Switching from P3D—what do I need?

[Ray Proudfoot 8,927]

9 minutes ago, Paladin said:

Ray, then why, dare I ask, are you in here, unless you are once again using Moderator privilege to uphold the thought that P3D is better within the MSFS forum.  Users have had a "holiday" inflicted upon them for similar.  5 hours ago you said "That’s me done here", so ?  BR.

I posted suggesting a high-speed internet connection would be helpful. Is there something wrong in saying that?

All other replies were in response to members quoting my post. I replied as it's polite to do so.

You're mistaken. Nowhere have I said P3D is better than MSFS.

Don't bring my moderator status into the discussion. It's irrelevant as you well know.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,927]

I've hidden an off-topic comment. Keep to the topic.

[ryanbatc 12,800]

38 minutes ago, Noel said:

MSFS, or Rex WF?   Seriously 'chasing' something like the weather engine w/ a 3rd party trying to keep up with changes is a waste of $$, for me.  For the OP--this is what the default weather engine can produce and I'm continually blown away by it even currently in the midst of its development.   

 

 

I do agree that the OP should try out the default sim - it does offer a lot visually.  However, if he is used to excellent weather products like Active Sky - and looking for accurate METAR depiction - it's not great in this sim.  Heck, MSFS doesn't even have a visibility value.  I would agree the MSFS has improved weather generation and realism over the last year though.  

[tup61 1,542]

All you really need is time: to fly and enjoy MSFS. 😉

I myself use MSFS since the initial beta and deleted all my other sims before beta was over. I only bought TWO addons, Skypark, which was (and is imho) a total waste of money, and the SWS Kodiak 100, which is great because it adds just a little bit more to the experience compared to the (excellent) default planes. (I may buy the Milviz C130 in the near future though because it adds even more to the experience). I do have to add I also use the freeware FBW A32NX and the freeware WT G1000 NXi: without those two I might be a little bit less happy with MSFS. But that's it. MSFS doesn't need investments like other sims did or do. And it looks a 1000 times better nonetheless. Not a flight goes by without me thinking 'Wow... this is awesome...'. MSFS is great.

[Gnak26 1]

21 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Out of interest what’s your download speed? Before I went FFTP it was around 70Mbps. A 30Gb+ update would take a significant amount of time at that speed. Probably closer to “whatever” than “an hour”.

Quite a nuisance if you were planning to have a fly but now can’t until the download is complete.

My download speed is between 50 and 60 Mbps (mix fiber and copper unfortunately) and in my experience the mandatory updates are easy and "quick" (dont have the chrono in my hands while updating but jmost of the time just reading stuff on the forums while downloading is enough to get it completed). Moreover, as far as i know the world updates are managed through the content manager so you can decide when to download them in the sim. I ususally install the world updates as soon as they are available but I think you can delay what is delivered through the content manager and download it when you want.

This is to say that for me moving to a new gen simulator was a life changer, not only for the graphics but also for the way minor effort required to manage the sim. This gave me back more time to fly and less time to spend on configuring/updating/throubleshooting the simulator.

I for sure miss some study level airliner but it seems that some of them are on (short?) final! :D 

 

[Noel 4,486]

2 minutes ago, Gnak26 said:

I for sure miss some study level airliner but it seems that some of them are on (short?) final! 😄

Don't r/o AS CRJ 550/700 as it is currently being updated presumably to resolve some chronic issues--but even w/o those resolved it is a total blast to fly:   its navigation and flight envelopes make it both a real challenge to fly as well as a real joy to master.  It will force you to pay attention and fly the plane as results are not to be assumed!  It may not currently qualify as 'study level' but it's absolutely in the ball park and perhaps now that it is being re-updated might get even closer.

[abrams_tank 7,393]

17 minutes ago, tup61 said:

But that's it. MSFS doesn't need investments like other sims did or do. And it looks a 1000 times better nonetheless. 

Yup, I absolutely agree with you.  For example, I see that RDShade has been released for P3D.  From what I gather, RDShade enhances the graphics of P3D. If I owned P3D though (and I don't own it), I would be a little bitter that Lockheed Martin is making me buy stuff like RDShade to make the graphics of P3D better.  Something like RDShade should be a part of the P3D graphics engine.  Why should I have to fork out extra money for a graphics feature that should already be a part of the core sim?  

This goes back to the OP's post.  That you don't need to buy stuff like RDShade for MSFS, because the MSFS graphics engine already incorporates the graphics enhancements that RDShade can do. And this is why the OP will save a lot of money on graphics enhancements when he/she switches to MSFS.

 

Edited March 29, 2022 by abrams_tank

[Chock 17,769]

1 hour ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

I have seen Manchester some time ago and barely recognised it or even the area immediately prior to landing on 23R. Buildings that bore no relation to the actual ones.

To be fair, the Macco Simulations Manchester airport for MSFS is only ten quid, and it's pretty spot-on for the most part; I'd have to get really picky to point out some stuff which isn't exactly right, and to be honest that's only because I work there and know the place like the back of my hand. It's actually the only payware airport I've got for MSFS since I've felt little need to buy any others, and even when I did buy that one, it was only six quid, and they gave us a freebie version of Birmingham with it too, so it was nearly free anyway when you look at it like that considering I got two major payware airports in the UK for three quid each.

The default Manchester Barton is every bit as good as any payware airport I've ever seen for a flight sim which is why I've frequently used it for my youtube channel reviews, and the entire Greater Manchester area is a freebie photo-realistic update from flightsim.to, so it looks about as good as it possibly could get when 'oop north' in our neck of the woods. Up the road, the default Liverpool John Lennon airport is the same, since both this and Barton were significantly improved in the UK update for MSFS.

With regard to the process of updating the sim, I actually find it is far less hassle to update MSFS than it ever was with FSX or P3D, where with those older sims it generally involves a lot of faffing about to get things to work and reinstalling stuff sometimes too. Conversely, with MSFS, if I ever crank it up and it says there is an update, I just click on the update button, go and make dinner or watch the news on TV or some such, and when I go back to my computer an hour later it's usually long since finished updating it and good to go with me not having had to do anything other than click on that button, and that's on a connection via tiny ten quid wireless plug in USB thing on my computer two floors above the room with the actual router in it, so we're not exactly talking about a blisteringly fast connection. I'll take that any day of the week compared to the process of updating P3D.

Edited March 29, 2022 by Chock

[Noel 4,486]

13 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

Why should I have to fork out extra money for a graphics feature that should already be a part of the core sim?  

Because LM needs your help because they only had $65B in revenues in 2020 and almost $7B in net income.  Plus, if you were honest, you paid $200 a pop for every major version release since v1 and they're at v5.x now.

[Noel 4,486]

7 minutes ago, Chock said:

Conversely, with MSFS, if I ever crank it up and it says there is a n update, I just click on the update button, go and make dinner or watch the news on TV or some such, and when I go back to my computer an hour later it's usually finished updating it and good to go with me not having had to do anything other than click on that button.

This is the real truth of the matter and as is seen in this thread it is part of the reason people are okay abandoning the mature sim platform for MSFS w/ its less than fully mature state:  ease of management, period, end of story.  Oh sure there are those who remain dumbfounded at the 3 steps required to do an install or update thru the MS Store, and for those there is Steam though that doesn't always pan out either.

[wiler 394]

#1- patience.  

[Abriael 952]

I absolutely advise against weather addons. MSFS's live weather is leagues better than anything they offer and it's constantly upgraded and improved. 

[Krakin 5,737]

1 hour ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

So are these developers who have mostly abandoned P3D wasting their time developing for MSFS? Might they have been wasting their time? Can they survive if what you hint at is correct?

The difference is that buying scenery for MSFS does not feel like it is something one HAS to do in order to get a half decent experience. In MSFS, the obscure little airport in my neck of the woods looks ok by default. The hill nearby on which the lighthouse sits is not flat like it was in FSX/P3D. I bought a 3PD version just to get that extra sense of immersion and to show off to my friends lol

[abrams_tank 7,393]

14 minutes ago, Krakin said:

The difference is that buying scenery for MSFS does not feel like it is something one HAS to do in order to get a half decent experience. 

^^^^ This!!!

Absolutely agree with Krakin!  After you buy MSFS, you really don't have to buy any of the additional graphics add-ons, like better meshes, better lighting, better trees/vegetation, better terrain, etc.  The default mesh, lighting, trees/vegetation, and terrain for MSFS is already really, really, good.  

Edited March 29, 2022 by abrams_tank

[Ray Proudfoot 8,927]

12 minutes ago, Krakin said:

The difference is that buying scenery for MSFS does not feel like it is something one HAS to do in order to get a half decent experience. In MSFS, the obscure little airport in my neck of the woods looks ok by default. The hill nearby on which the lighthouse sits is not flat like it was in FSX/P3D. I bought a 3PD version just to get that extra sense of immersion and to show off to my friends lol

I have never disputed the ground scenery is vastly improved. My comment was made to a member who didn't make his position clear. That has since been clarified.

18 minutes ago, Abriael said:

I absolutely advise against weather addons. MSFS's live weather is leagues better than anything they offer and it's constantly upgraded and improved. 

But no historical weather. So if I wish to depart KLAX at 10:00 local and I'm in the UK the weather injected will be that at 02:00. How is that better than Active Sky's historical weather option?