As far as FSElite is concerned, I've said it before and I'll say it again:

Many of these flightsim news websites cannot be truly impartial as they are funded by advertising and sponsors who are by nature interested in promoting their products.

Dave

So do you think they are pro or contra?

BTW: I think they are pro. And the clouds still look very artificial, so I would prefer to fly with clear sky to not  disturb the immersion.

But I think I should not have said this. Now I have a lot of enemies? 😉

The few times I have looked at FSElite it seems that the site is about 80-90 percent X-Pain ads. They do seem to be leaning toward that. It is just something we need to be aware of. Even if true, that is fine and only they can make that decision. It is just something that we who lean toward Prepar3d have to be aware of and it will help keep our heads from exploding. LOL Every time a P3d release comes along the same 4 or 5 guys spring out of the mud and start with the same on stuff. They don't even bother to change their screen names between paid "cam-pains".

58 minutes ago, PhotoReal Earth said:

So do you think they are pro or contra?

They are con.

But the vids from FSElite make more appetite for flightsimming than those from Rob.
So: ???
 

4 hours ago, dave2013 said:

If P3Dv5 is an improvement, even a small one, over P3Dv4, *and* it doesn't require major updates to my P3Dv4 aircraft and scenery, then I'm happy.

Pretty simple.

I don't understand all the negativity.

Dave

Dave,

About 10 years ago I started with the first version, every-time a new version (update) was available I was so excited and hoped for "not major improvements" but for better fixes that people complained about. Every-time it was a big disappointment and whatever they did it's still a disappointment having in view the time passed and technologies available.

I'm not gonna compare with the new MSFS2020, but after almost 10 years look at the ugly ground or buildings, oceans, lakes, sky  textures etc. 

The only good thing they did is the jump to the 64 bit.

Think about how many people keep on modifying the config file to get performance, better look etc after all this time. I'm looking at many youtube movies (including Robs ones) where they keep on adjusting the config file to get different results.

People are tired of paying for these micro-updates for the (almost) the same look, that's why you will have all this negativity.

People are tired when a new version comes out to re-install and wait for the other developers to come out with a new software update that some time is free or you end up paying for a new version to work with the update.

Unfortunately it gets to the point where people will stop using this product and look for something more stable and less tweaking. 

To be honest, I spent so much on this P3D but at this stage I'm not happy with what I see and will wait for the competition to see what is all about. 

4 hours ago, dave2013 said:

If P3Dv5 is an improvement, even a small one, over P3Dv4, *and* it doesn't require major updates to my P3Dv4 aircraft and scenery, then I'm happy.

Pretty simple.

I don't understand all the negativity.

Dave

Dave,

About 10 years ago I started with the first version, every-time a new version (update) was available I was so excited and hoped for "not major improvements" but for better fixes that people complained about. Every-time it was a big disappointment and whatever they did it's still a disappointment having in view the time passed and technologies available.

I'm not gonna compare with the new MSFS2020, but after almost 10 years look at the ugly ground or buildings, oceans, lakes, sky  textures etc. 

The only good thing they did is the jump to the 64 bit.

Think about how many people keep on modifying the config file to get performance, better look etc after all this time. I'm looking at many youtube movies (including Robs ones) where they keep on adjusting the config file to get different results.

People are tired of paying for these micro-updates for the (almost) the same look, that's why you will have all this negativity.

People are tired when a new version comes out to re-install and wait for the other developers to come out with a new software update that some time is free or you end up paying for a new version to work with the update.

Unfortunately it gets to the point where people will stop using this product and look for something more stable and less tweaking. 

To be honest, I spent so much on this P3D but at this stage I'm not happy with what I see and will wait for the competition to see what is all about. 

1 hour ago, killthespam said:

Think about how many people keep on modifying the config file to get performance, better look etc after all this time. I'm looking at many youtube movies (including Robs ones) where they keep on adjusting the config file to get different results.

People are tired of paying for these micro-updates for the (almost) the same look, that's why you will have all this negativity.

People are tired when a new version comes out to re-install and wait for the other developers to come out with a new software update that some time is free or you end up paying for a new version to work with the update.

Unfortunately it gets to the point where people will stop using this product and look for something more stable and less tweaking. 

To be honest, I spent so much on this P3D but at this stage I'm not happy with what I see and will wait for the competition to see what is all about. 

And that´s the point - you hit the nail on the head - and that is a fact - even if I am a P3D fan and like to tweak by myself - but slowly it is enough.

the same procedure over and over again - "ok update - reinstall everything - tweak - wait for updates - mish-mash of land classes again - troubleshooting - pay for THE SAME native customized updates again (don´t mean the customized installers after release of P3D) - install addon planes - approach test to my favorite airport - (and if according to the videos 30 FPS is a cut, limited or not, however) you have to subtract a couple for this constellation, there we here again at 15-20FPS, disillusionment - ok maybe new hardware helps..and so on and so on... sorry even if I can call me enthusiast, it is too much for me and this is FOR ALMOST THE SAME LOOK over 10 years now with some more clouds on the horizon….

 

Edited April 12, 20206 yr by AUA425

With all due respect, the history of Microsoft Flight Simulator from FS5 through to FSX  is a good example of incremental improvements (at best) to the core package with each subsequent version. Yeah, we got ATC in one version, but only after Looking Glass Studios showed them how it should be done. They also introduced autogen, but a shotgun blast of boxes scattered across some dodgy urban textures was not my idea of "as real as it gets". Based on that dubious record, you could argue that Lockheed Martin have exceeded expectations with successive iterations of Prepa3D (although I agree that some of the basic foundations remind me a little too much of the past).

Edited April 12, 20206 yr by Christopher Low

no, no, you are absolutely right about that, no any question, but just too close to what we already know since FS9 ! (at least as far as the scenery is concerned)
but we'll see anyway, the opinions have always been different and we have found each other again in the forum and helped each other, but it will be where as it will be, and everyone must decide for himself.

2 hours ago, killthespam said:

People are tired of paying for these micro-updates for the (almost) the same look, that's why you will have all this negativity.

People are tired when a new version comes out to re-install and wait for the other developers to come out with a new software update that some time is free or you end up paying for a new version to work with the update.

Unfortunately it gets to the point where people will stop using this product and look for something more stable and less tweaking. 

To be honest, I spent so much on this P3D but at this stage I'm not happy with what I see and will wait for the competition to see what is all about. 

I never supported this model of incremental updates w/ as you mention often w/ marginal improvements.  It's bad enough for the end user but just think about all of the requirements for that oh-so-necessary 3rd party content to keep up with these incremental updates, though I know LM tried to keep it simple by dividing the install.  But still, there are so many dependencies it's flat out remarkable it plays as well as it does w/ all of those add-ons.  Since moving to P3D v2.x I never bothered w/ the micro updates until v3.4 arrived, which I used nearly daily for 4 years in the same PC.  Just recently updated to v4.5 when I assembled a new PC.   I learned a week later v5 was about to release.  Oh well, don't care.   I'm enjoying the heck out of 4.5 now it's a nice improvement and that is another argument for slowing the whole 'update' process way down.   Give time for the hardware to mature and match the software.  My last build still works quite well and is now over 6y/o.  In the end w/o something like FSCaptain to keep my interest up I'd likely have quit altogether years ago.   I suspect I'll be happy and also let MSFS2020 really mature w/ mature add-ons before jumping in.

Edited April 12, 20206 yr by Noel

38 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

With all due respect, the history of Microsoft Flight Simulator from FS5 through to FSX  is a good example of incremental improvements (at best) to the core package with each subsequent version. Yeah, we got ATC in one version, but only after Looking Glass Studios showed them how it should be done. They also introduced autogen, but a shotgun blast of boxes scattered across some dodgy urban textures was not my idea of "as real as it gets". Based on that dubious record, you could argue that Lockheed Martin have exceeded expectations with successive iterations of Prepa3D (although I agree that some of the basic foundations remind me a little too much of the past).

Christopher,

I agree with their incremental improvements for FS5, but that was about 23 or 25 years ago with their technology. 

IMHO in our days  the "basic foundation of FSX" is not acceptable or at least I'm expecting to see better, especially with the new opportunities in the software development and  when the customer complained over and over again about certain items and it landed on deaf years, more-so  where the competition shows that it can be done. 

Please don't get me wrong, it's something wrong when every-time they put an update and you have to re-install everything, also have all the other developers scramble for  new compatibility issues, customers going for re-activation of some other software they purchased, wondering if their computer will work or if they have to buy another one or upgrade different parts (if the have money). It is not a fun hubby anymore, I think that something is very wrong here 

I understand what some of you are saying about the disappointingly small improvements from version to version.  I also would have liked for them to improve the ATC, for example.  However, they did give us sloped runways which many have been asking for.

I guess my perspective is also different than some for the following reasons:

1. I came directly from FSX:SE to P3Dv4.5.  The improvement in performance was huge, and the scenery is also better.  Plus, the ATC bug where one had to switch to a different frequency and then back sometimes in order to respond was gone.  I run P3Dv4 with no config file tweaks at all and I'm very happy with the performance(I use an Intel 9700K overclocked to 4.8GHz, a GTX 2070 Super video card, all SSDs, and 2K monitor resolution, not 4K.)

2. I've been flightsimming since 1984, so in my eyes the evolution of flight simulation over the years has been nothing short of marvelous.  I still am amazed sometimes when I'm flying as it looks so real.

The only thing that is going to beat what we have now is full satellite photoscenery with accurate buildings and vegetation for the whole world, which we will hopefully have soon with MSFS.

 

Dave