CPU blowing up. This isnt split across the cores, it all seems to runs on 1 Core. If I buy one of those crazy AMD 64 core Server CPUs the engine should scale up performance but it wont.

It also feels like all buildings are being rendered even when visibility is reduced (poor viewport culling) right down.

FS2020 and Xplane have just masssively better graphics pipelines that can cope with scenery chucked at the engine in a more scalable way that allows for proper lighting and on demand loading in of detail.

In Xplane the exact same scenery works much better because of how the secenery engine and scheduler works.

The day that FS2020 video dropped it became crystal clear why TEGB is so poorly ported and optimised for P3D.

ORBX are shifting efforts away from P3D towards XPlane and now FS2020, oh sure for the next year or so they will continue to badly port Xplane scenery for us and rake in that vital P3D money but both LM and ORBX know the clock is now ticking. P3D is the 3rd sim in town now.

Edited October 18, 2019 by DellyPilot
Spelling

[Christopher Low 5,381]

Quote from John Venema on the ORBx forum......

"Aiming for before xmas or earlier for the remainder of the TE GB series for P3D, including a complete rebuild of South for major performance improvements.

[DellyPilot 109]

7 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

Quote from John Venema on the ORBx forum......

"Aiming for before xmas or earlier for the remainder of the TE GB series for P3D, including a complete rebuild of South for major performance improvements.

Well that would be brilliant in fairness to them and its what I was pushing for before they banned me for claiming they were ditching P3D!

Lets wait and see because we heard all this on the first peformance patch but it sounds promising. 

I still think the points remain valid and this creaking old engine is now the 3rd wheel.

Its basic economics that ORBX will have to prioritise their efforts.

[Christopher Low 5,381]

I hope that those "performance improvements" also include "visual improvements" for those custom 3D buildings. In their current form, they are not all that convincing. Of course, I do not see them at the moment because I have had to disable all of the 3DM files for performance reasons (London was a 4fps slideshow), but TrueEarth GB South still looks good with just the autogen files and custom 3D landmarks enabled. I also have Aerosoft VFR London X working with it (just about), although that does not include the latest London buildings like The Shard or The Gherkin.