3 hours ago, spilok said:

I have both P3d v5.4 and MSFS 2024.  If I want to fly and enjoy "eye candy", I fire up MSFS.  If I want realism, and enjoy a long flight, I fire up P3d.  After all, the Military can't be wrong when they choose realism.  They use Lockheed Martin and P3d.

Both MSFS 2020 and MSFS 2024 do look like games and catering to Xbox kind of admits that.  I do enjoy both for VERY different reasons.

 

If I want realism, *and* I also want "eye candy", I fire up MSFS.. and I do that whether I want to just fly around or enjoy a long flight. If I want to use MSFS for casual fun, or if I want to use MSFS for maximum realism, or anything inbetween, I can. Such are the benefits of a sim platform that is not niche. This "either / or" mindset is a rather antiquated one.
 

Quote

So, unless you're flying a very Hi Fi add-on that's only available in P3D, you can have just as realistic, if not moreso, an experience in the other sims.

@UrgentSiesta Bingo.
 

Edited February 11, 20251 yr by lwt1971

3 hours ago, spilok said:

After all, the Military can't be wrong when they choose realism.  They use Lockheed Martin and P3d.

Yes, the military never make mistakes in their procurement programmes…

I pretty much dumped P3D the day MSFS 2020 came out. Best decision of my (gaming) life.

5 hours ago, lwt1971 said:

If I want realism, *and* I also want "eye candy", I fire up MSFS.. and I do that whether I want to just fly around or enjoy a long flight. If I want to use MSFS for casual fun, or if I want to use MSFS for maximum realism, or anything inbetween, I can. Such are the benefits of a sim platform that is not niche. This "either / or" mindset is a rather antiquated one.

Yup, agree.  For accuracy of landmarks and terrain, including how they look, MSFS 2024 is by far more realistic than P3D.  There is no way P3D can do this if a side by side video comparison between real life and P3D was made:

In addition, the flight dynamics for MSFS 2024 are vastly superior to P3D. There is a whole thread to discuss the flight dynamics of MSFS 2024: 

Finally, the ground physics of MSFS 2024 are simply at a whole new level.  The rocks that are procedurally placed around the world can impact the plane as the plane's tires roll over it.  This makes bush flying, and taking off & landing at nonpaved runways, more realistic in MSFS 2024 than ever: 

Then there is the simulation of default avionics.  No other flight simulator, XP 12 included, is able to match MSFS's simulation of the default G1000 (NXi), G3000, G5000, and G3X, even if you try to buy payware add-ons.  The simulation of the default GNS 430 and 530 are also very good in MSFS.  And now Working Title has added the  Honeywell Primus Epic 2 and Universal UNS-1 for MSFS 2024.   The default avionics simulation in MSFS 2024 is simply so far ahead of the other flight simulators out there.

The main advantage of P3D is that it is more open for modification and more customizable. Having said that though, MSFS 2024 is open enough for modification, with almost all the popular 3rd party products and 3rd party planes from P3D being ported to MSFS.  If P3D is 10/10 for being open for modification, MSFS 2024 is probably 9/10, which IMO, is more than enough (even FSLabs are able to port their A320 over, and FSLabs was the longest hold out among the most well known 3rd party plane devs because they said the MSFS SDK could not do what they wanted back in 2020, but that changed by 2022).

From a technical standpoint though, MSFS 2024 is just a better overall simulator than P3D, and IMO, the best overall flight simulator out there. If you are able to look past the UI and actually judge the simulation aspects of MSFS 2024, MSFS 2024 is a much better overall simulator. It would be interesting if Microsoft decide to go for the commercial or military market one day, even with a different product, but a product based on the same engine as MSFS 2024 . They have not decided to do that yet, but I think if they decide on this, they will be successful because of how advanced the MSFS 2024 engine is.

Edited February 11, 20251 yr by abrams_tank

10 hours ago, spilok said:

After all, the Military can't be wrong when they choose realism.  They use Lockheed Martin and P3d.

Does the US military still use Windows XP?

March 9, 2024 by William Taylor

Yes, the US military still uses Windows XP on some of its systems.

https://thegunzone.com/does-the-us-military-still-use-windows-xp/

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The U.S. Military drops big bucks for all sorts of equipment, supplies, and software. But while we spend millions to upgrade computers when better software comes out, we also spend millions to keep older software because, if we don’t, it could actually cost lives in combat."

https://www.wearethemighty.com/mighty-trending/us-military-old-windows-software/

Edited February 11, 20251 yr by turbomax

52 minutes ago, turbomax said:

Does the US military still use Windows XP?

March 9, 2024 by William Taylor

Yes, the US military still uses Windows XP on some of its systems.

https://thegunzone.com/does-the-us-military-still-use-windows-xp/

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The U.S. Military drops big bucks for all sorts of equipment, supplies, and software. But while we spend millions to upgrade computers when better software comes out, we also spend millions to keep older software because, if we don’t, it could actually cost lives in combat."

https://www.wearethemighty.com/mighty-trending/us-military-old-windows-software/

Because the US military uses Windows XP over Windows 11, it means Windows XP > Windows 11 🤣🤣🤣

Edited February 11, 20251 yr by abrams_tank

the military chose P3D and Windows XP for various reasons long before MSFS appeared on the DLSS horizon (long term contracts, security, custom specific adaptations, long term budgets etc) but clearly not because of higher realism. 🤣

I'll just put this in here for the record. 

Ground handling and inertia. 

I fly 3 sims right now. 

In FSX SE with the MD-11 from PMDG and in P3DV5 with their 777 and 744/748 taxiing is a wonderful thing. Whenever I start applying power after pushback in one of these beautiful HEAVIES I usually think hey why am I not moving yet. Then ever so slightly and smoothly I can just make out the pixels through my side window start to change. The plane has overcome ground friction and there is 1kt on the pfd... Now 2kts etc etc. When I turn I'd better be going slow enough to anticipate the turn! 

Back to MSFS and the 777 or 739(yeh not a heavy but still umm heavy ish). Apply a little throttle and.. Woah boy I'm doing 5..10..20 kts I'd better start them brakes! I'll never make that turn! Ohh.. Wow I can swing that nose back and forth like a formula 1 race car. Wiggle wiggle wiggle. In fact I can even drive my ac fast around the circuit.. Sorry airport... And get my wheels to skid around corners as the hydraulics seem ultra powerful and fast despite my massive umm MASS. 

Absolutely no comparison between 2020 and previous sims on the ground. I have NOT tried 2024 yet but it doesn't have high level heavies yet I believe. Defaults obviously don't count. 

1 hour ago, turbomax said:

the military chose P3D and Windows XP for various reasons long before MSFS appeared on the DLSS horizon (long term contracts, security, custom specific adaptations, long term budgets etc) but clearly not because of higher realism. 🤣

They spent bilions on OS and Flightsim software many years ago and will stay with it as long as they can …

Okay, this discussion is drifting away from the title of the post. Any more off-topic posts will be hidden.

Well, hopefully my first impression will change drastically.   After getting 2024 setup I've done three flights.  The first one was KBJC>KTEX, and it was very lovely.  I could see the improved detail in the Rockies.  Very little cloud depiction with clear weather.  Next flight was to KSHR from KDEN.  During this flight which was about 400mi we flew over cloud cover on the arrival side and on into Sheridan.   Cloud rendering look strange.  I had rid myself of 'voxel grid' artifact by manipulating PrimaryScaling and even when changed to DLSS4 + DLAA these stayed away.  Now what I see as we descend below the cloud layer is a weird dim grid throughout the entire cloud layer!   The former voxel grid was only seen on the edges of nearby clouds, but this was throughout!  So turned off FG, DLSS4 and went back to TAA, no difference.  I hope this isn't going to persist because it's really fugly, even the cloud depiction itself was a downgrade.   

At KSHR, during taxi, we saw leafless trees with lightly snow covered terrain but get this:  the trees appeared to have bits of snow on them and they flickered LIKE MAD!  And that wasn't just during taxi motion, but even at a standstill!  It was so distracting looking out the side it was just awful never saw anything like it, anywhere before!  

Saddest of all was this visit to my old home town area, Chico California.   I fully expected to see at a least a slight improvement in rendering there.  Here's what the flyover looked like.  PG on or off made zero difference:

So went straight to 2020 to see what it looked like now.  This is vastly more realistic than what appears in 2024:

I'm hoping all of this is growing pains and my very limited exposure so far.  But I tell you, today, if someone told me, 'You're stuck with only one msfs simulator for the next year....' I say BYE BYE to 2024 in a heartbeat. 

3 hours ago, Noel said:

 

Saddest of all was this visit to my old home town area, Chico California.   I fully expected to see at a least a slight improvement in rendering there.  Here's what the flyover looked like.  PG on or off made zero difference:

 

I'm hoping all of this is growing pains and my very limited exposure so far.  But I tell you, today, if someone told me, 'You're stuck with only one msfs simulator for the next year....' I say BYE BYE to 2024 in a heartbeat. 

Not sure how you got it to look so bad... There are some imperfect trees in that area, for sure, but this is what I see:

 

Great, that is hopeful.  I can't imagine 'what I did' to bring that on.  All my graphics settings are the same as in 2020 and I have Dynamic off with a RC file size of 32Gb.

Thanks Bert I will fire it up again and see if it was a one-off.  My internet bandwidth is around 800mbps.

Edited February 11, 20251 yr by Noel

21 minutes ago, Noel said:

Great, that is hopeful.  I can't imagine 'what I did' to bring that on.  All my graphics settings are the same as in 2020 and I have Dynamic off with a RC file size of 32Gb.

Thanks Bert I will fire it up again and see if it was a one-off.  My internet bandwidth is around 800mbps.

I have no special settings, just default "High".   TAA graphics.  Internet 75 Mbps.

Edited February 11, 20251 yr by Bert Pieke

Best approach will start slow and move some of your settings but take it slow and learn what the sim is about.

Also learn 2024 in a clean state so don't add anything to the sim until after SU2 maybe.

I don't know about you but I have loads of fun learning stuff like simulators.

good luck and check out an optimization vid or 2.

dd

Edited February 11, 20251 yr by Sky_Pilot071