13 hours ago, Jordixvz said:

use PMDG B737 in both simulators (for example), and my experience is that I vastly prefer it to P3D; everything from the way you press the levers, buttons, etc., the simulation seems more realistic to me.
Of course, I have P3D with a multitude of improvements: Active Sky,

I joined the Prepar3D fan club VERY late. Right after v4.5 came out.

I had discovered that there were some very High Fidelity add-ons in P3D that either didn't exist in other sims, or not at an equivalent level of fidelity. E.g., MilViz's T-38 Talon, A2A Sims Comanche & Civ Mustang, Majestic's Q400 and VRS' F/A-18E Super Hornet. Quite the eclectic group, eh...? 😉

Since I had jet airliner add-ons in other sims that are objectively "Study Level"/Full Fidelity, I didn't see the need to jump into that group at all.

But then PMDG came along with an offer I couldn't refuse: buy the P3D 737, and get their 737 for MSFS at $0 extra.

And lemme tell ya, after less than 20 mins or so, it was plainly apparent that the PMDG NGXu for P3D was (and remains) a Top Shelf addon.

Fast forward to MSFS v20 once PMDG released there, too.

I basically stopped flying the 737 in P3D, simply because I couldn't tell any difference between the two add-ons.

And MSFS offered significantly greater fidelity as a world representation, not just in graphics, but also in weather/atmospherics (which they tell me is of passing interest to Aviators 😉), flight model, physics, and so on.

Oh, and let's not forget about undulating runways, which are a thing for the jetliners.

And the further fidelity improvements offered in MSFS v2024 make it even less tempting to return to P3D, except for 4 out of those 5 add-ons that STILL have no equal in MSFS.

Now, I'm not qualified to judge the distinctions between the PMDG jets for P3D and those for MSFS, but I've yet to see any advice from a Pro to say that we should stick with the P3D versions for "professional" "simulator" fidelity reasons.

If you prefer the P3D PMDG, all good keep right on keeping on.

But let's recognize that there are at least a "few" High Fidelity simulation features in MSFS, as well. Certainly enough to raise it above the "game" pejorative. 🙂🤙

Edited May 18, 20251 yr by UrgentSiesta
Clarification & correction

Actually, people that want a "professional" simulator these days, tend to go with X-Plane 11 or X-Plane 12.  X-Plane offers the most realistic flight simulation that is possible in a desktop simulator imo.  X-Plane's flight physics are based fully on aerodynamics, whereas P3D and MSFS both use flight physics that are more simplified.  It also has superior systems implementation compared to P3D or MSFS.  Many professional pilots that are looking for a desktop simulator specifically for training, tend to go with X-Plane for those reasons.

MSFS is superior when it comes to scenery fidelity, though, I do agree with that.

47 minutes ago, Zylx said:

Actually, people that want a "professional" simulator these days, tend to go with X-Plane 11 or X-Plane 12.  X-Plane offers the most realistic flight simulation that is possible in a desktop simulator imo.  X-Plane's flight physics are based fully on aerodynamics, whereas P3D and MSFS both use flight physics that are more simplified.  It also has superior systems implementation compared to P3D or MSFS.  Many professional pilots that are looking for a desktop simulator specifically for training, tend to go with X-Plane for those reasons.

MSFS is superior when it comes to scenery fidelity, though, I do agree with that.

What metrics/facts do you have to support those assertions...?

8 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

What metrics/facts do you have to support those assertions...?

It must be his long experience of being a MSFS 2020/24 user...

3 minutes ago, DD_Arthur said:

It must be his long experience of being a MSFS 2020/24 user...

  I have spend a a few hundred hours flying in MSFS2020, I have not tried 2024 but I doubt it's much better.  Asobo doesn't seem to care about making such things better.  I haven't added MSFS2020 to my signature because I don't use it a lot.

  

6 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

What metrics/facts do you have to support those assertions...?

You can find this information yourself if you do the research on the internet.  Of course, there have long been debates on FS forums debating these issues but if you look at the way the X-Plane flight model and systems implementation works, and how the P3D and MSFS work, it is easy to see.

MSFS is supposed to be improved over the P3D flight model, but as I said in an earlier post, I don't think it's been well implemented in many aircraft.

I have also seen this all for myself, just by flying and testing all kinds of different aircraft for P3D, MSFS and X-Plane and comparing the differences.  For example, comparing study level P3D and MSFS aircraft to study level X-Plane aircraft.  The differences are pretty clear to me, and to many others that have tried them all like I have.

I have also spent much time comparing and contrasting the different 3rd party aircraft for each simulator, looking specifically at how those things work.

I am not saying one simulator is better than the other, I am just pointing out some of the differences.  Not everyone is looking for a simulator just for real life flight training.  Every simulator has it's advantages and disadvantages.  I enjoy them all regardless.

2 hours ago, UrgentSiesta said:

So, Windows isn't Windows, then..

Looks like you are in urgent need of a nap.  

Sure, we developers just hit the pixie dust button on our keyboard and everything magically goes from a 32bit address space to a 64bit address space.

Qualified isn't un-Qualified ... Context isn't relevant in your sphere ... lets do the context shuffle and call it a day.

3 hours ago, dave2013 said:

but eventually I will likely switch to MSFS2024 once the major bugs are fixed.

That could be a long wait ... a long long wait.  Out of the box, MSFS 2024 Portland and PDX area are horrifically bad ... all those solid bridges still NOT addressed by Asobo and have to look for 3rd party options.  Don't even think of using Ultra settings on a 16GB VRAM GPU on a base install, let alone 3rd party aircraft/scenery.  Or just avoid any locations with bridges or population density.

 

Edited May 18, 20251 yr by CO2Neutral

2 hours ago, CO2Neutral said:

Looks like you are in urgent need of a nap.  

Sure, we developers just hit the pixie dust button on our keyboard and everything magically goes from a 32bit address space to a 64bit address space.

Qualified isn't un-Qualified ... Context isn't relevant in your sphere ... lets do the context shuffle and call it a day.

Nah, I'm just in urgent need of hearing less hyperbole disguised as sage knowledge.

18 hours ago, Jordixvz said:

Thank you very much for all your contributions.
It's true, I wasn't asking a question; it was just a reflection on which I hoped to hear your opinions.
I share the opinions most of you have expressed, especially regarding having multiple simulators. I said it at the beginning: MSFS for low-altitude flights to enjoy the graphics, to be able to see the world as realistically as possible. But to simulate a B737 IFR flight, as close as possible to what a real pilot would do, I use P3D v5.4. I don't have the knowledge to judge categorically, but I perceive MSFS as an arcade game, a very good game nonetheless.
I use PMDG B737 in both simulators (for example), and my experience is that I vastly prefer it to P3D; everything from the way you press the levers, buttons, etc., the simulation seems more realistic to me.
Of course, I have P3D with a multitude of improvements: Active Sky, Asca, Toga, FS Global, ORBX Global and OpenLC, Mega Scenery, many airports, REX, PMDG, FSlabs, etc., etc., etc. For this reason, I don't miss what MSFS represents in terms of graphics, which are obviously much better than P3D.
Thanks again for listening to me and for your opinions, from which I learn.

Out of interest, as someone who doesn't fly airliners, I'm curious about what P3D models in terms of what a real B737 pilot flying IFR does, that MSFS doesn't?

4 hours ago, Zylx said:

I am not saying one simulator is better than the other,

Except you just did.

You're also conflating the aero model of ESP/FSX/P3D with MSFS when the latter has not only been decidedly improved, but in fact re-written.

I mean, did you miss the whole CFD/NPS/SBS thing, along with the follow-on improvements for rotary wing flight in v2020? And the new highly increased resolution of aircraft flight modeling possible with v20204...? 

I will absolutely agree that many MSFS add-ons have old-school flight models, but a rapidly increasing number are taking advantage of CFD/etc, and are decidedly better than the former ESP FM's.

Even (especially?) many of the v2024 Defaults, like the C172, Guimbal Cabri, and Citation jets (among others).

Prime 3rd Party examples are the FSR500, which has had a great CFD FM since it released for v2020, the first iB A310 was noticeably better than many airliners in ESP, the iB A300 Premium v2024, and the latest Just Flight Hawk v2 and Piper Arrow v2's are far and away better than they've ever been. So much so it's as though they're from a different developer.

Now, am I ready to dump my favorite X-Plane add-ons from SimCoders, Ubben/Khamsin, AirfoilLabs, Flight Factor, et al...? Absolutely not. They're excellent add-ons in every respect. So much so that there's no substantive reason to consider their respective counterparts in MSFS.

/// 

In terms of "people that want a "professional" simulator these days, tend to go with X-Plane 11 or X-Plane 12.", I emphatically challenge you to cite your sources, because I've never seen any evidence to support your implication - anywhere.

///

"Every simulator has it's advantages and disadvantages. I enjoy them all regardless."

On that, we are very much in agreement.

ETA:

" I have spend a a few hundred hours flying in MSFS2020, I have not tried 2024 but I doubt it's much better. Asobo doesn't seem to care about making such things better. I haven't added MSFS2020 to my signature because I don't use it a lot."

I mean, the cognitive dissonance is extraordinary.

You've never used v2024, but you doubt it's better, but you've spent hundreds of hours comparing...

And Asobo doesn't care to make things better, except they absolutely, undeniably have...

 

Edited May 19, 20251 yr by UrgentSiesta
ETA

2 hours ago, UrgentSiesta said:

Nah, I'm just in urgent need of hearing less hyperbole disguised as sage knowledge

Then stop posting.

1 hour ago, UrgentSiesta said:

And Asobo doesn't care to make things better, except they absolutely, undeniably have...

Yep, and some things much worse.  MSFS 2020 physics ... ya think ... then please explain to us the equations they used to simulate inertia?  Turbulence?  Would love to see the code behind that ... oh wait, you don't know ... so sage.

What specifically is "Better" than?

1 hour ago, UrgentSiesta said:

You've never used v2024

I doubt you have either based on your sage knowledge.

Edited May 19, 20251 yr by CO2Neutral

@UrgentSiesta I said that X-Plane excels when it comes to the flight modelling and the systems implementation but I didn't say it was the most superior flight simulator, that is too subjective.

I have honestly not been paying a whole lot of attention to MSFS 2024 yet but eventually I probably will in the future.  I am just going based on how MSFS 2020 was developed by the same developers.  I really do hope that you are right and those things are improved for MSFS 2024 compared to MSFS 2020.

There is no definitive single source out there that can back up my opinion as 100% absolute fact, however there is a lot of information that I've gleaned from reading lots of old forum threads, reading what lots of commercial pilots have said about the subject (of comparing flight simulators) as well as discussions I've had personally with commercial pilots on the topic.

Also, learning about how the flight modelling and systems implementation actually works in P3D, MSFS 2020 and X-Plane 11 & 12 works, can really help you better understand and see the differences.  Doing my own testing has also backed up what I believe.

It is a fact that X-Plane's flight modelling is fully based on aerodynamics whereas P3D and MSFS 2020 is not, that is not a secret.  That does not mean that X-Plane is perfect, it certainly has it's flaws and limitations too.

I meant that I spent a lot of time comparing MSFS 2020 to P3D and X-Plane, not MSFS 2024.  I should have been more clear about that.

Edit: I should add that the differences in flight modelling and systems implementation between flight simulators are not very noticeable to many people, even to some pilots.  This is why people have argued what simulator is the best for ages.  There is no one best simulator.

Edited May 19, 20251 yr by Zylx

15 hours ago, CO2Neutral said:

Then stop posting.

Yep, and some things much worse.  MSFS 2020 physics ... ya think ... then please explain to us the equations they used to simulate inertia?  Turbulence?  Would love to see the code behind that ... oh wait, you don't know ... so sage.

What specifically is "Better" than?

I doubt you have either based on your sage knowledge.

Yaaaaawnnn....

16 hours ago, Zylx said:

@UrgentSiesta I said that X-Plane excels when it comes to the flight modelling and the systems implementation but I didn't say it was the most superior flight simulator, that is too subjective.

I have honestly not been paying a whole lot of attention to MSFS 2024 yet but eventually I probably will in the future.  I am just going based on how MSFS 2020 was developed by the same developers.  I really do hope that you are right and those things are improved for MSFS 2024 compared to MSFS 2020.

There is no definitive single source out there that can back up my opinion as 100% absolute fact, however there is a lot of information that I've gleaned from reading lots of old forum threads, reading what lots of commercial pilots have said about the subject (of comparing flight simulators) as well as discussions I've had personally with commercial pilots on the topic.

Also, learning about how the flight modelling and systems implementation actually works in P3D, MSFS 2020 and X-Plane 11 & 12 works, can really help you better understand and see the differences.  Doing my own testing has also backed up what I believe.

It is a fact that X-Plane's flight modelling is fully based on aerodynamics whereas P3D and MSFS 2020 is not, that is not a secret.  That does not mean that X-Plane is perfect, it certainly has it's flaws and limitations too.

I meant that I spent a lot of time comparing MSFS 2020 to P3D and X-Plane, not MSFS 2024.  I should have been more clear about that.

Edit: I should add that the differences in flight modelling and systems implementation between flight simulators are not very noticeable to many people, even to some pilots.  This is why people have argued what simulator is the best for ages.  There is no one best simulator.

As a fan of both XP and MSFS and P3D, I'd love to carry on the X-Plane vs MSFS debate, but that's not what this post is about.

What I'll say is that aero/flight models - in particular - are what interest me the most, and form the foundation of a satisfying sim experience for me.

So I'll ask that instead of assuming I don't understand, or that haven't even looked into the various methods of producing good flight models, you accept that I have, in fact, done so.

///

In contrast, based on what you've shared so far, MY perspective is that you haven't investigated or absorbed MSFS' continually evolving aero modeling. Your statements lead me to believe that you stopped learning about MSFS' FM about 3-4 years ago.

ESPECIALLY since you keep describing P3D and MSFS as though they use the same aero / flight models, which is objectively untrue. Simple as that.

All you'd have to do to prove it to yourself is fly a helicopter in P3D, then jump in one in MSFS v2020, and THEN jump in one in v2024.

Worlds of difference, to vastly over simplify.

You say that XP's aero model is "fully based on aerodynamics", implying that MSFS doesn't have "aerodynamics" available.

Without getting into shades of gray in re 3rd Party Dev support, what do you think CFD, NPS, and SBS are all about, if not literally "aerodynamics" conceptually similar to X-Plane BET and other physics...?

I mean, MSFS even included airflow and atmospheric visualization tools so we mere mortals can see things in a manner similar to the BET visualizations in XP!

I honestly believe you've approached your position with literal prejudice, and have a strong case of confirmation bias in favor of XP. Which, again, isn't OP's purpose.

I'll remind you that we're supposed to be sticking to P3D vs MSFS, because to bring other sims under consideration unnecessarily muddies the waters re OP's position that P3D is a "professional simulator" and MSFS is a "game".

From an aero / flight model perspective, MSFS v2020, and v2024 even moreso, stand head and shoulders above P3D. Period, end of story.

As an Appendix, I'll once again readily agree that XP has fantastic aerodynamics & physics, and some of the Hi Fi add-ons there are my favorites over all other similar in other sims.

Since to go further is OT, I'll stop there.

Edited May 19, 20251 yr by UrgentSiesta
Clarification

1 hour ago, UrgentSiesta said:

Yaaaaawnnn....

Thought so, fluff.