MSFS surely does look good, but P3D is improving and you can fly jetliners

And if TrueSky will be completely functional then the clouds/sky will match the MSFS ones or even look better ( DX12)

Regarding the MSFS eyecandy :

P3D (FranceVFR) :

 

 

amen.  the msfs buzz has worn off for me and I'm back to flying the great airplanes I love.  Maybe MSFS=future.  uncertain i guess at this point. 

1 hour ago, GSalden said:

MSFS surely does look good, but P3D is improving and you can fly jetliners

And if TrueSky will be completely functional then the clouds/sky will match the MSFS ones or even look better ( DX12)

Regarding the MSFS eyecandy :

P3D (FranceVFR) :

 

 

Does look good!

 

However, I'm finding the overall lighting and ground object shadowing in MSFS to be so much better.  For some reason the objects and terrain in P3D look a little too bright and cartoony and lack decent shadowing.  Shader mods don't add much of a realistic effect for me as they make everything appear too dark. 

 

Getting harder to get back to enjoying the view in P3D currently for me at least!

For instance look at this user posted screenshot from MSFS as an example...:

 

 

 

 

Everything in my P3D sim looks exactly like the left side of the screenshot from every angle no matter what my settings are on.

 

 

 

Edited September 1, 20205 yr by Kilo60

2 minutes ago, Kilo60 said:

For instance look at this user posted screenshot from MSFS as an example...:

 

 

 

 

Everything in my P3D sim looks exactly like the left side of the screenshot from every angle no matter what my settings are on.

 

 

 

Use receive shadows for buildings in P3D....

Do you see all that in MSFS when flying above 10.000 ft ? 
MSFS is a very nice VFR game but no flightsim at this moment.

P3D:

 

18 minutes ago, GSalden said:

MSFS is a very nice VFR game but no flightsim at this moment.

 

 

this is it.  While MSFS might look better to me, the unrealistic aircraft, not always real world weather, airports with totally different taxiways than real life make P3D a clear winner for those trully wishing to come as close as possible to simulating flight.  Yes joyrides in MSFS are fun, but I really like the realism of p3d. 

33 minutes ago, micstatic said:

this is it.  While MSFS might look better to me, the unrealistic aircraft, not always real world weather, airports with totally different taxiways than real life make P3D a clear winner for those trully wishing to come as close as possible to simulating flight.  Yes joyrides in MSFS are fun, but I really like the realism of p3d. 

Asobo has a lot of work to do. Aerosoft and some others are helping making an enhanced SDK so complex jetliners can be added.

However, lots of eyecandy always causes less performance ; in case of MSFS it causes stutters ( look at all jetliner vids ) because of the speed being too much for smooth performance.

Use MSFS for VFR flying . Hopefully the flight characteristics can be improved , the obelisk trees can be fixed , the fisheye fix will be made working, the mesh issues will be fixed etc. That will make it a nice VFR game .

P3D and MSFS and XP can all coexist 

Let's pretend V5 was a fine simulator in its default state when it was first released. LM has since remedied plenty of shortcomings. Asobo will obviously do that aswell. Both V5 and MSFS were released premature...no idea why LM rushed v5. That was such a clumsy move. At least MS made no secret they wanted their money.

Anyway, following forum post by user B777ER sums up this place around V5 launch (I bet he had an AMD gpu 🤪)

"If LM was an AAA studio and they released something that is as half-baked, bug riddled, CTD prone as v5 is, the gaming press (along with the tens of thousands of users) would have eviscerated them online in article after article. Only because of the very niche market they have they been able to escape any bad press really. They really screwed the pooch on this release. now 3rd party dev's are held up such as FSL and PMDG (NGXu). Unreal what a mess they have made. Even Rob and a couple others have said it will bascially be v5.1 before this thing is even where it needs to be."

😂

1 hour ago, SAS443 said:

. Even Rob and a couple others have said it will bascially be v5.1 before this thing is even where it needs to be."

😂

He was right except that it got "where it needed to be" with Hotfix No. 2.

Yeah I had a line of firetrucks at 35,000 feet in the release-to-market v5.  ha ha.  There they were, cruising right along.

Some tried to use v5 when they shouldn’t have. They didn’t have enough vram or didn’t understand the settings.  From day 1 my problems were minor. Was true sky ready right away?  Nope. But I just click it off. All while enjoying massive performance upgrades. So a vocal group made themselves heard about their problems. But I had none of it. 

7 hours ago, Kilo60 said:

For some reason the objects and terrain in P3D look a little too bright and cartoony and lack decent shadowing. 

It is clearly different for different people.  I've only done maybe 8 1h sessions and flights now in MSFS and the scenery, while clearly matching photoreality far better than P3D could hope to, there is a certain blahness to the actual image quality.  I'm using the Ultra preset, w/ rendering at 100.  Distant scenes can look like a pastel painting and not very crisp and real.  I've also not done the biggest variety of areas yet.  It seems like urban scenes are quite good, whereas wilderness scenes less so.  Part of it I'm sure is that I've become accustomed to P3D's visuals having seen the basic stuff for over a decade.  At the risk of being described as cartoonish you can actually carve out a better looking reality than what reality offers, w/ the poetic license that comes w/ development.  There is a certain fuzziness in MSFS that looks unrealistic to me, it's too uniformly so in the distance.  I think cloud shapes/structures look more realistic in ASN4/REX-SF.   The sky, while with some amazing colors at dawn/dusk, also looks kind of painted and 2-dimensional almost.   I love the variable haze and how it is implented in P3D/REX/ASN4 and I don't see this in MSFS.  It is impressive to be able to see a much closer rendition of what is actually there, the photoreal part, but in some ways image 'quality' seems to be quite inferior in MSFS.   Shadow edges as so low resolution, and I think I'm maxed out on the slider for it in MSFS.

I'm glad I have MSFS and hope it continues to evolve and improve it has potential, even if only as a way to tour the virtual world and get a better idea what things look like. 

I do think the same people who programmed my wife's 2015 Forester's media controls likely were the team who built the camera system in MSFS:  robust for sure, but not particular user-friendly nor intuitive 

Edited September 2, 20205 yr by Noel

7 hours ago, GSalden said:

Use receive shadows for buildings in P3D....

Do you see all that in MSFS when flying above 10.000 ft ? 
MSFS is a very nice VFR game but no flightsim at this moment.

P3D:

 

Hmmm...

 

I have and my scenery doesn't look anything like that?

9 hours ago, GSalden said:

Use receive shadows for buildings in P3D....

Do you see all that in MSFS when flying above 10.000 ft ? 
MSFS is a very nice VFR game but no flightsim at this moment.

P3D:

 

Is the receive shadows for buildings still an fps killer?

12 hours ago, SAS443 said:

Let's pretend V5 was a fine simulator in its default state when it was first released. LM has since remedied plenty of shortcomings. Asobo will obviously do that aswell. Both V5 and MSFS were released premature...no idea why LM rushed v5. That was such a clumsy move. At least MS made no secret they wanted their money.

Anyway, following forum post by user B777ER sums up this place around V5 launch (I bet he had an AMD gpu 🤪)

"If LM was an AAA studio and they released something that is as half-baked, bug riddled, CTD prone as v5 is, the gaming press (along with the tens of thousands of users) would have eviscerated them online in article after article. Only because of the very niche market they have they been able to escape any bad press really. They really screwed the pooch on this release. now 3rd party dev's are held up such as FSL and PMDG (NGXu). Unreal what a mess they have made. Even Rob and a couple others have said it will bascially be v5.1 before this thing is even where it needs to be."

😂

Never had a CTD on none of my 2 pc’s....

V5 HF2 is very stable and smooth ; with EA and without it .

That V5 has been released to soon I agree with that. The first V5 release should have been the HF2 version.

MS has released a game which was far from ready. Issues with flight characterizes, obelisk trees, missing major airports ( like Stuttgart ), fisheye correction that does not work, elevation issues, controls sensivity issues , blurry issues ( only sharp around the edges ), very simple SDK so no complex 3rd part ac can be flown, etc..

MS should have given Asobo at least 3 more months so the base was there. Luckily AS is helping on the SDK.

If MSFS will be smooth with high settings + complex jetliners + bad weather + AI ac at/around airports and it supports Prosim I will switch immediately....

But I guess it will take a long time or it will never happen .

It’s all about a balance between features and eyecandy and performance...

Have you heard anything about P3Dv5.1? It's time to show up!)