Is it a good idea to get into Prepar3D now?

[Bob Scott 7,709]

31 minutes ago, jabloomf1230 said:

At least if you are going to quote what I said and respond, then respond appropriately. My quote said "MSFS scenery" and your response has nothing to do with scenery and everything to do with the piloting side of MSFS, which is still not even close to XP11 and P3d5. The two legacy sims are (to paraphrase Abraham Lincoln) "of the pilots, by the pilots and for the pilots." MSFS hasn't gotten that far yet, but I'll wager that they fix the piloting issues well before LM and especially LR fix the appearance deficits.

Yeah, OK, that's fair critique.  I was focused more on answering the OP's broader question about the advisability of jumping into P3D.

[scottb613 1,186]

Hi Folks,

Been MIA for a while - think I'll give P3D an update to v5 - vs - starting with an entirely new sim. P3D has kept me pretty darn happy.

Regards,
Scott

[Bob Scott 7,709]

14 minutes ago, scottb613 said:

Hi Folks,

Been MIA for a while - think I'll give P3D an update to v5 - vs - starting with an entirely new sim. P3D has kept me pretty darn happy.

Regards,
Scott

I highly recommend keeping v4 around as well, at least for a while.  I find myself going back to it probably one out of every 6-8 flights or so due to wanting to use an acft or scenery that isn't v5-compatible.

 

[Patco Lch 1,459]

1 hour ago, scottb613 said:

Hi Folks,

Been MIA for a while - think I'll give P3D an update to v5 - vs - starting with an entirely new sim. P3D has kept me pretty darn happy.

Regards,
Scott

Hi Scott, good choice and good to see you back.

[himmelhorse 1,276]

21 hours ago, BiologicalNanobot said:

• Is it really a good idea to get into Prepar3D v5 now? Will these airliners I've mentioned indeed take a lot of time to come to the new Microsoft Flight Simulator?
• What improvements will Prepar3D v6 bring?
• Even though I am really enjoying sky environment of Prepar3D v5, the ground environment is really disappointing. Is Orbx TrueEarth good for that purpose?
• I am also unsatisfied with the default night lighting, is there a visual add-on to make it look like X-Plane 11 night lighting?
• Overall, what visual add-ons do I need to make Prepar3D v5 look beautiful like X-Plane 11?

Hello mate,

1. V5 is very nice with some aircraft still not converted from v4.5 (iFly is just one example) It also, for the time being at least gobbles up VRAM and I believe you need at least 10gb vram memory for your GPU.  This, I believe is temporary and there is work afoot to improve performance.  

2. v6 will bring more information on how long is a piece of string.  At this stage, we have not even got v5.1 so anything or information has got to be based on speculation and that ain't good to lay bets on.

3. It is amazing that you mention Ground environment for P3D. Default scenery, in comparison to default MSFS scenery is dismal to say the least. Any ORBX scenery (other than YBBN Australia) I have found to be quite brilliant. However, in some cases, even ORBX or P3D fades into the background in comparison, again, to most of the default MSFS scenery. Getting close is going to be an expensive process.

4. I do not thing any sim comes close to XPlane night lighting. 

5. Default XPlane, as you may well know, in its default form, is like all the other sim platforms, and it is not "pretty"  They are all very substandard in default form compared to the base MSFS. It is the Add-ons which "make" all platforms function as well as they do in dressed up form.  I think it is hard to advise what addons you need because each of us have different preferences and you have not really mentioned yours in any detail.  There are however, many Youtube videos on addons for all of our favourite sims and most of those should satisfy your requirements.  

Finally, I am guessing you already have v5 and this is really about whether purchasing those much needed add-ons is a value call. Again, many variables here as it depends largely on your ability to finance these addons.  For me, I have v5 with ORBX Aussie sceneries, including the "horrible" YBBN  and 3PD aircraft.  I still gravitate from MSFS to Xplane to P3D on a daily basis and enjoy them all for their individual excellencies.  So, to quote my good mate Simon from every country has talent, it's a YES from me.

Good luck with your considerations mate

Tony

[qqwertz 770]

I am almost only flying P3D 4.5 right now, precisely for the reason you mentioned: great airplanes. MSFS is much more beautiful, but with ORBX regions and a decent mesh (which I all purchased over the course of many years) I am reasonably happy with the visuals in P3D. Mind you, to get there you have to spend a lot of money ($1k?). If that is not an issue for you, then go for it. Otherwise, I would wait. MSFS has huge potential. As soon as Simconnect is fixed, you will see high-quality airplanes for MSFS without having to invest a lot in scenery.

Peter

[himmelhorse 1,276]

4 hours ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

I hope MSFS isn't the best one can get, it needs to evolve A LOT more than what it currently is now.

Rob,

The good thing is that the potential is there in greater quantities that ever before. I think we are all aware that MSFS, like all the other platforms, will be transformed by 3PDs. I agree that the basic sim, excluding the problems some people are currently facing, needs a LOT of work but, that too is currently being processed.  Personally, the default aircraft are very pretty, fairly basic and systems leave a lot to be desired. Lots of controversy about the weather at the moment and I think it desperately needs an SDK that will support the Active Sky equivalent, Comments on ATC are best left unstated and other utilities are sorely needed. 

We may well be left with a fairly long wait, but in reality, it is "same old same old" with the other sims. How often has it been said about MSFS, "patience is required" when in reality it probably should not be required.

Regards

Tony

[mtrainer 136]

I'll be hanging on to Prepar3D 4.5 for a little while longer.  The older I get, the less desire I have to constantly fiddle with updates and new software (go figure - I work in the IT industry too).  Call me lazy but I'll switch over to MSFS once the majority of issues have been resolved.  I like flying and navigating, most using PMDG products, and they work perfectly in P3D 4.5.  

For airliner flying, once you're at 25K+ AGL then the scenery doesn't matter so much (I say this but own a ridiculous number of ORBX products just the same, and shamefully I bought Australia but have never flown there as I'm stuck in New Zealand with my PDMG 737 and semi-trapped due to babes and the tasty cocktails at the bar by the beach). 

Mark Trainer 

 

[himmelhorse 1,276]

Rob,

 I think you have misunderstood what I meant to say.  I was actually referring to the wait for addons, and not a similarity to other sims.  By that, I mean a sim is released and then we wait for 3PDs  to add the "polish" 

You are however, quite correct, when you say the core sim should be perfected before the scenery but I would add with emphasis on the SDK too.  There is little doubt that this sim has been released and marketed with scenery as the priority. Looking at the sales figures, it would appear that this has been a remarkably successful strategy. That does not make it the best strategy for the dedicated simmers who obviously have had to take a temporary back seat. 

I am not a RW pilot so the actual flight dynamics (good or bad) will not have a significant impact on my and my ilk. I fly anything and everything and probably badly.  I keep saying that I am a self taught pilot and that my instructor has serious shortcomings in the edumacation department. In fact he gets the blame every time I  ^&^%$* up. 

Due to the fact that I have had negligible problems with this sim, I am a happy camper for now but I am getting a little impatient waiting for some really good aircraft, which may or may not have been already available if the SDK had been up to date and available to the Addon Professionals.

Regards

Tony 

[GSalden 4,652]

3 hours ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

I'll disagree with this and I can list specific changes and new features over time, it's a long list, especially the SDK/PDK side which is seriously lacking in MSFS.

XP10 to XP11 was a big visual jump, much improved if you're looking at just "visuals".

P3D add lots of additional visuals also, but sadly not fully utilized or updated by DLC providers

Wait and see applies to XP, P3D, and MSFS ... none of these platforms are standing still.  MSFS has the luxury of "forcing" DLC providers into "their" construct, something LM has done their best to avoid by keeping compatibility as much as possible ... and no doubt that compatibility has punished LM in the visual department because many DLC providers did little to nothing if their existing products were compatible, heck many DLC providers didn't even use the P3D SDK to compile their assets, they still used FSX and in some cases FS9 because it was the most compatible across platforms.

It's going to be interesting to see how MSFS "adapt" or DLC providers "adapt" to MSFS changes that impact them (this has already happened in some of the MSFS patches) ... heck even the latest release of the SDK that renames the WASM libraries ... that will require a VS reference update and recompile and update for DLC providers.  In other words, the more "fixing" MSFS has to do, the more likely DLC providers will have to do fixes ... how long do you think that will hold up before DLC providers see their support costs have exceeded their initial revenue boom?

The MSFS new flight physics are frankly a joke, I can't believe any real world pilot would suggest otherwise.  P3D and XP flight physics have issues too (no doubt) but whatever Asobo have done needs to fixed ASAP, as in yesterday not some "future date".  Complex aircraft developers are NOT going to want to touch MSFS flight physics as they currently stand ... and when Asobo does get around to giving flight physics more than 1% CPU cycles, it will impact all existing aircraft (internal and DLC) and they will need to be updated.  My fear here is MS will just blow onwards ignoring existing DLC compatibility.

The way MS/Asobo have approach this project is "Visuals first" (because they sell), fix the core internals later ... this is backwards IMHO.  The core needs to be done first so that DLC have something complete to work with and will not have to go thru many iterations of updates to their existing products as MSFS "evolves".

I see a lot of "MS/Asobo will get around to it" ... but what about existing DLC providers, potentially breaking updates from MS every two weeks?  Yikes!  What are they supposed to do? 

Cheers, Rob. 

 

 

This explains in a very clear way how the situation is in the Fs world..

Thanks Rob

[Biology 1,347]

3 hours ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

The MSFS new flight physics are frankly a joke, I can't believe any real world pilot would suggest otherwise.  P3D and XP flight physics have issues too (no doubt) but whatever Asobo have done needs to fixed ASAP, as in yesterday not some "future date".  Complex aircraft developers are NOT going to want to touch MSFS flight physics as they currently stand ... and when Asobo does get around to giving flight physics more than 1% CPU cycles, it will impact all existing aircraft (internal and DLC) and they will need to be updated.  My fear here is MS will just blow onwards ignoring existing DLC compatibility.

Hi,

I am quite confused about the flight physics part. According to the SDK documentation, all calculations of the new flight model is "normalized" / fitted to the table data, which is the same with FSX/P3D. In other words, it seems like they run a really simplistic BET-ish model to calculate localized forces first, and then normalize the calculations to fit to the "mathematically accurate" table data.

It looks like it is mostly FSX/P3D flight model with more accuracy between data points of the table and other outside-envelope situations. I am confused, why do you think it is worse than P3D/XP?

[psolk 3,037]

I really don't understand how one can continually compare a 10 year old product on V5.xxxx with a V1.xxx 45 day old product.  I guess no one remembers P3D v1, V2, V3, until LM cam out with a 64 bit version that was a game changer.   The negativity and hypocritical comparisons forgetting all the issues with P3D over the years just baffles me.   Calling out that major add-on dev's wont touch it in it's current state, I'm sorry, we didn't have a PMDG dedicated P3D bird until like V2.5 or something, they "passed" for years on P3D.  It's amazing how P3D gets a pass on the fact it took 10 years to get to this point!!!  P3D V1 compared to MSFS V1, Now THERE is a fair comparison...  It's sad some people are trying so hard to put the nail in the coffin on MSFS without giving it the same chance they gave P3D... 

Even at V1.xxx MSFS "VISUALS" are incredible.  All the add-ons in P3D can't come close to the vanilla MSFS visuals HOWEVER the rest of the sim needs a lot of work BUT IF (big words there) they can manage to merge the P3D maturity with MSFS visuals 24 months from now I will be ECSTATIC!!!  I am grateful for P3D TODAY and hopeful for MSFS in the FUTURE...  

As for the OP's question based on their requirements YES I would invest in P3D...  It is going to take a while for MSFS to catch P3D in terms of detailed heavy add-on AC so if that is what you are looking for P3D is undeniably the best platform.  Would I try to minimize the $1000,'s on P3D add-ons yes but would I invest in the base sim, some airports and a few detailed aircraft, absolutely... 

Edited October 3, 2020 by psolk

[Biology 1,347]

20 minutes ago, psolk said:

I really don't understand how one can continually compare a 10 year old product on V5.xxxx with a V1.xxx 45 day old product.  I guess no one remembers P3D v1, V2, V3, until LM cam out with a 64 bit version that was a game changer.   The negativity and hypocritical comparisons forgetting all the issues with P3D over the years just baffles me.   Calling out that major add-on dev's wont touch it in it's current state, I'm sorry, we didn't have a PMDG dedicated P3D bird until like V2.5 or something, they "passed" for years on P3D.  It's amazing how P3D gets a pass on the fact it took 10 years to get to this point!!!  P3D V1 compared to MSFS V1, Now THERE is a fair comparison...  It's sad some people are trying so hard to put the nail in the coffin on MSFS without giving it the same chance they gave P3D... 

Even at V1.xxx MSFS "VISUALS" are incredible.  All the add-ons in P3D can't come close to the vanilla MSFS visuals HOWEVER the rest of the sim needs a lot of work BUT IF (big words there) they can manage to merge the P3D maturity with MSFS visuals 24 months from now I will be ECSTATIC!!!  I am grateful for P3D TODAY and hopeful for MSFS in the FUTURE...  

As for the OP's question based on their requirements YES I would invest in P3D...  It is going to take a while for MSFS to catch P3D in terms of detailed heavy add-on AC so if that is what you are looking for P3D is undeniably the best platform.  Would I try to minimize the $1000,'s on P3D add-ons yes but would I invest in the base sim, some airports and a few detailed aircraft, absolutely... 

Thank you, I am planning to get 1-2 TE regions, a few airports and FSLabs A320 as a start. I wish MSFS catched up earlier, but it looks like it will take more than 1 year.

[F737MAX 5,500]

49 minutes ago, psolk said:

I am grateful for P3D TODAY and hopeful for MSFS in the FUTURE...

You've just stated what a lot of people here think. MSFS is for the future, P3D is for now.
That's how we can compare - the same way P3D v1 was compared against FSX.

There's no denying that visually out of the box, MSFS is far superior. However, this is a flight sim forum and the MSFS flight modelling (in my view) is one of the weakest parts.

I shouldn't be bounced around in light chop conditions like I was caught in a continuous wake turbulence event, p-factor shouldn't cause me to need full rudder deflection to stay on the runway in a single engine prop, using more than the very slightest of rudder input in an airliner shouldn't have me weaving all over the runway on take-off roll, nor should there be a pronounced sticking to the runway at touchdown (where are the bounced landings?).

MSFS has brought stunning advances to the flight sim genre, no doubt, but it just isn't ready yet for the sensation of flight.

I've chosen to pay (a lot) for add-ons for P3D to give me a weather engine, turbulence and photo scenery to make the two sims comparable, but the actual flying bit leaves me cold in MSFS and is what brings me back to P3D.

Like you, I'm hopeful for MSFS' future, but P3D is for today.

[honanhal 1,420]

I've already sunk some substantial costs into P3D. I've got thousands of dollars worth of addons (all the Orbx Global stuff, nearly all the Orbx regions, more third-party airports than I can count, everything PMDG makes, which I bought twice, FSL Airbus, etc. etc. etc.) I also spent hundreds of hours converting my AI traffic from FSX to work in P3D v4, since there was no simple, one-click solution to that problem. In other words, I have a lot of psychological pressure to stick with P3D.

And yet...

Since MSFS launched, I haven't been able to bring myself go back, even with the various gaps and frustrations others have already mentioned with the new sim. Why? Three main reasons:

1) Even with all the money I've spent to make it look better, it looks 10 years behind MSFS. I don't mean that as hyperbole. It's genuinely that dated in comparison, to my eyes at least.
2) Performance in P3D was always a stuttery disappointment at best, a barely-flyable trial at worst. My performance with MSFS with my now-dropped-down overclock (4.4 GHz) is twice as good as I ever got with any version of FSX or P3D at 4.7 GHz. Smoother, more consistent, and the FPS are often literally twice as high. Did I mention it also looks 10 years ahead visually?
3) Stability. How many thousands of crashes did I have in P3D? I've never, ever had an in-flight CTD in MSFS. Not one.

Do I miss the airliners in P3D? Sure, especially the superb PMDG 777. But that, and all the various sunk costs I put into P3D, still aren't enough to get me to go back.

For the OP: you've already bought P3D, so that's a start. My advice is to think long and hard before sinking a ton of money (and let's be clear, the temptation will be to spend a lot of money to get it into more palatable shape) into that platform that you might regret. I had some good times with FSX and P3D, but also an awful lot of frustration over the years. MSFS is a little rough right now, but it's frankly a less frustrating experience for me, even right now, than P3D ever was.

My views, for whatever they're worth.

James