16 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Will performance at 4K being acceptable as it is in P3D v4.5?

Let's wait and see how performance will be once PMDG releases its 737NG3 this year or next year. But performance so far on my end, is very good, except for the airliners where  `CoherentGTDraw` process drags down the main thread in the cockpit which causes the lower FPS and hence the sim becomes CPU limited : https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/cpu-bug-limited-by-main-thread-is-causing-the-bad-fps/190971

Edited August 25, 20205 yr by omarsmak30

36 minutes ago, ParaMan said:

I respect your opinion, but I honestly have no idea how to go back to P3D after flying this sim. Sure, I'm waiting on PMDG but the GA aircraft are more than enough to keep me occupied.

Same here,

With all the pro's and con's of each, As much as i wanted to, I had a problem flying P3D V5 last night after flying MSFS. Im a VFR pilot and the visuals were just to over whelming in MSFS. I personally will gladly and patiently wait for updates to MSFS and still utilize P3D for other aspects of flying, But lets face it, Once things start getting updated and the add on developers start to get their stuff going its going to be a nice ride. Patience, 9 of 10 times always wins out.......  Fly what gets you high!

2 minutes ago, Ed_S_Pilot said:

Same here,

With all the pro's and con's of each, As much as i wanted to, I had a problem flying P3D V5 last night after flying MSFS. Im a VFR pilot and the visuals were just to over whelming in MSFS. I personally will gladly and patiently wait for updates to MSFS and still utilize P3D for other aspects of flying, But lets face it, Once things start getting updated and the add on developers start to get their stuff going its going to be a nice ride. Patience, 9 of 10 times always wins out.......  Fly what gets you high!

Did you ever try FranceVFR scenery or Orbx True Earth scenery ?
And there is much more PR scenery + custom AG + POIs...

You cannot compare LC based scenery from one sim to PR scenery + custom AG + POIs in another.

The good thing is that with MSFS all flightsim developers are waken up and sharp again 🤠

 

 

Wouldn't expect 100% of flight simmers to move to the new sim within a week of it coming out.

You get so connected to these things and we don't have and will likely never have the 'do everything really well' flight sim.

I went back and forth between FSX (with Steve's DX10 fixes, RC4, ASX etc etc) and XPlane for a long time. You just couldn't beat the depth and raw functionality of FSX with a bunch of payware but man it always ran like a pig and the handling never felt convincing to me.

Coming from XPlane to MFS though is very different. MFS addresses the biggest shortcomings of XP - weather and scenery, and the GA feel superb to hand fly just like in XP. It's an easier transition for me to make, almost overnight.

Just as Slides said, I too am excited for the hobby again.

XPlane owes me nothing, I've had years of joy with it and plenty of amazing moments. But I'd expect to see quality and study aircraft in MFS long before the Laminar guys start to work on weather and scenery.

4 hours ago, omarsmak30 said:

Can moderators please close these kind of topics? Is getting very tiring reading these rantings instead of sharing tips and asking questions.

One man's rant is another's man's opinion.

Edited August 25, 20205 yr by B777ER

Interesting thread.  I bought MSFS and have used it since day 1.  BUT...I'm also using P3d.  From what's been said, I am finding MSFS to be a good VFR sim.  The autopilot seems to be something that is still being refined, from what I'm reading and finding out for myself.  However, every day I still need my Microsoft Force Feedback2 fix!  I miss FF in MSFS and heard that it will be coming some day soon.  THAT will make a big difference for me, I'm sure.  Landing and taking off just have no feel for me, and that lessens the perception of reality.  P3dv5 some days runs great for me, and some days I get stutters up the wazoo!  V4.5 never causes me any concerns.  Lockheed Martin can insure their longevity if they come up with a "super update" that increases reliability (and eliminates the need for so many user tweaks) and ADDS something spectacular.  Perhaps a huge improvement in True Sky would do it.  

Whatever....both sims give me pleasure throughout the day, and there are so many wonderful places to visit in MSFS because of all the real detail that's built in.  I only wish my home airport, KABE, were an enhanced airport.  THAT would be excellent since Allentown, Pa., is the 3rd largest city in the state.  I guess you can't have everything.

Good discussion.

Stan

Edited August 25, 20205 yr by spilok

The OP (original posters) simply need to write a complete subject line. I would have skipped this thread if the Subject was 'A personal point of view why I am leaving MSFS'. 🙂

Bob

5 minutes ago, GSalden said:

Did you ever try FranceVFR scenery or Orbx True Earth scenery ?
And there is much more PR scenery + custom AG + POIs...

You cannot compare LC based scenery from one sim to PR scenery + custom AG + POIs in another.

The good thing is that with MSFS all flightsim developers are waken up and sharp again 🤠

 

 

I have all the usually suspects for P3D from orbx in P3D, including true earth Northern Calif. and it does not look as good as it does in MSFS. 

11 minutes ago, spilok said:

Interesting thread.  I bought MSFS and have used it since day 1.  BUT...I'm also using P3d.  From what's been said, I am finding MSFS to be a good VFR sim.  The autopilot seems to be something that is still being refined, from what I'm reading and finding out for myself.  However, every day I still need my Microsoft Force Feedback2 fix!  I miss FF in MSFS and heard that it will be coming some day soon.  THAT will make a big difference for me, I'm sure.  Landing and taking off just have no feel for me, and that lessens the perception of reality.  P3dv5 some days runs great for me, and some days I get stutters up the wazoo!  V4.5 never causes me any concerns.  Lockheed Martin can insure their longevity if they come up with a "super update" that increases reliability (and eliminates the need for so many user tweaks) and ADDS something spectacular.  Perhaps a huge improvement in True Sky would do it.  

Whatever....both sims give me pleasure throughout the day, and there are so many wonderful places to visit in MSFS because of all the real detail that's built in.  I only wish my home airport, KABE, were an enhanced airport.  THAT would be excellent since Allentown, Pa is the 3rd largest city in the state.  I guess you can't have everything.

Good discussion.

Stan

Agree...

 

17 minutes ago, GSalden said:

You cannot compare LC based scenery from one sim to PR scenery + custom AG + POIs in another

Yes you can. Even if the approaches are different, they both aim to visually represent the world, and so we can quite simply compare how they achieve that aim, i.e. how do they look.

When MSFS shows off this upcoming VR  stuff it's a done deal, no going back it will be MSFS 2020 all the way.

Edited August 25, 20205 yr by SirDan

     I have not taken the plunge yet into MSFSXX:  I had a feeling that a huge, complicated project like this would be buggy.  But missing many features that used to be standard?.   I'm sure everyone else out there did not expect everything to work 100% out of the "box" . But I cringed when this was first introduced to the flight sim world that it world also be an XBox add-on.  I had a feeling it might be dumbed-down to appeal to a younger demographics.  Am I right?  Is that why it may have been released a little too early w/o some fixes?  (Plus all the flying tips included for novice simmers).  Who knows?  Only Microsoft.  Or perhaps  MS saw the all excitement it generated from their hype campaign and decided to get it out there?  We'll fix it all down the road, said they.  Even the installation process is a needless MS fiasco, and overly complicated. 

   But enough nitpicking:  I myself will purchase it after the New Year - but only after investing in a new gaming rig in to run this monster of the midway.  So maybe, just maybe in 6 months time, this sim will live up to everyone's expectations?  

     

 

Edited August 25, 20205 yr by overspeed3

38 minutes ago, omarsmak30 said:

Let's wait and see how performance will be once PMDG releases its 737NG3 this year or next year. But performance so far on my end, is very good, except for the airliners where  `CoherentGTDraw` process drags down the main thread in the cockpit which causes the lower FPS and hence the sim becomes CPU limited : https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/cpu-bug-limited-by-main-thread-is-causing-the-bad-fps/190971

Despite having a Microsoft account I wasn't able to read that linked topic. I believe the beta was rushed out by the bean counters for whatever reason. Strange to have over a year of alpha testing followed by 3 weeks of beta. Never enough time as has been shown by the sheer number of bugs reported.

If a patch can substantially improve performance with default aircraft only then can 3rd party developers plan with condidence.

19 minutes ago, Ed_S_Pilot said:

I have all the usually suspects for P3D from orbx in P3D, including true earth Northern Calif. and it does not look as good as it does in MSFS. 

Look at my vids ( see my signature ) to see what can be accomplished..

14 minutes ago, scotchegg said:

Yes you can. Even if the approaches are different, they both aim to visually represent the world, and so we can quite simply compare how they achieve that aim, i.e. how do they look.

Did you read what I wrote ? 🧐 ......