Why scenery developers focus on MSFS instead of P3D?

[OzWhitey 3,353]

36 minutes ago, Groovy_Kincaid said:

people resist and make any and every comment they can to justify their sim of choice.

You’re posting on a P3D forum, pal. We don’t need to justify our choice of sim, we don’t need to “resist” - this forum exists specifically for discussing Lockheed Martin’s platform.

Most of us are only engaging because people who don’t currently fly P3D are continuously telling us how bad/outdated/dead the sim is. That’s nonsense and annoying, and although responding to these claims all the time is tiring, if we don’t it allows a false narrative to persist on this forum.

[GSalden 4,655]

4 minutes ago, OzWhitey said:

You’re posting on a P3D forum, pal. We don’t need to justify our choice of sim, we don’t need to “resist” - this forum exists specifically for discussing Lockheed Martin’s platform.

Most of us are only engaging because people who don’t currently fly P3D are continuously telling us how bad/outdated/dead the sim is. That’s nonsense and annoying, and although responding to these claims all the time is tiring, if we don’t it allows a false narrative to persist on this forum.

Correct.

And many of those people complained about having to tweak P3D and that they would never do that again.

MSFS is just a month old and people are tweaking multiple aircraft and features because they do not like how it is by default.

I have seen not one vid with the 320 or 787 that did not stutter in the outside view. Even with the Glass Cockpit frequency feature. At this moment P3D runs jets much smoother than MSFS. And many complaining about a stutter once in a while in P3D are now completely satisfied with a stuttering outside scenery in the 320 and 787.

Imho MSFS is built as a VFR game. And fast jets with complex systems are too much of one also want a lot of eyecandy, It’s all about balance,

FSX never had a fisheye correction feature . MSFS does not have one either. So people with multiple view systems have an issue. And why would MSFS ever have it ad the Xbox version will only use 1 Tb.

P3D has a fisheye correction.

 

 

 

 

[Groovy_Kincaid 71]

14 minutes ago, OzWhitey said:

You’re posting on a P3D forum, pal. We don’t need to justify our choice of sim, we don’t need to “resist” - this forum exists specifically for discussing Lockheed Martin’s platform.

Most of us are only engaging because people who don’t currently fly P3D are continuously telling us how bad/outdated/dead the sim is. That’s nonsense and annoying, and although responding to these claims all the time is tiring, if we don’t it allows a false narrative to persist on this forum.

Oh, we’re pals now? Awesome. Quite aware of what forum I am in and great job in paraphrasing what I meant. Here you have it. 

[IUBrian 151]

I’ll be curious to so how MSFS is able to handle complex add-ons, traffic, etc, in terms of frame rates and smoothness. I think part of the allure was from incredible visuals in preview videos that looked buttery smooth; I’m not convinced that will be the case when MSFS is loaded up with all the extras - sure, the default scenery may look spectacular but at what cost in terms of performance? If it is comparable to P3D then P3D will fade into oblivion for the entertainment crowd. If it instead is a “VFR Simulator” for low and slow flying, with P3D remaining the go to for complex simulation, I’m not sure what the market will be for complex add on airports long term. Maybe due to sheer volume of users with MSFS compared to P3D it will remain a much larger market, but I’ll be curious to see if enthusiasm remains as high in one year. For myself, I haven’t yet purchased MSFS, although when I feel a sufficient number of issues have been ironed out I probably will, at least for the “low and slow” flying. If I do that, however, I’ll be less interested in purchasing complex airports as I have been with P3D. It makes a difference if I’m flying an airliner out of Indianapolis (which sadly hasn’t been developed), but if I’m flying out of nearby Eagle Creek, I don’t really care if a few hangars are rendered in photorealistic detail on my way to a 2 minute taxi to a single runway, and those are the types of airports I would be flying in and out of, not the big ones. 

[OzWhitey 3,353]

50 minutes ago, Groovy_Kincaid said:

Oh, we’re pals now? Awesome. Quite aware of what forum I am in and great job in paraphrasing what I meant. Here you have it. 

No, we’re not pals. Maybe one day, who knows.

Look, it’s bad enough when people come to this forum and speak ill of P3D. But it’s worse when they come here and try and make us feel stupid for liking it.

[OzWhitey 3,353]

58 minutes ago, GSalden said:

At this moment P3D runs jets much smoother than MSFS

I posted a random picture of my Maddog in Hobart AU2 in this thread yesterday. What I didn’t mention was that this complex airliner with full AIG and a bunch of other good stuff was running at 100 frames per second.

Good luck running multiscreens or VR smoothly in MSFS with an airliner any time soon. That sim is good at what it does, but there’s a lot of things it can’t do now and may never do well.

Edited September 21, 2020 by OzWhitey

[SAS443 1,714]

15 minutes ago, OzWhitey said:

What I didn’t mention was that this complex airliner with full AIG and a bunch of other good stuff was running at 100 frames per second.

So when I fly the maddog with my 9900k/2080ti I should except nothing less than 100fps? That is the average value?

[OzWhitey 3,353]

4 minutes ago, SAS443 said:

So when I fly the maddog with my 9900k/2080ti I should except nothing less than 100fps? That is the average value?

Not quite sure what you mean, SAS. I was using it as an example of the much better frames you can get with p3d.

what you accept is up to you. I want about 90 fps because i am typically using vr. Those who fly with triple screens will also want excellent performance at baseline.

there’s no way to calculate an average fps as theres way too many variables.

[Groovy_Kincaid 71]

28 minutes ago, OzWhitey said:

No, we’re not pals. Maybe one day, who knows.

Here’s to hoping sunshine!

However, I did notice that you cropped out the beginning of my quote where I said “In general...”. So, I think you were making a whole lot of nothing about nothing. I did not disparage P3D once. 
 

How many times has a new platform been announced and the typical forum responses are similar to “If it isn’t this, doesn’t support that, or allow this, I am not in”. That’s the typical resistance that I was referring to. Personally, I don’t care what you do (general population and directed at you personally) or what platform you use.

As stated, I am still on FS9. And I don’t care what people think. My other hobby is cycling and I have quite a bit invested in that with several bikes. Some of those performance tires and wheels ain’t cheap. Nothing beats getting up at 6 AM and hitting the road for 5 hours.

I remember the days of FSX vs. FS9. The crew from the FSX forums would come over to the FS9 forums and tell us what they thought and how old FS9 was. Really, was there a 3 year gap or something?

Anyway, I digress, in summation, I was speaking in general, because that’s what I wrote, I did not point to any sim in specific. And I didn’t rat off about how P3D is old or anything like that. 
 

Keep your chin up!

[Patco Lch 1,462]

3 hours ago, Cognita said:

So I wonder if sales will not slow just because many people, like me, have most of what they need/want and are now enjoying learning and simulating.

That's me.🙂

[Dreamflight767 311]

One of the biggest reasons I was ready to move to MSFS was because of the updated and large selection of airports.  I've since learned that not be the case so I'm sticking with v4.  I'm shocked (and depressed) by how slow DEV have been making airports for P3D even before MSFS was announced.

If P3D (suddenly) had an increase in updated airports, I won't move to MSFS for years.  But, once I read of better coverage in MSFS AND there are better airliners, I'll move on from P3D.

As a matter of fact, not updating airports is one of my biggest peeves with LM and why I no longer have allegiance to them - it's all my payware.

 

[GSalden 4,655]

56 minutes ago, Dreamflight767 said:

One of the biggest reasons I was ready to move to MSFS was because of the updated and large selection of airports.  I've since learned that not be the case so I'm sticking with v4.  I'm shocked (and depressed) by how slow DEV have been making airports for P3D even before MSFS was announced.

If P3D (suddenly) had an increase in updated airports, I won't move to MSFS for years.  But, once I read of better coverage in MSFS AND there are better airliners, I'll move on from P3D.

As a matter of fact, not updating airports is one of my biggest peeves with LM and why I no longer have allegiance to them - it's all my payware.

 

V5 has 24.000 improved airports ...

[simbol 5,807]

12 hours ago, Christopher Low said:

The day I worry about being politically correct is the day that I run naked down my local high street singing Yankee Doodle Dandy.

😂

[OzWhitey 3,353]

16 hours ago, Groovy_Kincaid said:

Here’s to hoping sunshine!

However, I did notice that you cropped out the beginning of my quote where I said “In general...”. So, I think you were making a whole lot of nothing about nothing. I did not disparage P3D once. 
 

How many times has a new platform been announced and the typical forum responses are similar to “If it isn’t this, doesn’t support that, or allow this, I am not in”. That’s the typical resistance that I was referring to. Personally, I don’t care what you do (general population and directed at you personally) or what platform you use.

As stated, I am still on FS9. And I don’t care what people think. My other hobby is cycling and I have quite a bit invested in that with several bikes. Some of those performance tires and wheels ain’t cheap. Nothing beats getting up at 6 AM and hitting the road for 5 hours.

I remember the days of FSX vs. FS9. The crew from the FSX forums would come over to the FS9 forums and tell us what they thought and how old FS9 was. Really, was there a 3 year gap or something?

Anyway, I digress, in summation, I was speaking in general, because that’s what I wrote, I did not point to any sim in specific. And I didn’t rat off about how P3D is old or anything like that. 
 

Keep your chin up!

I’ve thought about the nuance of what you originally wrote. I still object to the inference that people who fly P3D are reacting in a reflex manner to the new sim, which is what you were arguing.

That’s not what I see here. People are pointing out that P3D does a lot of things that are core to serious simulation better than MSFS does. And they are sick and tired of people telling them that their sim is dead and they are insightless for sticking with it (I appreciate that you didn’t do that, but it’s a common theme in this sub in recent months).

Your argument is also a bit off base in that Prepar3d v5 is not “old”, or at least it’s only a bit older than MSFS, it’s being actively developed and is technically more advanced in some aspects (Umberto mentioned it was the more powerful platform from a dev perspective).  It’s a DX12 VR-compatible sim that is optimised for modern hardware to a greater degree than MSFS is. So, again, it’s not about holding on to something old and dear - it’s more that if I want to fly a complex airliner in VR or with a home cockpit (i do both), P3D is a much better platform right now.

Anyway, as I said, I reread your post series and they’re growing on me despite the fact that I still disagree with the applicability of some points as noted above. So here, have an upvote, Groovy. 🙂

 

Edited September 22, 2020 by OzWhitey

[simbol 5,807]

I am not yet convinced of the size of the market for MSFS over the long run.. it will be interesting to see the reactions when P3D release an update.. that alongside with more time allowing users and gamer's to use MSFS will reveal if the numbers are there or not..

Gamer always move on to the next title.. it is about living a fantasy, achieve goals and explore something new.. simulation is not about that, simulation is about replicating real life.. and most gamers are looking to "escape" the real world.

S.