5 hours ago, micstatic said:

@Recognition It's a concern for me too.  However Robert from PMDG was so positive about MSFS.  You can read his comments in their forum.  I'm going to guess the excitement wouldn't be that high if he felt he would have to release a product nobody would enjoy.  Who knows.  I just have a higher degree of optimism than some.  But I also wasn't one of those people who deleted my working p3d with a massive collection of payware.  I think its safe to say we will see some degree of msfs optimization by the time high quality payware aircraft are released.  i've been a simmer since the early 90's and have never seen a new generation sim release that works perfectly (or at all) out of the box.  

As the MSFS SDK is too simple at this point Robert could never know the framerate and stutter impact the PMDG ac would have....
 

Both the 320 and 747 vids shoe stuttering. The PMDG and FsLabs ac are more complicated.

Positive thinking is fine but at the end it is reality that counts .....

1 hour ago, GSalden said:

Both the 320 and 747 vids shoe stuttering.

You have no idea if that’s related to over taxing a potato, their streaming equipment, or your implied, MSFS performance issues. I don’t understand how performance matters anyway, this board has been the stern father to all with the household line, Turn down your settings! Why in the world would you not think the same for MSFS? With the P3Dv5 VRAM OOM it was everyone’s fault for demanding too much and not spending $2400 on 24 gigs of VRAM but MSFS is a problem child that won’t be able to handle a PMDG plane 6 months from now, 7 days after its release? Again, I wouldn’t hold your breath. 

Saying the SDK is too simple is a fine opinion for you but discrediting Robert’s knowledge of the SDK seems a bit of a stretch.  Aerosoft and PMDG are both very vocal on MSFS potential. I don’t think you can dismiss that and it says a lot about the future  

 
 

 

2 hours ago, TravelRunner404 said:

You have no idea if that’s related to over taxing a potato, their streaming equipment, or your implied, MSFS performance issues. I don’t understand how performance matters anyway, this board has been the stern father to all with the household line, Turn down your settings! Why in the world would you not think the same for MSFS?

To be fair, I am experiencing terrible performance issues in MSFS.  There is something not right with it IMO as I was an Alpha tester since day 1 and performance was much better even in the very early builds.  Not sure if my system is considered a potato or not..maybe it is at almost 4 years old but I am just comparing apples to apples.  I'm not sure what is different in the release version but performance for me is not good.  The issue for me is intermittent FPS drops into the single digits (from 40-50) and long pauses of sometimes 10-20 seconds. My settings are generally Med-High and have tested all kinds of variations with no luck.  I do hope it improves but I have found myself migrating back to P3D V5 for the airline flying (smooth and stutter-free).  I will use MSFS for GA and night flying and I hope things will get ironed out slowly with it.  But I agree with Gerard in that there is no way a PMDG or FSL bird is going to by flyable on a mid-high end PC in MSFS at the moment!!

Edited August 25, 20205 yr by Flic1

I’ve often wondered why more developers don’t attempt to do what majestic did. Didn’t they basically put a ton of the processing work totally outside the sim?  I realize the plane isn’t the most up to date in terms of textures and pbr. But it’s performance is amazing. 

2 hours ago, micstatic said:

I’ve often wondered why more developers don’t attempt to do what majestic did. Didn’t they basically put a ton of the processing work totally outside the sim?  I realize the plane isn’t the most up to date in terms of textures and pbr. But it’s performance is amazing. 

Most of the better developers do put the processing of specific systems and features "outside the sim". The drawback to that approach is that the aircraft must be updated to match the sim's updates. Designing an aircraft solely based on the sim's SDK extends the duration of the aircraft's update cycle because features in the SDK generally have backwards compatibility.

Further, why should  the average developer waste effort on duplicating  functionality that is already built into the sim? Most users aren't looking for a so-called study level aircraft.

7 hours ago, TravelRunner404 said:

You have no idea if that’s related to over taxing a potato, their streaming equipment, or your implied, MSFS performance issues. I don’t understand how performance matters anyway, this board has been the stern father to all with the household line, Turn down your settings! Why in the world would you not think the same for MSFS? With the P3Dv5 VRAM OOM it was everyone’s fault for demanding too much and not spending $2400 on 24 gigs of VRAM but MSFS is a problem child that won’t be able to handle a PMDG plane 6 months from now, 7 days after its release? Again, I wouldn’t hold your breath. 

Saying the SDK is too simple is a fine opinion for you but discrediting Robert’s knowledge of the SDK seems a bit of a stretch.  Aerosoft and PMDG are both very vocal on MSFS potential. I don’t think you can dismiss that and it says a lot about the future  

 
 

 

Take a look at several jetliner vids yourself.

Stutters on the outside but with smooth gauges. That way you know that it is not the recording software but something in the sim. It does not matter what causes it : it is there.

And as the SDK was not enhanced enough at release for a complex 3rd party jetliner Robert does not know how his ac will perform in MSFS. The same goes for other 3rd party ac developers. Without trying you simply cannot know.

Myself I am using Prosim which also is waiting for a way more enhanced SDK. I am sure that it will come.

Imho : the sim should have been released 2-3 months later. An Alpha for almost a year and then a beta for a few weeks ..,?? This is due to MS and not Asobo.

I hope that we not have to turn down a lot of settings and lose a lot of eye candy to have ac like PMDG, FsLabs and Prosim flying smooth. 

Edited August 25, 20205 yr by GSalden

4 hours ago, micstatic said:

I’ve often wondered why more developers don’t attempt to do what majestic did. Didn’t they basically put a ton of the processing work totally outside the sim?  

Yes they did.

Unfortunately not all platforms allow external sim processing.., so if you want to design a product that works on multi-platform that becomes an issue.

S.

There are other projects - company-wise not comparable with MS/Asobo though - which were released to the public unfinished and turned out to be great products with best scores on Steam. I wouldn’t judge a product by a mere quality at release day nowdays. 

2 hours ago, GSalden said:

Without trying you simply cannot know.

but here you are claiming MSFS has evident performance issues and wont handle complex addons. 🤔

 

39 minutes ago, SAS443 said:

but here you are claiming MSFS has evident performance issues and wont handle complex addons. 🤔

 

I just alarmingly noticed poor FPS with vanilla MSFS 2020 Airliners at hand painted airports and built up cities. From my experience addons like PMDG and FSLabs will take a heavy toll on FPS.

I'm worried for us heavy pilots 😲

5 hours ago, jabloomf1230 said:

Most of the better developers do put the processing of specific systems and features "outside the sim". The drawback to that approach is that the aircraft must be updated to match the sim's updates. Designing an aircraft solely based on the sim's SDK extends the duration of the aircraft's update cycle because features in the SDK generally have backwards compatibility.

Further, why should  the average developer waste effort on duplicating  functionality that is already built into the sim? Most users aren't looking for a so-called study level aircraft.

While most users might not want study level aircraft, I suspect that in terms of payware aircraft sales that’s where the money is. 

16 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

Yeah, it's all me, I take credit for everything LM have provided since 2013:

• 64bit
• PBR
• Dynamic Lights (aka Volumentric)
• Dynamic Reflections
• TrueSKY (Enhanced Atmospherics)
• nVidia Wave Works
• SpeedTrees (3D vegetation)
• HDR
• SSAA support
• Variable Refresh Rate support
• VR support
• 120 FPS TFR
• Dynamic Texture Streaming
• High Resolution Textures (1024 x 1024 terrain resolution support aka TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=10)
• 3 LOD levels higher
• 3X more Autogen
• Volumetric Fog
• Windshield Effects
• Godrays
• Ability for high quality shadow maps
• DX12
• Add-On process
• Momentum Effects
• GPS Network Transmit
• PDK all features
• SDK all added features
• More threading support

Yep, that was all me, no one else had any input at all. 🙄

  As real as it gets?

 

 

 

Hi Rob!

1000times Thumbs UP! I love P3D V5 for what it is and it allows me a lot to do wich MSFS does (yet) not allow (VR Tubeliners)!

Now I am really hoping they make EA stunning and bring it out of the Beta mode. I think EA has a lot more potential and I think it can give us similar looks like in MSFS (they did actually on the atmospheric looks a stunning job)!

In my opinion the EA mode is really important to bring the sim visually levels up! Also the "water" needs some work. I am hoping for 5.1 any time soon with updated EA (VR in singlepass with the use of EA) and updatet water!

Cheers and thanks for all your input! P3DV5 has really good USP´s and a good chance to "stay tuned"!

Marcus

Just now, Rob_Ainscough said:

I'm not permitted to comment of v5.1 per NDA.  Agree with your input about EA which has been passed along by myself and many others and hasn't fallen on deaf ears.

Cheers, Rob.

I know Rob. I am not seeking for answers. But you have a good feeling what the community wants! 

P3D stays on my end. EA has catched me and I watched a lot of Simuls videos. There is room for lots of enhancements. 

Also LM needs to optimize the multi core and cpu usage more. Performance is already great but I have a feeling that the usage of vram isnt optimized yet. 

We will see.....always looking forward for improvements. 

 

Very much looking for V5.1.  While I've enjoyed doing some sightseeing in MSFS, I find myself now back to simulating airline flights in P3D.  

Quite frankly I can see maintaining P3D and MSFS for a very long time--they're just very different animals.   I think with as much as both LM & MS have in these base programs already, and the robust mature 3rd party support for P3D, the study-level aircraft, 3rd party stunning HD terminals, and seasonal changes w/ best possible mesh & Orbx regional landclass is perfectly adequate when you're doing long distance high altitude routes.  

MSFS could stay focused on VFR flying largely and dominate there which arguably they are close to doing already, and skip the 'full-service' simulator that P3D already has in many ways.  Otherwise, if both platforms are striving to essentially be....the same thing....then one quite likely will fade away.  What a waste of effort.

Edited August 27, 20205 yr by Noel