I tried to play P3D today. It's just not it for me anymore. After I booted up the two programs I have to start before even starting the sim, I jumped in the Comanche for a quick flight.The graphics look terrible, the panel on my A2A planes looked low quality (though I know they are high quality for P3D), the weather effects were just bad (it was raining). I also had some kind of rudder bug that I have no idea where it came from.

I'm basically reserved to just sim less if I have to until MSFS meets all my needs vs. trying to continue to use P3D.

I'm only speaking for myself. Others will still enjoy P3D.

Edited August 20, 20205 yr by bonchie

Well - all other civilian sims went last week to clear out space. But DCS and IL2 BoX stays where they are. Especially as VR really is something I promised myself was a base requirement for simulators two years ago as it completely changes the experience to actually simulating be IN the plane. But I made an exception for MSFS 🙂 

And VR is coming to MSFS - but I kind of dread the hardware needed to get MSFS running well in my Valve Index when it arrives later this year. Hopefully the Zen 3 is here then to help my RTX2080 a bit on the road but I guess it will require an RTX 4080Ti in 2022... In both DCS and IL2 I get 100++ FPS on the highest settings in 2D but 45 to 90 in VR. That works OK, but as MSFS is more in the 50 FPS domain on 2D for me, I really do not understand how that is going to work well on 2020 hardware. Maybe have to dig out my TrackIR from some box where it has been since I got my first VR headset.

Edited August 20, 20205 yr by mazex

13 minutes ago, mazex said:

Maybe have to dig out my TrackIR from some box where it has been since I got my first VR headset.

Hehe!  Aren't you glad you didn't sell your TrackIR? 😄 

Hook

4 hours ago, ErichB said:

I have uninstalled P3D

LOL

Cheers

bs

1 hour ago, pjs37 said:

There are some glitches to be sure (textures under the water at docks and bridges for sure) but honestly given the scale of the sim I feel these will (hopefully) be addressed in the future and do not take the overall enjoyment for me from the sim.

Yeah. When you fly over AI procedurally generated cities which you know, then you might be a little disappointed if you find those houses looking a bit weird. But that mostly happens when you visit them with the drone camera. From the plane they look quite OK as they match the top down satellite view.

It's nice to have those buildings where they are supposed to be for navigation in traffic patterns for example.

Nature itself with fields and forests look just outstanding.

3 hours ago, mtr75 said:

I have one thing to say as well: who cares? 

TrueSky in P3Dv5 is absolutely untouchable for anyone looking for a true IFR experience. 

You uninstalled it? Good for you. Nobody cares. 

Erich has been around the community for a while and has been involved in a lot of productive discussions and beta tests of products if I remember correctly. Have some respect and calm your t**s a little. 

4 hours ago, ErichB said:

I have uninstalled P3D

I have just made a flight in Tasmania in P3D using VR. 
At this point the weather and atmospheric simulation in MSFS is superiour, but the terrain mesh resolution is severly lacking (as with all defaulf sims), and looking at a flat screen everything zoomed out just does not give me the feeling of being there.

Old style atmospherics, flying on rails and landclass system aside, P3D is still the better sim at this point, because it supports VR and you have regional packs from ORBX that give you what  MSFS is still lacking (Hazard Obstacles, correcltly placed Powerlines, Wind Turbines, accurate and full vector data (in many places of MSFS the vector data that draws the actual water masks on the rivers is of very low quality, as far as lacking flattens for rivers or having elevation discrepancies with the underlying coarse mesh.).

So it's going to be a while until P3D leaves my library.

52 minutes ago, bonchie said:

I tried to play P3D today. It's just not it for me anymore. After I booted up the two programs I have to start before even starting the sim, I jumped in the Comanche for a quick flight.The graphics look terrible, the panel on my A2A planes looked low quality (though I know they are high quality for P3D), the weather effects were just bad (it was raining). I also had some kind of rudder bug that I have no idea where it came from.

I'm basically reserved to just sim less if I have to until MSFS meets all my needs vs. trying to continue to use P3D.

I'm only speaking for myself. Others will still enjoy P3D.

Same here, if I do have to wait for msfs to meet all my needs just as you put it,  I will do so as I can’t seem to get myself to enjoy p3d after using msfs 2020...But as I mentioned before in other threads, I am thankful for the years of enjoyment p3d has given me, but it’s time to move on at my end. 

Some of the Orbx stuff looks higher res, but certainly not in all areas and certainly not in ALL aspects. The autogen in MSFS is superior and the low-level ground texture are far superior in MSFS, even unedited runways have better looking grass than most of Orbx payware (talking about from take-off standpoint, not if using BOB and walking around a hangar).

The trees in Xplane and P3D (if I recall) were not great, especially when looking directly from above as an overhead view. Even in general, I never liked Orbx trees, that was my one complaint about TE Washington, some of the trees were horrible looking (in XP11).

The main issues in MSFS are with very sharp mountains or cliffs, but that is an issue in Orbx as well. If you look at the golf courses in Seattle and similar areas, the resolution looks fairly high (at least 80cm), and the buildings are way higher resoution.

So I cannot say that the terrain looks better in Xplane or P3D even when using a higher LOD for the terrain. That said, of course at its absolute best and highest 30cm-60cm mountain ranges in Orbx and P3D ortho, yah it's going to look a bit better just from that one mountain viewpoint. However, that's really not fair comparison as this is streamed. The stuff in Orbx only looks high res in small areas too, other than maybe True Earth GB, even True Earth Washington has numerous issues with res and mountains in certain places, and the ground is much blockier looking around the city than MSFS.

 

Edited August 20, 20205 yr by SceneryFX

2 hours ago, nbhall68 said:

I haven't yet, but I will be uninstalling P3D soon.  My reasons are specific.  I've had a great time with P3D...it's been a wonderful product.  But I'm a minimalist by nature.  I don't want to have multiple sims, jumping through hoops, tweaking, maintaining accounts across a dozen portals...blah, blah, blah.

 

I’m in the same boat, between life, work, kids, family, other hobbies etc. I don’t have time to tinker and mess around with multiple sims. It is time consuming and only really have a need, time or want to focus on one sim.

4 hours ago, tweekz said:

Not there yet for me to uninstall XP (several issues, airliners), but I am pretty certain that I won't need it within a year.

At the moment I don't feel like playing anything else, but that's quite normal when you have a new toy.

XP12 will have to provide something truly innovative to make me even consider it.

This is exactly where I’m at. Once the PMDG 737NG3 comes out there’s no going back for me. I miss a functioning Cessna, but Im sure they’ll fix up the default soon enough. 

To me p3d5 and xplane looks great but they just run poorly even with the latest and greatest hardware. I’m lucky to get half the fames in p3d5 maxed out as I do in fs2020 and it looks maybe 70% as good running that poorly even on my rig which is pretty well ludicrous speed. It’s a much more mature platform though and I have no intention of uninstalling it. Xplane will probably get the boot though. 

1 minute ago, FlyingInACessna said:

I miss a functioning Cessna, but Im sure they’ll fix up the default soon enough. 

Me too. Is it just my impression or is the performance on default planes a bit weird? First I'm having a hard time accelerating, then you can't slow them down properly. Needs some fixing IMO.

MSFS doesn't render the iconic Sydney Harbour Bridge which should be rendered by default in any sim.

There is plenty of improvement to be made before P3D goes for me.

Ok, well about to do a side-by-side comparison of TE Washington and MSFS Seattle, will post a new thread...

Did P3D v5 still have that slow loading texture problem with any textures above 1.2m quality?

I do not think Xplane 11 ran bad FPS wise at all after Vulkan, a bit better than MSFS to be honest, but it's not a fair comparison. If I lowered the settings on MSFS enough though, MSFS would probably beat it.

 

Edited August 20, 20205 yr by SceneryFX