1 hour ago, Carts85 said:

study level aircraft from PMDG/FSlabs etc brings in revenue for Microsoft as they they take a cut of the marketplace profit sales without a doubt.

But no 3rd party developer is forced to use the marketplace.

5 minutes ago, Farlis said:

But no 3rd party developer is forced to use the marketplace.

True, personally I will be buying from the marketplace where I can. If we want to have a sim thats improved for years to come we should try an support it as much as we can.

2 hours ago, pstrub said:

Just 10 minutes ago I played around with this, my perfect solution would've been to allow mouse wheel zoom when pressing ctrl or when keeping the right mouse button pressed. First one can't be assigned, the second one can... For a split second I was pleased to avoid zooming while using the wheel to turn the knobs. Then I noticed that this somehow blocks the function to move the view direction holding the right button while moving the mouse. So still experimenting to find the perfect solution. 

Huh?

1 minute ago, Ricardo41 said:

Huh?

What's your question? Maybe I didn't express myself clearly!?

Edited September 12, 20205 yr by pstrub

I deleted the mouse zoom off the middle wheel, and still move the view when holding the right mouse button. 

4 minutes ago, Ricardo41 said:

I deleted the mouse zoom off the middle wheel, and still move the view when holding the right mouse button. 

ahhh ... no, what I did was something different. No problem when deleting it, however, I hoped to have mouse zoom while holding the right mouse button. The control settings seem to accommodate that and even show RMB + wheel down / up, but then the function "hold right mouse button to move the view" stopped working. 

Would be a logical solution for me, everything you can do with the mouse to change the view (move / zoom) happens while you hold the RMB.

Edited September 12, 20205 yr by pstrub

The point is that the difference in quality between default airplanes and addon airplanes has shrunk dramatically. I've never ever flown a default aircraft in P3D, FSX, FS2004, etc. Never. Now, I'm perfectly happy with the TBM 930 - sure, a couple of things need fixing, but I don't see myself shelling out 79.99 for a"study level" TBM 930. 

Let's look at the airbus: If I remember correctly, you didn't even HAVE an airbus in P3D. So if you wanted one, you had to buy the Aerosoft version, with its "if you're not hitting 18 fps constantly, the plane will instantly die" rubbish, or you had to shell out for the FSLabs version. 

Now you have a default airbus that's being ziboed. Once that has advanced far enough, a lot of simmers are going to say: Good enough for me! It'll eat into Aerosoft's sale like moths through your Tuxedo. Sure, you'll be stuck with the 320Neo, but there are literally thousands of routes that you can fly with this plane, all over the world, so I personally can live with that. 

Did I say A320Neo? Does the Aerosoft line-up even have a 320Neo? As far as I can tell (can't fly the bus because of my substandard system) the MSFS version has wingflex. Will the Aerosoft have wingflex, or do simmers have to fight tooth and nail to convince Aerosoft that, yes, the airbus birds have wingflex.- 

TLDR: The default planes that come with MSFS are a huge leap forward for the franchise. 

9 minutes ago, Ricardo41 said:

[...]

TLDR: The default planes that come with MSFS are a huge leap forward for the franchise. 

Yes, I agree. If they fix a couple of issues they've already acknowledged, like tuning the flight dynamics, fixing a couple of G1000 issues, the MSFS default planes are nice planes, if you hold them by previous MS FS standards. Less mature with respect to bugs and flight dynamics, of course, but with great attention to detail. 

If 3pd focus on aircraft that aren't available in MSFS, I still see them getting a fair share of the market. 

Edit: And I don't see MS publishing more aircraft anytime soon.

Edited September 12, 20205 yr by pstrub

I think everyone needs to go fly the 737 or A320 in FSX for a while to get a good idea of what one should expect. Everyone has been flying PMDG, FSLabs, or Leonardo aircraft for too long for a frame of reference. Although there's some bugs and definitely some wonky flight dynamics, they are much higher fidelity aircraft than the FSX default. I don't think it will take much to get them even better given how far the mods have improved them already. That said, bring on the third party developer aircraft, they will be fantastic in this sim.

10 minutes ago, Ricardo41 said:

The point is that the difference in quality between default airplanes and addon airplanes has shrunk dramatically. I've never ever flown a default aircraft in P3D, FSX, FS2004, etc. Never. Now, I'm perfectly happy with the TBM 930 - sure, a couple of things need fixing, but I don't see myself shelling out 79.99 for a"study level" TBM 930. 

Let's look at the airbus: If I remember correctly, you didn't even HAVE an airbus in P3D. So if you wanted one, you had to buy the Aerosoft version, with its "if you're not hitting 18 fps constantly, the plane will instantly die" rubbish, or you had to shell out for the FSLabs version. 

Now you have a default airbus that's being ziboed. Once that has advanced far enough, a lot of simmers are going to say: Good enough for me! It'll eat into Aerosoft's sale like moths through your Tuxedo. Sure, you'll be stuck with the 320Neo, but there are literally thousands of routes that you can fly with this plane, all over the world, so I personally can live with that. 

Did I say A320Neo? Does the Aerosoft line-up even have a 320Neo? As far as I can tell (can't fly the bus because of my substandard system) the MSFS version has wingflex. Will the Aerosoft have wingflex, or do simmers have to fight tooth and nail to convince Aerosoft that, yes, the airbus birds have wingflex.- 

TLDR: The default planes that come with MSFS are a huge leap forward for the franchise. 

I wholeheartedly agree!  What I'm noticing is how much CPU headroom I have now flying the TBM930.  And that plane has a lot going on with it processing-wise for a light aircraft.  Since I discovered what hyperthreading does for MSFS I've found massive headroom for adding more complex aircraft from 3rd party sources which bodes well for this sim becoming a platform for any kind of flight sim use, not just VFR.  I always fly IFR plans with the TBM930.   Haven't ventured into anything but the 172 and TPM930 so far, but it's really impressive.  The boys at FSCaptain are very much interested in making it work and are already having some successes there.  Once it arrives for MSFS, it may be very hard to fire up P3D.  Lately I've been flying the PMDG NGUx and 777 between big terminals, then flying MSFS to ferry PAX to regional airports and that is working.  I flew into CYYC in the TBM930 from CYXC, over the Rockies, and flying into Calgary was just amazing.   This morning I fired up the 777 for routing to KSAN (have to deselect Orbx SCA regional it's a bit much for that plan into KSAN-HD) and the entire airport and surroundings looked very cartoonish.  But no matter, the 777 is awesome so we ignore the outside and do what we do.  Up in the air visuals looked very decent, if nowhere near as compelling as the day before's flight over the Rockies.  I must say the clouds using REX SkyForce in ASN4 in most ways look much much nicer than clouds in MSFS.  There is poor variability in clouds MSFS overall IMO.   No such thing as cloud types and structures in MSFS it's all the same basic type it would appear.  Are there any cirros layers on high?  

Despite the fact P3D has been a source of major enjoyment for me, I've always disliked the cost of the platform, and didn't care for where it came from, and especially the phony language in the EULA.  I've always looked forward to the day I would kiss LM goodbye and this may come now.  I didn't buy v5.x and am very glad about that so far.  It's really the identical sim, w/ a few improvements once again, for another $200 if you're honest.