On 1/12/2021 at 9:58 AM, CJ1045 said:

So if someone says 50% Xplane 11 and 50% MFS2020. Then a second person says 50% xplane 11.5 and 50% MSFS202.  You don't get a combined figure for xplane of 100% and MSFS 50%!!!

That would give both 100%, not only X-Plane... And that makes sense. People who fly XP11 are all generally in the same category. 

It amazes me how some folks continue to defend a simulator that's based on 16 year old soggy and stale code, that looks in the default version like word not allowed,  with default planes that nobody ever looks at, and that needs sprucing up with a metric word not allowed ton of expensive addons. 

5 hours ago, DEHowie said:

The gamer types are still in msfs but those interested in an aviation experience are all back in P3D and Xp11.

Hey, we all start somewhere. It’s this kind of attitude that’ll crush the community. I found FSX from an online ad 10 years ago, and I transitioned from messing around with the planes for fun to flying the missions as specified, to joining multiplayer servers where you just mess around, to joining multiplayer servers where you have to operate realistically under ATC (while still flying the default airplanes), to learning about the PMDG 737, to becoming proficient in its use, to joining VATSIM and conducting every flight there, to being inspired to get my pilot’s license, to completing my first solo, to completing my first solo cross country.

Again, we all start somewhere. The influx of not-in-the-aviation-community simmers is good for everyone, and especially the airlines facing pilot shortages.

1 hour ago, Ricardo41 said:

It amazes me how some folks continue to defend a simulator that's based on 16 year old soggy and stale code, that looks in the default version like word not allowed,  with default planes that nobody ever looks at, and that needs sprucing up with a metric word not allowed ton of expensive addons. 

It amazes me how many fans of MSFS keep using the default angle to compare the legacy sims and this one.

*No-one* runs vanilla default in XP or P3D.
The mods being added to MSFS such as FBW A320N, Working Title's CJ4, Rob Young's Bonanza Turbo mod, the hundreds of 3D models scraped from Google Earth, freeware airport scenery and payware add-ons makes it obvious that a lot of people don't run MSFS in vanilla form either!

The reasonable comparison is: 'Does the new tech and other features in MSFS make me want to move away from my XP / P3D / AFS2 / FSX, or heck even FS9, setup with all of my add-ons?'

The vast majority on this thread think so and have shifted.
Those spending the majority of their time on the legacy sim forums don't, and as such, have stayed put.

 We'll see when the big names such as PMDG, FSL, A2A, etc. bring their aircraft across to MSFS as to whether their arrival changes the dynamic for legacy platform simmers.
 

3 hours ago, ryanbatcund said:

but you're still flying them in decades old terrain and scenery.

You don't have to use "decades old terrain and scenery".
Ortho4XP gives you freeware photo scenery and autogen in XP and more recently in P3D. Alternatively, there are payware options such as MSE or Orbx TE.

The downside is that you need a lot of storage space, however. The ability to stream scenery in MSFS is a big win for it over the legacy sims.

14 minutes ago, F737NG said:

The vast majority on this thread think so and have shifted.
Those spending the majority of their time on the legacy sim forums don't, and as such, have stayed put.

I still find the most interesting datapoint to be that in the 2019 survey 48% of people who responded expected to switch to MSFS, and in the 2020 survey only 32% have switched.  So clearly expectations were not met for about 1/3rd of the people who thought they would switch.

It's great that MSFS has a lot of new users but clearly there are some things that need to get sorted out to convince more existing users.

2 hours ago, Ricardo41 said:

It amazes me how some folks continue to defend a simulator that's based on 16 year old soggy and stale code, that looks in the default version like word not allowed,  with default planes that nobody ever looks at, and that needs sprucing up with a metric word not allowed ton of expensive addons. 

Equally amazing is the fact that a real world business jet pilot, while flying a real business jet in real life, would "highly, highly recommend" his viewers on YouTube to check out the excellent Working Title CJ4 in MSFS 2020 . 🥰

 

6 hours ago, ryanbatcund said:

you're still flying them in decades old terrain and scenery.

It is a commonly held delusion, that just because there is something new, all that went before it is suddenly no good. 

The earth is much older than a few decades and with the addition of a bit of photo scenery with autogen and a weather addon, a highly detailed and even complex aircraft can still be flown in FSX, let alone P3D v4 or v5.

Some people prefer Xplane, some people prefer MSFS, some people prefer P3D..... 

It’s just a matter of personal preference, different people with different taste and that’s the reason we don’t live in a monochrome and dull world.

Debating over personal preference/taste is just useless and endless, you can wrote a 2000 words post with the best arguments in the world trying to convince an Xplane user that MSFS is better(and vice-versa),  if the dude love Xplane you won’t change is mind!

We are all sharing the same passion i don’t understand the debate over simulators..

2 hours ago, F737NG said:

. The ability to stream scenery in MSFS is a big win for it over the legacy sims.

You've seen my screenshot posts here I'm guessing.  I've used allllll the addons.  I had Orbx TE for xp11 and p3d.  Ive used Ortho for xp11 and yes, it's all amazing.  But it's simply not feasible to have the entire world on a drive.

Even without any addons,  MSFS is the most complete default sim.  You can still travel the world with nice looking and reasonable flying default aircraft.  Sure there are bugs, but there are plenty in xp11 and p3d.  Again, there's a number of reasons to stay with those sims - but not for me!

We're only what, six months in?  Imagine the possibilities in another year!

11 hours ago, omarsmak30 said:

ouch that is negative statement. These folks actually have done transmodus job, you can take a closer look at the changelog.

 

 

As i said sorry to rain on anyone's parade but a cold hard viewpoint is whats needed if MSFS is going to go anywhere.

My asesment is off having flown the real one for over a decade, 787 for 3 years, King Airs etc and 7 years as a CFI.

Lets compare it to the industry standard in Simulation the FSlabs which does basically exactly what a real Airbus does,

The changelog is'nt the issue its the where it sits now compared to where it needs to be or more realistically where it has to go to be called a simulation of an A320

This isnt about FBW as i admire there concept but this is no Zibo mod and it has light years more work than Zibo had to do simply because of the aircraft your trying to simulate.

Look at some basic facts.

The 737 is a 1960's technology aircraft which means its "easier" to simulate because of systems segregation.

Zibo has been doing incredible work and its taken 3 years of work to get it to where it is now and a great effort it has been.

The A320 family(in fact every Airbus post A310) is an integrated aircraft ie ALL the systems send information to one another. This means for instance if you turn down the cabin temp on the ground the temp controller send a message via bus to the hot air regulator which adjusts the hot air valves which if when backed off temp still cannot be met the temp controller talks to the bleed monitoring computer to boost engine idle N1 to increase airflow so the packs can produce more cold air. Numerous Airbus systems work like this as its fully "integrated" and no addon has every modeled this type of thing except the FSlabs. Now you might think who cares how does that effect me. Easy on the ground on a hot day you notice the aircraft taxi's far faster as idle speed is increased. In warm weather idle descent profiles change, when anti ice is turned on descent profiles change these are day to day things Airbus pilots get used to. This is day to day and it NEEDS to be simulated to see that. This is whats missing from Aerosoft, Tollis,etc you miss the day to day differences and in Tollis case basic fundamental problems still to be fixed.

There is only ONE aircraft that shoes them in sim world the FSlabs.

To model this level of systems integration requires sim access, a fully developed SDK and how many years of work? I think it took a full time team at FSlabs 5-6 years and FBW think they will have a similar standard out in a year? Unrealistic expectations to say the least.

As per performance i get better perf in V5 now with the FSlabs than ANY default aircraft in MSFS with similar settings ie world detail etc. For instance high to very high in cockpit im getting 45-50 in FSlabs and 25-30 in the TBM. Worse in dense cloud regions in MSFS where it staggers at a whopping 15-18fps. If your not getting decent frames in V5 its your setup or you have something wrong in your system. The one single point everyone concedes is P3DV5 performance is outstanding. However until LM fix the Vram management which as under DX12 its a user fix that is the issue holding people back not FPS.

Also you realize true sky is a completely new lighting and 3D world thats being brought in? Its a lighting world used for other purposes like World 3D modelling so yes with Tuesky/EA on the entire lighting world is now changed rom a lighting and shader view. LM has the issue of updating it step by step but make no mistake the lighting is already improved significantly and again with aircraft that are the industry standard in 12 months where will P3D be?

The cloud lighting in P3D in Truesky/EA(ie directional shadows etc, respect of other clouds and sun position) is already superior to MSFS however the clouds themselves have a long way to go. MSFS has set the standard for clouds in many lighting scenarios and it can look utterly amazing, it can also look as bad or worse in a few situations compared to  the other 2 sims.

And we havnt even spoken about xplane which still has the best feel flight model in the genre. Do you think Austin is sitting around twiddling his thumbs?

With thousands of new users who may want something more serious than an SR-22 flown on an xbox controller do you not think he can see the cash register ticking over as people ant a more realistic experience not just a Venice which looks great??

The premier GA simulator isnt going to be standing still while MSFS tries to get its flight model, turbulence interface(did i mention how horrendous that is), its weather engine with its morphing light speed clouds building and dying at 50 times real speed, and the other 101 issues like its incredibly unfriendly camera system sorted.

In a years time the sim world could look very different.

Do Asobo actually fix anything or do they do what they did in the beta and do nothing? Sit back ignore the input from the guys who know and pretend to or keep listening to the showers of praise from those who have never set foot in an aircraft? MSFS is in a great positin but if they continue on the road they have been on for over a year the sim will be no better than now in 12 months. Realistically it hasnt improved a great deal in the last year the biggest issue of all is the camera system. Clunky and difficult to learn and configure its the biggest impediment to enjoying the sim. And its basically unchanged for the last 12 months.

Do LM get P3D to a competetive lighting and environment so match the quality of the aircraft?

Does Austin finally listen to his users and give seasons and also a improved environment?

Lots can change but right now ALL three need work and different sims have different features worth exploring.

A lot can happen in a year and with MSFS in limbo for at least that long from an airliner view if not longer means the door is wide open for every other sim to gain ground to the point they are a viable option.

Will MS keep MSFS locked up and we will see NO high quality profesional standard addons that is also a possibility.

By the middle of next year there "may" be ONE high quality airliner in MSFS. If anyone thinks the other two sims are going anywhere they are simply ignoring some very basic truths.

 

 

Edited January 15, 20215 yr by DEHowie

10 hours ago, ryanbatcund said:

Even without any addons,  MSFS is the most complete default sim.  You can still travel the world with nice looking and reasonable flying default aircraft.  Sure there are bugs, but there are plenty in xp11 and p3d. 

That's the key point. Spend money only on the default sim, and you have a fairly complete simulator with tons of potential.

If you spend, say, $100 on P3D - that'll get you a couple of houses, a few trees, couple of shaders, and two or three addon airports.

Here's what it comes down to for me. What are the critical things each sim is missing?

MSFS: "Study level" aircraft (either addon or default), realistic flight model/turbulence, seasons.
P3D: Modern world engine including realistic lighting (sorry, I've followed EA's development, and that ain't it), worldwide satellite terrain with autogen, realistic flight model/turbluence, weather engine.
X-Plane: Seasons, worldwide satellite terrain with autogen.

Which of these "to-do lists" do you think is likely to be completed first? Because if you answered "P3D," really?

James

Edited January 15, 20215 yr by honanhal

9 hours ago, DEHowie said:

a cold hard viewpoint is whats needed if MSFS is going to go anywhere.

Yawn, no it’s not. It’s already gone further in a few months since its release than the other sims have in many years. Your own particular fetish (study level tubes) will arrive in the next year or so, again, much quicker than they did for, say, XPlane.

Edited January 15, 20215 yr by scotchegg

11 hours ago, DEHowie said:

There is only ONE aircraft that shoes them in sim world the FSlabs.

To model this level of systems integration requires sim access, a fully developed SDK and how many years of work? I think it took a full time team at FSlabs 5-6 years and FBW think they will have a similar standard out in a year? Unrealistic expectations to say the least.

FBW is an open source project, which means everyone is welcome to contribute, even you yourself can contribute to the project with your real life expertise feedback or testing the builds to see if they match IRL data .. etc. Now if you look at their discord and their github, you will be amazed of the amount of people contributing to the project from all branches (pilots, developers, researchers, engineers, testers, designers .. etc), even these sounds, they were recorded by IRL pilots for the purpose of this project and they shared them to the folks in discord to implement these sounds in the mod. Hence you do have the chance from now to shape the project by yourself and not relying on a payware developer and beg them to implement to certain features ... etc 

Sure Zibo took him 3 years, but we are talking here about an open source project where many people contributing to the project vs one person.

 

11 hours ago, DEHowie said:

The cloud lighting in P3D in Truesky/EA(ie directional shadows etc, respect of other clouds and sun position) is already superior to MSFS however the clouds themselves have a long way to go. MSFS has set the standard for clouds in many lighting scenarios and it can look utterly amazing, it can also look as bad or worse in a few situations compared to  the other 2 sims.

Okay really, I'd agree with you about airliners and things related in P3D that are better at the moment but telling me EA dusk lighting that makes clouds looks like Mars in The Martian movie is superior to MSFS, leaves me speechless. But if you think they are better in P3D, then is good for you :).

Edited January 15, 20215 yr by omarsmak30