On 11/12/2020 at 10:24 AM, eslader said:

I have both 4.5 and MSFS. I will not be purchasing P3d5. Why? Because 4.5 is as good as I need it to be. MSFS blows 4 and 5 out of the water graphically. All I'm waiting for is "study" level addons. Once they arrive, P3d will join the long list of "sims I used to run." For now, I fire up 4.5 when I want to fly an airliner or A2A's Connie.

And I find myself not doing that terribly often anymore because unlike all the flight sims before it, MSFS actually makes VFR navigation possible because you're not flying over hundreds of square miles of repeating, made-up textures. MSFS approximates the real world closely enough that it even has the weird geometric patterns my neighbor painted on his driveway. It'd be a waste of money to buy 5, for me. With that new capability, I'm having enough fun at the moment flying low'n'slow in the turboprops. This presents a double advantage, because unused skills atrophy which means I get to learn how to fly a 737 all over again when PMDG releases the MSFS version. 😉

 

 

 

I so wish I'd read this before I doled out $199. 😞  I haven't invested heavily and after reading a lot of these comments I definitely won't, but especially this one.  #buyersremorse

On 2/19/2021 at 4:37 AM, GhostHunterGal said:

I so wish I'd read this before I doled out $199. 😞  I haven't invested heavily and after reading a lot of these comments I definitely won't, but especially this one.  #buyersremorse

Howdy,

I've used P3D since v2, which I paid $199 for, then again paid $199 for 3, then $199 for v4.  Then I bought MSFS.  I used P3D now probably 60% of total sim time, 40% for MSFS.  For a long time it was 90% MSFS, 10% P3D, but that has changed and in a good way actually.  Besides spending $600 for 3 versions of P3D, I also bought a boat load of ORBX regional sceneries.   So all told, well over $1200 for P3D w/ addons, maybe pushing $1500 or more.   Anyway, because performance is so poor overall in P3D compared to MSFS, what I've done which has been so liberating is use P3D for what it does far better than MSFS does, and that is simulate airline operations.  I use Ground Services X II and FSCaptain, and without FSCaptain I'd leave P3D permanently.   I only fly from pre-dusk thru post-dawn, night flights more or less, when scenery does not matter, except for the departure and arrival airports.  Because of this I disabled much of the Orbx regional sceneries which only stressed performance and adds nothing during low light flights.  So now I have plenty of headroom to land for example at KLAX totally fluid smooth w/ ample CPU headroom, more or less.  So, the liberating part was to be able to ignore the lame scenery (compared to what we have in MSFS), even enhanced lame scenery w/ Orbx regionals, and just use P3D for what it does best.   Night lighting at nice add on airports is very nice in P3D.  So I use MSFS for IFR flights w/ a little VFR thrown in, from pre-dawn til pre-dusk when you can appreciate the scenery.  After flying P3D, MSFS always looks astoundingly good.  But....I do enjoy the rituals/procedures in airliner cockpit simulation, especially as I say w/ FSCaptain, which again without it I'd leave P3D permanently.  I look forward to kissing P3D goodbye if and when MSFS completes its evolution to accomodate...PMDG & FSCaptain  

 

On 2/19/2021 at 12:37 PM, GhostHunterGal said:

I so wish I'd read this before I doled out $199. 😞  I haven't invested heavily and after reading a lot of these comments I definitely won't, but especially this one.  #buyersremorse

Sorry to hear that.
If you have the disk space, then there are freeware and payware options to give you photoreal scenery.

Freeware: Ortho4XP_FSX_P3D to create your own, ItalyPhotoreal.weebly, AirHispania forums, or where some kind flight simmers are hosting their work.
Payware: Orbx TrueEarth, MegaSceneryEarth among others.
 

No repeating patterns in my P3D. It can be done:

However, I can freely admit that MSFS is a better bet for continental-sized areas of photoreal scenery and requires minimal effort, as it's all hosted on Microsoft servers, rather than downloaded and installed on your own disk drives.

 

Guess we all like to have an opinion if we come from P3D and FSX, and although I realise I will be reiterating much that has already been said here, I'm afraid I'm no exception.

As Sticky pointed out - Procedural flying - P3D, landscapes - MSFS, is pretty much right. 

What this doesn't take into account is the sense of immersion from what MSFS does get right, and the mostly relatively small impact (for me) that it's problems give me.

So I would observe perhaps: 

P3D - Basics - v poor, Study level planes - amazing, some add-on airports great, the fact you have to buy some many add-ons to make it look half decent - not good. Not that many freebies, future uncertain. True Sky - potential for sure, but still deeply unsatisfactory. Had lot's of CTDs - relatively unstable. Big investment - well over £1,500.

MSFS - Basics potentially excellent - skies and landscapes incredible - planes often very much WIP right now but that's changing. Much more scenery coming up now, and much of it free. Plane mods becoming very promising indeed. No add on programs needed (weather, regions etc). For me pretty stable few CTDs most of the time. Future bright... investment so far  - well under £200 and excellent value.

From an experience point of view, I have been so immersed when flying in MSFS that I have never reinstalled P3D after reinstalling Windows and I haven't missed it.. and I had FSL Airbus, Milviz B350i and Dash 8 Q400 pro, Orbx regions and airports etc. I would love these planes and more Orbx airports and strips to be migrated to MSFS - obviously. 

ray

I understand this topic is a bit dated, but here goes anyway. I have been using p3d since it became available and now on v5. I am interested in MSFS and did try the $1 version when it came out but was not able to make it work. In p3d I have 5 monitors - 3 for wide view from the cockpit (Nvidia surround) and two for instruments. It is very easy to set up the 5 monitors in p3d. Also, I only fly four aircraft - PMDG 737, Aerosoft CRJ, Aerosoft Twin Otter and Majestic Q400.

Is there a viewer with experience who can advise me as to whether I could set up MSFS to match my p3d set up, and comment on the MSFS equivalent of the four aircraft.

Thanks for any replies.

Martin

 

 

 

 

34 minutes ago, Bigmarty said:

I understand this topic is a bit dated, but here goes anyway. I have been using p3d since it became available and now on v5. I am interested in MSFS and did try the $1 version when it came out but was not able to make it work. In p3d I have 5 monitors - 3 for wide view from the cockpit (Nvidia surround) and two for instruments. It is very easy to set up the 5 monitors in p3d. Also, I only fly four aircraft - PMDG 737, Aerosoft CRJ, Aerosoft Twin Otter and Majestic Q400.

Is there a viewer with experience who can advise me as to whether I could set up MSFS to match my p3d set up, and comment on the MSFS equivalent of the four aircraft.

Thanks for any replies.

Martin

 

 

 

 

I can't tell you about the monitors, but I can tell you that three of the four aircraft are already available for MSFS (CRJ) or very close to release (Twin Otter) or a couple of months close to release (PMDG 737). I was sticking to P3D until this summer (after having tried MSFS last year), but I finally fell for it when I tried again this summer. The graphics are just so important for immersion - and I am one of those guys that loves to follow procedures and nothin else, go figure. But those clouds in MSFS... oh boy.

50 minutes ago, Bigmarty said:

I understand this topic is a bit dated, but here goes anyway. I have been using p3d since it became available and now on v5. I am interested in MSFS and did try the $1 version when it came out but was not able to make it work. In p3d I have 5 monitors - 3 for wide view from the cockpit (Nvidia surround) and two for instruments. It is very easy to set up the 5 monitors in p3d. Also, I only fly four aircraft - PMDG 737, Aerosoft CRJ, Aerosoft Twin Otter and Majestic Q400.

Is there a viewer with experience who can advise me as to whether I could set up MSFS to match my p3d set up, and comment on the MSFS equivalent of the four aircraft.

Thanks for any replies.

Martin

 

 

 

 

A user here in Avsim named Gsalden has a multi monitor setup for MSFS.  You can ask him.

The Aerosoft CRJ is out for MSFS and people say it’s the best CRJ Aerosoft has done for any sim. PMDG 737 is estimated to come out for MSFS this quarter, if everything goes smoothly at PMDG. Aerosoft is working on the Twin Otter for MSFS, you can google it. Not sure where Majestic is with MSFS but given the P3D sales have tanked for many P3D add-on makers, leading to many 3rd parties to abandon future P3D projects, it’s just MSFS or X-Plane for Majestic in the future if they want to stay profitable  in the home consumer flight simulation market (or else Majesric needs other sources of income like commercial or military customers).

Edit: Majestic is working on bringing their lineup to MSFS and here is an updated comment from Majestic from 2 months ago: 

 

Edited October 28, 20214 yr by abrams_tank

2 hours ago, Bigmarty said:

I understand this topic is a bit dated, but here goes anyway. I have been using p3d since it became available and now on v5. I am interested in MSFS and did try the $1 version when it came out but was not able to make it work. In p3d I have 5 monitors - 3 for wide view from the cockpit (Nvidia surround) and two for instruments. It is very easy to set up the 5 monitors in p3d. Also, I only fly four aircraft - PMDG 737, Aerosoft CRJ, Aerosoft Twin Otter and Majestic Q400.

Is there a viewer with experience who can advise me as to whether I could set up MSFS to match my p3d set up, and comment on the MSFS equivalent of the four aircraft.

Thanks for any replies.

Martin

If this is all you fly.. I would say No.. not yet.

But you could get the standard edition of MSFS and fly some other aircraft to get a feel for it.. The Bonanza with the new G1000NXi is my favorite, but even a Carbon Cub could be fun to fly once in a while 🙂

So, why not both???

ps. sent you a PM

Edited October 28, 20214 yr by Bert Pieke

Recently I bought the MFSN Professional version about 120 €, I thought it would be a better thing and I have been disappointed, and in his day from FS98 to 2000 professional, which were not bad, but when they released the version that was more dedicated to the CHALLENGES that has FLY, like this, and above to put it in CONSOLES, "Pufffff". And on top of the mischief that they did not play from one day to another with NOT GIVE ASSISTANCE OR SUPPORT TO PROBLEMS, and leave us abandoned, I left it abandoned, luckily I found Prepar3D and I have spent my money enough from Planes to Scenarios, utilities and Hardware to modernize the PC etc. ... I am not going to abandon Prepar3D and even the latest version v5.3, Microsoft will have many PHOTOREALISTIC sceneries but when you fly at 30000 feet or more you see NOTHING, only the cockpit, clouds, stars etc ... the next version of Prepar3D will soon put MFS and their consoles in their place.

On 8/27/2020 at 8:14 PM, omarsmak30 said:

You can take a look at this video: 

 

I'm not sure this video is a fair comparison between the simulators.  MSFS would win in this video if the question was 'which simulator has the best base scenery out the box'. If the question was 'which simulator will give you the best choice for study level airliner flying', MSFS would be at least third.  It would be understandable to say MSFS will have study airliners soon, but if that is a valid point then one would have to mention that XPlane 12 is just around the corner and will have much improved graphics.

My response would be to 100 percent buy MSFS.  It is maturing nicely and will soon have study level airliners to follow the PMDG DC-6.  I would also say 100 percent to buy XPlane 12 when that is released (which I assume will be back compatible to the addons on XPlane 11).  Those two sims will cover everybody's needs nicely.

55 minutes ago, MVM55 said:

Recently I bought the MFSN Professional version about 120 €, I thought it would be a better thing and I have been disappointed, and in his day from FS98 to 2000 professional, which were not bad, but when they released the version that was more dedicated to the CHALLENGES that has FLY, like this, and above to put it in CONSOLES, "Pufffff". And on top of the mischief that they did not play from one day to another with NOT GIVE ASSISTANCE OR SUPPORT TO PROBLEMS, and leave us abandoned, I left it abandoned, luckily I found Prepar3D and I have spent my money enough from Planes to Scenarios, utilities and Hardware to modernize the PC etc. ... I am not going to abandon Prepar3D and even the latest version v5.3, Microsoft will have many PHOTOREALISTIC sceneries but when you fly at 30000 feet or more you see NOTHING, only the cockpit, clouds, stars etc ... the next version of Prepar3D will soon put MFS and their consoles in their place.

Cool story, bro. 

On 8/27/2020 at 9:00 PM, Sticky said:

Airline procedural flying —-> P3D

GA flying and/or amazing visuals —-> MSFS

I am exclusively flying tubeliners on VATSIM, so what you describe as airline procedural flying. 
I uninstalled P3D some time ago and switched to MSFS. Never looked back. 
 

For me personally P3D is dead. As soon as PMDG releases the 737 and the weather is fixed - why would you ever go back to P3D. 
But hey. Everyone is different. 

1 hour ago, MVM55 said:

... the next version of Prepar3D will soon put MFS and their consoles in their place.

Lol 

For sure. 

I'll NEVER uninstall P3d or XP. I cannot fly a B767F or realistic King Air 350i in MSFS and doubt if ever will at least with any fidelity. Dont care about pretty dirt. My conclusion is MSFS is, not going to say game as much as a novalty.

Edited December 5, 20214 yr by Adrian123

15 minutes ago, MySound said:

For me personally P3D is dead. As soon as PMDG releases the 737 and the weather is fixed - why would you ever go back to P3D. 
But hey. Everyone is different. 

This. I uninstalled P3D the day before the recent update came out lol 😑. Oh well. I couldn't get past that it looks like a cartoon, especially with the night color banding. Even fired up X-Plane because I wanted to take up the 767 and check out the X Enviro clouds. They just don't come close. Ugh, visuals, sadly have a pretty large influence in believably for me. If I want the most realistic experience in a flight sim with terrible visuals, I'll just wait to do my recurrent training at work...For now, MSFS does a really good job. To each their own.