Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
BiologicalNanobot

Is it a good idea to get into Prepar3D now?

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, jabloomf1230 said:

ORBX TE is not a viable alternative to MSFS unless one is independently wealthy

I guess we disagree, the MSFS limited LOD Radius and Clouds doesn't provide a "natural and immersive" experience for me ... you'll spend far more on hardware to get MSFS to run well than to buy ALL of Orbx products now or in the future (assuming one doesn't already have them).  But even if we added up all current and future Orbx TE products over the years we're looking at what $400/yr ... I don't consider that "independently wealthy"?  That's less than our food budget for the month.  Either way, simulator cost doesn't define my experience and it's no where near close to being an "expensive" adventure ... it's great value for money.

MSFS render scaling above 100 (move into SSAA processing which is what everyone wanted in prior sims from FSX to P3D to XP) and MSFS performance tanks.  It's odd to see how AA quality is somehow no longer a problem with users (it was a huge deal breaker before MSFS and now it's not)?  Render Scaling 100 looks horrible in MSFS, AA issues everywhere.  The default LOD of 200 is equivalent to early FSX days LOD radius.  Trees and buildings that are all brownish further out in the distance ... great for blending but not realistic at all ... again, roll in the tweaks to try and fix it.  I hope MSFS isn't the best one can get, it needs to evolve A LOT more than what it currently is now.

Cheers, Rob.

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, jabloomf1230 said:

ORBX TE is not a viable alternative to MSFS unless one is independently wealthy. The performance is not comparable to MSFS either. Despite all its bugs, MSFS  scenery is the most natural and immersive experience one can get in a flightsim.

I would only agree that MSFS is the most *visually* immersive experience.  "Most natural", no, not at all...acft flying in MSFS are twitchy and unstable, and still poorly modelled as to flight characteristics.  And if your definition of "immersion" includes the planning and problem-solving headwork that makes up 90% of flying and staying ahead of a credibly-modelled jet aircraft--its systems and its operation, then no again, MSFS lacks that dimension of immersion.

For the OP--if *operating* an airliner is what you're after, then P3D delivers the best options now.  If experiencing the visual perspective of being in the air is what you're after, then MSFS delivers the best options now.  As to how each will evolve towards the strong suits of the other, it really remains to be seen.  I'm sure both camps are working hard at doing just that.  As to what will result and when, well I don't have a crystal ball, and neither does anyone else--those that tell you that x WILL happen aren't any better positioned to foresee the future than you or I...they just have a strong belief that is more based on a religion-like faith than a basis in fact.

I have both.  MSFS is mostly an interesting curiosity to me at the moment, but I am keeping my eye on it just the same.  But when it's time to pull out the charts, plan, and execute a flight in a complex acft, P3D is still my go-to platform. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 8

Bob Scott | President and CEO, AVSIM Inc
ATP Gulfstream II-III-IV-V

System: i9-10900K @ 5.2GHz on custom water loop, ASUS Maximus XII Hero, 32GB GSkill 3600MHz CAS15, EVGA RTX3090 XC3 Ultra
Samsung 55" JS8500 4K TV@30Hz,
3x NVME 2x SATA Samsung SSD, EVGA 1KW PSU, 1.2Gbps internet
SoundBlaster XFi Titanium, TOSLINK to Yamaha RX-V467 HT Rcvr, Polk/Klipsch 6" bookshelf spkrs, Polk 12" subwoofer, 12.9" iPad Pro
PFC yoke/throttle quad/pedals with custom Hall sensors, Coolermaster HAF932 case, Stream Deck XL button box

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, w6kd said:

I would only agree that MSFS is the most *visually* immersive experience.  "Most natural", no, not at all...acft flying in MSFS are twitchy and unstable, and still poorly modelled as to flight characteristics.  And if your definition of "immersion" includes the planning and problem-solving headwork that makes up 90% of flying and staying ahead of a credibly-modelled jet aircraft--its systems and its operation, then no again, MSFS lacks that dimension of immersion.

For the OP--if *operating* an airliner is what you're after, then P3D delivers the best options now.  If experiencing the visual perspective of being in the air is what you're after, then MSFS delivers the best options now.  As to how each will evolve towards the strong suits of the other, it really remains to be seen.  I'm sure both camps are working hard at doing just that.  As to what will result and when, well I don't have a crystal ball, and neither does anyone else--those that tell you that x WILL happen aren't any better positioned to foresee the future than you or I...they just have a strong belief that is more based on a religion-like faith than a basis in fact.

I have both.  MSFS is mostly an interesting curiosity to me at the moment, but I am keeping my eye on it just the same.  But when it's time to pull out the charts, plan, and execute a flight in a complex acft, P3D is still my go-to platform. 

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.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
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.


Bob Scott | President and CEO, AVSIM Inc
ATP Gulfstream II-III-IV-V

System: i9-10900K @ 5.2GHz on custom water loop, ASUS Maximus XII Hero, 32GB GSkill 3600MHz CAS15, EVGA RTX3090 XC3 Ultra
Samsung 55" JS8500 4K TV@30Hz,
3x NVME 2x SATA Samsung SSD, EVGA 1KW PSU, 1.2Gbps internet
SoundBlaster XFi Titanium, TOSLINK to Yamaha RX-V467 HT Rcvr, Polk/Klipsch 6" bookshelf spkrs, Polk 12" subwoofer, 12.9" iPad Pro
PFC yoke/throttle quad/pedals with custom Hall sensors, Coolermaster HAF932 case, Stream Deck XL button box

Share this post


Link to post

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

  • Upvote 3

imageproxy.png.c7210bb70e999d98cfd3e77d7

Share this post


Link to post
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.

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Bob Scott | President and CEO, AVSIM Inc
ATP Gulfstream II-III-IV-V

System: i9-10900K @ 5.2GHz on custom water loop, ASUS Maximus XII Hero, 32GB GSkill 3600MHz CAS15, EVGA RTX3090 XC3 Ultra
Samsung 55" JS8500 4K TV@30Hz,
3x NVME 2x SATA Samsung SSD, EVGA 1KW PSU, 1.2Gbps internet
SoundBlaster XFi Titanium, TOSLINK to Yamaha RX-V467 HT Rcvr, Polk/Klipsch 6" bookshelf spkrs, Polk 12" subwoofer, 12.9" iPad Pro
PFC yoke/throttle quad/pedals with custom Hall sensors, Coolermaster HAF932 case, Stream Deck XL button box

Share this post


Link to post
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.

  • Like 1

Vic green

Share this post


Link to post
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


Tony Chilcott.

 

My System. Motherboard. ASRock Taichi X570 CPU Ryzen 9 3900x (not yet overclocked). RAM 32gb Corsair Vengeance (2x16) 3200mhz. 1 x Gigabyte Aorus GTX1080ti Extreme and a 1200watt PSU.

1 x 1tb SSD 3 x 240BG SSD and 4 x 2TB HDD

OS Win 10 Pro 64bit. Simulators ... FS2004/P3Dv4.5/Xplane.DCS/Aeroflyfs2...MSFS to come for sure.

Share this post


Link to post

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


(MSFS 2020, i7-10700KF, GTX 3080, 32 GB ram)

Share this post


Link to post
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

  • Like 1

Tony Chilcott.

 

My System. Motherboard. ASRock Taichi X570 CPU Ryzen 9 3900x (not yet overclocked). RAM 32gb Corsair Vengeance (2x16) 3200mhz. 1 x Gigabyte Aorus GTX1080ti Extreme and a 1200watt PSU.

1 x 1tb SSD 3 x 240BG SSD and 4 x 2TB HDD

OS Win 10 Pro 64bit. Simulators ... FS2004/P3Dv4.5/Xplane.DCS/Aeroflyfs2...MSFS to come for sure.

Share this post


Link to post

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 

 

  • Upvote 1

Mark Trainer

 

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, himmelhorse said:

it is "same old same old" with the other sims.

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. 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post

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 

  • Like 1

Tony Chilcott.

 

My System. Motherboard. ASRock Taichi X570 CPU Ryzen 9 3900x (not yet overclocked). RAM 32gb Corsair Vengeance (2x16) 3200mhz. 1 x Gigabyte Aorus GTX1080ti Extreme and a 1200watt PSU.

1 x 1tb SSD 3 x 240BG SSD and 4 x 2TB HDD

OS Win 10 Pro 64bit. Simulators ... FS2004/P3Dv4.5/Xplane.DCS/Aeroflyfs2...MSFS to come for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
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

  • Like 1

Gerard

12900K (8 cores @ 5.1-5.5 GHz / 8 cores @ 3.9 GHz ) - Asus ROG Strix Gaming D4 - GSkill Ripjaws 2x 16 Gb 4266 mhz @ 4000 mhz / cas 16- Inno3D RTX3090 X4 iCHILL 24 Gb - 1x SSD M2 2800/1800 2TB - 1x SSD M2 2800/1800 1Tb - Sata 600 SSD 500 Mb - Thermaltake Level 10 GT case - EKWB Extreme 240 liquid cooling set push/pull - 2x 43” Sony 4K tv's in NVSurround

8700K : all 6 cores @ 5.0 GHz - Asus ROG 370 - 2x 8 Gb 4000 MHz @ 3600 Mhz - Inno3D RTX 3090 X3 iCHILL 24 Gb  - 1x SSD M2 2800/1800 2TB - 2x  Sata 600 SSD 500 Mb - 1x 55” Sony 4K tv

My flightsim vids :  https://www.youtube.com/user/fswidesim/videos?shelf_id=0&sort=dd&view=0

 

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...