P3D 6 officially announced

[james42 258]

P3D+Active Sky+ PMDG ( or any other high end developer, FSLabs etc) is a winning combination for me. Personally, I feel the more higher end study level addons feel better in P3D. I'm not sure why. Maybe having a decent weather engine helps. The only thing keeping me away from P3D is the lack of detail in the default airports. I know this can be solved with addon scenery's, but its so much easier having up to date airport layouts out of the box. If they could bring the default airports up to the same level as MSFS with its accurate up to date aircraft parking and general airport layouts, I could see myself returning to P3D very quickly. 

[CO2Neutral 278]

12 hours ago, GCBraun said:

Launching a title in 2023 without Frame Generation is a bummer, especially one that is known to be extremely CPU limited.

I don't think you understand what frame generation is?  This process is for games where the next "actual" frame isn't really relevant and an AI based compare between frames produces a estimate of what the next frame "might be" ... definitely NOT something one wants in a training tool. 

P3D provides for the next actual render based on what is actually happening, not a guess on what they next frame will be.

As far as nVidia DLSS 3 ... AMD's FSR is a better option and doesn't require "training" nor "developer support".  

P3D isn't aimed at gamers, never will be ... the list of professional training features in P3D aren't even on MSFS "to be implemented road map" and unlikely to ever happen, again the focus is XBOX/PC gamers not training.

Based on what I've seen of AVSIM moderation the P3D bashing goes untouched while anything negative said about MSFS and one feels wrath of bans and thread deletion.  I can see why P3D users go elsewhere for information, help, and overall better communications experience.  The uniformed speculation that turns fiction into fact is staggering!

[GCBraun 2,403]

Just now, CO2Neutral said:

I don't think you understand what frame generation is?  This process is for games where the next "actual" frame isn't really relevant and an AI based compare between frames produces a estimate of what the next frame "might be" ... definitely NOT something one wants in a training tool. 

I have no intention of actually flying a triple-seven, therefore I have never used P3D as “training tool”.

Frame Generation would be very useful on a platform that can barely push beyond 25fps in complex scenarios.

It is also not mandatory…if you feel it is affecting your precious “training” session, then just turn it off and let us enjoy better performance. 

[Bob Scott 7,743]

7 minutes ago, CO2Neutral said:

Based on what I've seen of AVSIM moderation the P3D bashing goes untouched while anything negative said about MSFS and one feels wrath of bans and thread deletion.  I can see why P3D users go elsewhere for information, help, and overall better communications experience.  The uniformed speculation that turns fiction into fact is staggering!

...and...yet...you're...still...here

[CO2Neutral 278]

2 minutes ago, GCBraun said:

It is also not mandatory…if you feel it is affecting your precious “training” session, then just turn it off and let us enjoy better performance.

It mandatory for training/certification.  But you aren't getting better performance, you getting an AI generated frame to give you the perception of higher FPS.  No idea what "triple-seven" has to do with anything related to training tool?  P3D is used for all kinds of training from GA to commercial to military.

[CO2Neutral 278]

2 minutes ago, Bob Scott said:

yet...you're...still...here

Not very often ... that's good how?  You're side stepping the obvious bias here.

[micstatic 4,338]

Just now, CO2Neutral said:

Not very often ... that's good how?  You're side stepping the obvious bias here.

please don't be ridiculous.  It's ENTIRELY reasonable for people to comment on their opinions from the previews we just saw on V6.  Just because some of us are critical of the previews we saw doesn't show any bias one way or another.  Personally I'm a fan of flight simulation.  I've used multiple simulators over the last 30 years of doing this as a hobby.  Every few years we tend to see changes in flight simulation.  Sometimes I'm excited by previews, and other times not.  But to be clear.  There is absolutely nothing wrong with people sharing their opinions of V6 in a v6 topic

[Bob Scott 7,743]

20 minutes ago, CO2Neutral said:

I don't think you understand what frame generation is?  This process is for games where the next "actual" frame isn't really relevant and an AI based compare between frames produces a estimate of what the next frame "might be" ... definitely NOT something one wants in a training tool. 

P3D provides for the next actual render based on what is actually happening, not a guess on what they next frame will be.

I think maybe it's you that's missing some things--estimates and projections are used in military applications in the real world all the time.  The purpose of something as simple as a WW-II era gunsight or submarine's TDC is to estimate where the target will be when the rounds from the gun (or the torpedo) will reach it.

My primary go-to sim is still P3D, and I for one would sure welcome some of the advancements in technology like frame generation--they aren't impractical or irrelevant at all.  OTOH, lack of them isn't a deal-breaker, either.

[Ray Proudfoot 9,030]

21 minutes ago, CO2Neutral said:

Based on what I've seen of AVSIM moderation the P3D bashing goes untouched while anything negative said about MSFS and one feels wrath of bans and thread deletion.

You clearly missed my post this morning before I had had my breakfast warning that if comparisons with MSFS continued I would consider locking the topic. Fortunately people saw sense.

Someone asked if it was possible to discuss P3D vs MSFS. I advised a neutral forum like hangar chat was the best place.

One question. Do you currently use P3D?

[CO2Neutral 278]

1 minute ago, Bob Scott said:

estimates and projections are used in military applications in the real world all the time

And what does this have to do with "fake frames" in order to pump FPS numbers?  Taking on your statement, if anything that would make the prediction even less accurate (prediction on a prediction).  DLSS isn't really solving a problem, it's masking a problem.  Ray Tracing would be on the right path to solving the performance degradation involved in light transforms ... but GPU manufacturers still are unable to hit performance goals using that accelerated process.

 

[CO2Neutral 278]

16 minutes ago, micstatic said:

Just because some of us are critical of the previews we saw doesn't show any bias one way or another.

In other threads, when comparing P3D vs. MSFS they are closed.  In this thread when compares are made to MSFS, they are unaffected ... why?  

But I agree with you 100%, all the good, bad, and ugly of simulators should be open to discussion, but that's not what's being implemented here.

 

[sdirand 247]

15 minutes ago, CO2Neutral said:

P3D isn't aimed at gamers, never will be ... the list of professional training features in P3D aren't even on MSFS "to be implemented road map" and unlikely to ever happen, again the focus is XBOX/PC gamers not training.

Gamers.. the magic word in this forum!

Come on, no matter if we use P3D, Xplane or msfs, the vast majority of us on this forum ARE gamers, no matter the passion we devote to our sim or the level of realism we try to reach to replicate real ops.

We are gamers, because the vast majority never bothered to buy a professional licence and because for the vast majority, this is a hobby. Most of us don't use the sim to train for a private pilot license and even less to train with the goal to pursue a career in commercial aviation. Yes I agree, there are a few exception but give me a break, it only represent a tiny % of the simmers, even on avsim and no matter the sim. No matter if we use XP, P3D or msfs, most of us uses it the exact same way, as a hobby flight sim software. 

So maybe some of us really think in their dream that they are a real pilot and could land a real 737 if necessary, but boy, I'm, you are, we are gamers!

Yes I know P3D is used for training in schools on the professional world but that is the main core of Lockheed Martin. The main reason such schools buy and use a P3D professional licence is mainly because they need support and after sales services and LM is one of the only company to offer and provide such services. Those schools and training business will never rely on Microsoft/ Asobo msfs for this reason. Just like a clever business company doesn't rely on avast or norton antivirus public licences to protect their datas and security.  

 

[CO2Neutral 278]

9 minutes ago, sdirand said:

Gamers.. the magic word in this forum!

You're correct, it does seem to set people off ... I have no idea why?  Gamers can be simmes and simmers can be gamers, but P3D focus is simulation and always has been and is certified for flight training from GA (RedBird) to Military (USAF) ... it's more than a game and will never run on an XBOX, so why does this trigger people?  I can assure you Lockheed Martin are making considerably more money thru training than Microsoft are making thru gaming ... easy enough to verify if you look at funding provided to LM from government contracts (two companies each with a very different focus).

Edited June 25, 2023 by CO2Neutral

[SAS443 1,729]

I'd like to say an honest thank you for the last 11 years and to all fun and (at times) extremely complicated projects I had the chance to be involved in, mostly as a tester.

But this is end of the line for me. V6 has very little that v5 already offers me, and v5 being a version I sadly barely use nowadays because XP12 and MSFS neatly complements my "simming needs".

So again, thank you LM for dynamic lighting, PBR, 64bit (obviously) and thousands of other fixes over the last decade. Wishing you nothing but best of luck going forward!

[klimpen 45]

3 hours ago, DChockey08 said:

I would tend to agree, but the comments from Andrew Wilson at FSLabs were perplexing. 

When someone posted stating that all that should be required is a simple update, he stated this was "quite incorrect" and that he was "setting expectations".

I am, however, semi-confident that FSLabs will port their addons to v6, but i am somewhat worried about PMDG. 

http://ifly.flight1.net/forums/prepar3d-v6_topic21115&FID=13&PR=3.html