FSPS : FFTF DYNAMIC P3Dv5 Released

[d.tsakiris 418]

2 hours ago, eaim said:

I'd imagine that MSFS will need a lot less add ons to drastically improve the SIM compared to the older sims, so performance shouldn't be as impacted.

That just means it will be a performance hog out of the box, without add-ons.

[chapstick 2,757]

17 minutes ago, d.tsakiris said:

That just means it will be a performance hog out of the box, without add-ons.

lol no it doesn’t 

[NickBo 102]

8 hours ago, jabloomf1230 said:

No, people with weak hardware had stuttering blurries for 15 years. Maybe you don't understand that "the blurries" is actually a feature.

It's so sad that you actually believe that. The fact that this myth is still repeated just proves my point that we've come so far that we actually think this is the way it must be and that we must accept all bugs and bad programming without even questioning it.

Here is a question for you. If the community think that "the blurries is a feature", to you think LM will invest any effort at all in fixing it, ever?

Truth is that most people who are into flight simming have never seen what modern software can really do, because they only run their flight sim. They only compare the new version to the previous version and think "wow, what an improvement". If you look outside of Prepar3D however and see what can be done in other software using the exact same hardware, you'd realize that Prepar3D looks like other games did about 5-10 years ago. What you think looks awesome, others are laughing at.

FSX had some terrible texture optimizations and other issues with the graphics engine that are still plaguing us today.  To some extend they can be worked around using ridiculously fast hardware, sure, but the main issue is still the bad programming and the terrible engine that everything is built upon. Fact is that the Prepar3D engine has almost not evolved in 10 years. Yes, they did things like moving to DirectX12 which had some positive effects, but the engine itself did not improve. Same bugs as always. And there is absolutely no way you could argue that the game looks good. Better than the previous versions, sure, but still not good with today's standards, even with the best addons.

The next time someone tries to sell you e.g. a ground handling addon with a "totally awesome superior animated marshaller", you should compare it to the animated ground crew in videos such as https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFp0yxdThF8. Then you should say NO - this is not good enough, you will not get my money. That's how software evolve. The "blurries is a feature" misconception is exactly why the Prepar3D engine hasn't evolved in 10 years.

 

Edited May 14, 2020 by NickBo

[d.tsakiris 418]

32 minutes ago, Chapstick said:

lol no it doesn’t 

There are no free lunches. Once MSFS reaches P3D's level of features, I'm sure the performance will be better than P3D's, but I really doubt it will be so much better that it will shut everbody up, let alone have everyone still drooling over it.

 

35 minutes ago, NickBo said:

The next time someone tries to sell you e.g. a ground handling addon with a "totally awesome superior animated marshaller", you should compare it to the animated ground crew in videos such as https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFp0yxdThF8.

Too much unsteady camera action and quick cuts in that video to really be able to make out the marshaller animations. But even so I could spot a few jerky motions. Be that as it may: I know what you are trying to say, but the fact of the matter is that for a lot of us, there are just two flight sims that give us what we want: P3D and X-Plane. Personally, I am not willing to invest money and time in both of them. If an add-on for "my" sim has badly animated objects, and there is a better alternative, that's what I get. If not, I get the non-perfect add-on, but I certainly don't switch the sim to one that doesn't give me the features I want...

[OzWhitey 3,353]

1 hour ago, NickBo said:

Truth is that most people who are into flight simming have never seen what modern software can really do, because they only run their flight sim. They only compare the new version to the previous version and think "wow, what an improvement". If you look outside of Prepar3D however and see what can be done in other software using the exact same hardware, you'd realize that Prepar3D looks like other games did about 5-10 years ago. What you think looks awesome, others are laughing at.

FSX had some terrible texture optimizations and other issues with the graphics engine that are still plaguing us today.  To some extend they can be worked around using ridiculously fast hardware, sure, but the main issue is still the bad programming and the terrible engine that everything is built upon. Fact is that the Prepar3D engine has almost not evolved in 10 years. Yes, they did things like moving to DirectX12 which had some positive effects, but the engine itself did not improve. Same bugs as always. And there is absolutely no way you could argue that the game looks good. Better than the previous versions, sure, but still not good with today's standards, even with the best addons.

The next time someone tries to sell you e.g. a ground handling addon with a "totally awesome superior animated marshaller", you should compare it to the animated ground crew in videos such as https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFp0yxdThF8. Then you should say NO - this is not good enough, you will not get my money. That's how software evolve. The "blurries is a feature" misconception is exactly why the Prepar3D engine hasn't evolved in 10 years.

 

There are lots of parts of this statement that are way overstated.

Do you really think people here have never seen other software?? I think that P3D v5 with appropriate addons looks great. I have 490 title in my steam account.  I have plenty to compare this to. As a simulation of the real world, I think P3D looks a heck of a lot better than other modern flightsims such as DCS, I don't currently know of a better way to simulate the world than P3D v5 plus addons, and if I did I'd use it!

Note that I said "with addons". Default P3D has substandard terrain. I think LM should release one exemplar area, so that people know what this sim can look like with a bit of TLC. 

The engine is also very, very different compared to FSX, something that I note when I boot up that old sim or even P3D v3. 

You say "Absolutely no way that you can argue that the game looks good."

 Looks pretty good to me.

 

[AnkH 2,261]

2 hours ago, NickBo said:

And there is absolutely no way you could argue that the game looks good.

Show me any, one single piece of other flightsimulation software or whatever software that depicts the whole world as a globe (not flat), covering several 10'000 airports worldwide that looks equally good? Neither DCS nor any other game is capable of displaying such a huge area correctly. DCS is small pieces somewhere on the world, of course this needs less resources and you can create an engine capable of more eye candy within those relatively small regions. Imagine P3D needs to load only one single TE product from ORBX, nothing else around it. But in P3D, you can put one TE region next to the other until you have the whole planet (!) covered, if you have enough disk space and you would be able to fly around the globe as such. Any other game capable of this?

Due to the rather old school looks of the native engine we sometimes forget how powerful it actually still is in depicting a "map size" that any other game currently available looks utterly small if compared to. RDR2? Ridiculous, this small piece of land is covered in P3D by a single, local scenery like Mallorca by MK Studios. But with the whole world around it simulated and accessible without loading time break and potentially looking equally good as Mallorca.

Same goes for your DCS example: while illumination and details of the planes is visually and technically absolutely outstanding, the world looks not really nice (exception: water). Airports and regions are way below what you get for example with a TE product in XP and P3D. And it is, as mentioned, covering only a very small region.

[rayharris108 259]

Just upgraded to FFTF v5.

I was OK on base P3D5 but as soon as I added HR ground textures, Texture_Exp-10 EA etc, I started to get blurries and lazy autogen.

So I tried FFTF and set it to frame mode. Immediately textures resolved to max sharpness and autogen ceased to be lazy and actually appeared before I got to final approach.No loss of framerates and butter smooth as always - no CTDs either. I do have VRFAM issues with the old version of Windows ( I can't upgrade right now) and an 8Gb graphics card - but that's another story

Well worth the  upgrade in my opinion - i critical to my ongoing enjoyment.

 

ray

[djbully 210]

17 minutes ago, AnkH said:

Show me any, one single piece of other flightsimulation software or whatever software that depicts the whole world as a globe

Not entirely flight simulation, but Star Citizen does model currently a whole Solar System with several globe, planet sized objects. Each one can be flown to and travelled around with no apparent loading screens. Ok there are no 20 odd thousand airports etc, but they have the engine to make Planet sized globes. It took them quite a while to get there. And it is FULL of bugs. You think P3D is bad, it's nothing to SC!  To be fair though SC is still in ALPHA phase and they've been making it since 2012! 

  

[G-RFRY 1,710]

Just don't buy an addon it`s not compulsory just like FSX you don't have to have addons. 

[F737MAX 5,579]

FFTF Dynamic for me is a 'must-have' product alongside FSUIPC and Lorby Addon Organizer. Everything else is a 'nice-to-have' that has alternatives.

I can tell when I've forgotten to start it - I get microstutters and the FPS drops.

Should it be a built-in function of the base sim? Yes, but it isn't and I can't change that fact.
All I can do is sit here happy that FFTF Dynamic exists while P3D practically purrs while I fly a 787 into KSFO.
 

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

3 hours ago, NickBo said:

It's so sad that you actually believe that. The fact that this myth is still repeated just proves my point that we've come so far that we actually think this is the way it must be and that we must accept all bugs and bad programming without even questioning it.

Here is a question for you. If the community think that "the blurries is a feature", to you think LM will invest any effort at all in fixing it, ever?

Truth is that most people who are into flight simming have never seen what modern software can really do, because they only run their flight sim. They only compare the new version to the previous version and think "wow, what an improvement". If you look outside of Prepar3D however and see what can be done in other software using the exact same hardware, you'd realize that Prepar3D looks like other games did about 5-10 years ago. What you think looks awesome, others are laughing at.

FSX had some terrible texture optimizations and other issues with the graphics engine that are still plaguing us today.  To some extend they can be worked around using ridiculously fast hardware, sure, but the main issue is still the bad programming and the terrible engine that everything is built upon. Fact is that the Prepar3D engine has almost not evolved in 10 years. Yes, they did things like moving to DirectX12 which had some positive effects, but the engine itself did not improve. Same bugs as always. And there is absolutely no way you could argue that the game looks good. Better than the previous versions, sure, but still not good with today's standards, even with the best addons.

The next time someone tries to sell you e.g. a ground handling addon with a "totally awesome superior animated marshaller", you should compare it to the animated ground crew in videos such as https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFp0yxdThF8. Then you should say NO - this is not good enough, you will not get my money. That's how software evolve. The "blurries is a feature" misconception is exactly why the Prepar3D engine hasn't evolved in 10 years.

 

"You're hitting home runs....".

[AnkH 2,261]

56 minutes ago, rayharris108 said:

I was OK on base P3D5 but as soon as I added HR ground textures, Texture_Exp-10 EA etc, I started to get blurries and lazy autogen.

So I tried FFTF and set it to frame mode. Immediately textures resolved to max sharpness and autogen ceased to be lazy and actually appeared before I got to final approach.No loss of framerates and butter smooth as always - no CTDs either.

I do not get the point here, what did you use before you "set FFTF to frame mode"? AGL mode? And why do you consider "no loss of framerates" as a positive aspect here, should FFTF not be used to actually GAIN FPS in certain situations? For "no loss of framerates and buttersmooth as always" I do not need any tool, do you? Or is your intention of "as always" to say "as always with FFTF Dynamic"?

[OzWhitey 3,353]

2 hours ago, djbully said:

Not entirely flight simulation, but Star Citizen does model currently a whole Solar System with several globe, planet sized objects. Each one can be flown to and travelled around with no apparent loading screens. Ok there are no 20 odd thousand airports etc, but they have the engine to make Planet sized globes. It took them quite a while to get there. And it is FULL of bugs. You think P3D is bad, it's nothing to SC!  To be fair though SC is still in ALPHA phase and they've been making it since 2012! 

  

Space Engine would be a better example of something that covers a decent-sized area and looks good. Star Citizen, apart from being a development disaster, only covers a tiny area.

 

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

*****THIS WORKS!!!!!!!!!*****

I bought the v5 version...read the manual, you know..RTFM!...I did...I set it up as suggested...and the bottom line...

1. At my worst FPS sucking depiction Custom 3rP KORD...with the sim bent to the right...before purchasing and running it...at the airport (amongst the gates, loaded out...), I usually had 11-13 FPS, fluctuating, and some taxi animation stutters.

Well,well,weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeell---------------------------> after running the v5 version,  I immediately went to 20-23 FPS!, and no ground stutter forward animation.  WOW....and wowzer!

Taking off from the active, and heading out towards Michigan with the Chicago skyline in view...up to 30 locked and stayed there.  Where I was having some weather injection stutters...GONE!  Gone With The Wind..., hear that, Clark?  Vivian?

Shut down P3Dv5...and rushed back to pick up v4... for P3D v4.5------>ran that...same everything!

Like others said already in this thread------>...this program takes care of it all...no Snake Oil here...and worth every Euro!

Later...getting back to great v5 (bent right) performance, and in the Land of the Happy Dance!   To all those that say this is just Snake Oil...oh...so sorry, too bad...you're missing out....so sorry....:)

Later, I have some flying to do....

Post Edit..."oh..running in AGL mode..and lovin' it!"

Edited May 14, 2020 by Sesquashtoo

[OzWhitey 3,353]

I'm I right in thinking that FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION=0.33 is default for P3D v5, as it was previously?

Is anyone running a FFTF greater than this to avoid blurries?