FlyBaby

There have been valid reasons/opinions put forth on both sides, it is all a matter of preference at the end of the day. I am also looking to hold off for addons and to see what the performance is like from other's feedback. I do plan to eventually purchase v4 as the autogen LOD increase is a big plus in my book. Anyone looking to label you as "whining" for simply stating your thoughts...was not really looking for a discussion...just trolling to spark drama.

Exactly.

The hypocrisy here is deafening. Another worthless post disguised as clever insight.

I think this really nails it. These are huge steps forward and will benefit us in the future. LM was smart to invest in "core" elements. I saw some complaints about the default scenery, but why would LM invest in this effort when there are so many 3P devs (Orbx, Rex etc) out that have this area locked down with improvements? My biggest concern is performance. I would like to see more reviews etc. in this area. I plan to get P3Dv4, but I need to get a better sense of what performance is for most people running high LOD setting etc to see if I need to upgrade my PC.

What is the best AA setting? Is it in P3D or N-Inspector? Or which is acceptable when considering performance (fps drop). I like the dynamic lighting, but I would be willing to turn it off for performance sake. From what I remember in P3D v3.3, the Orbyx night light was pretty decent for my tastes.

I will wait for a few updates to address issues (if any) and for Orbx to update FTX Global, Vector, and OpenLC. I will also wait and see how the performance is impacted for the higher LOD and determine if I need to upgrade hardware. I expect to make a purchase around early fall.

I think you will have several lines of thinking regarding your post. Sure, there will be some who want 3rd party support and will move to the sim that offers it. But, there will be others who are fine with what DTG has to offer stock. Avsim seems to have the more serious simmers, but this demographic is not what makes up the Steam consumer base. There will be users looking to fire up a sim and fly (quick and easy) without much hassle. I think that FSW offers that experience and will be able to attract a less demanding consumer base.

I recently stated that XP and FSW would be the front runners in the flight sim race, but now I see that P3Dv4 has autogen out to the horizon. For me, (GA and Heli Flying), the ground aspect is very important. XP's 3D world has been unmatched (IMO) until now. In an instant, XP (to me) is now seriously falling way behind in the LOD spectrum. XP does not have autogen out to the horizon, nor do they have clouds out to the horizon, P3Dv4 now has both! I still only fly XP10 (waiting for a more stable XP11 release) and I have very simple needs (SR22 and helis are all that I fly). I may have to switch back to P3Dv4 before committing to XP11. I think that XP is far ahead in many aspects (3D world, lighting, water etc), but autogen and clouds to the horizon (with smooth performance) is something that can't be overlooked!

I agree. Even when I ran P3D and FSX...it was only in the daytime. After flying XP at night nothing else compares. On the flip side, P3D etc. had better cloud/weather and other daytime effects.

I do agree that DTG's train simulator seems to focus more on quantity than quality when comes to dlc. I have spent $100s on dlc that still have nagging issues, like flashing station lights at night. I would hope, however, that the strong community feedback regarding flight school and the demise of MS flight due to the community backlash will dictate how DTG supports FSW in the future. The Flight sim community (IMO) is much more vocal than the train sim community, and the competition here is also tougher.

Thanks, DTG.

Nice video. Some things to like, and of course, some things to point out. However, DTG seems committed and they are "listening", making changes etc. With this approach, it looks like a promising future for DTG as it will only get better over time. We gave LM and LR 5+ years to evolve, lets see what DTG can do with their sim.

This is a hard community to please. However, there are some longstanding complaints that will never go away. Popup scenery, small draw radius, blurries, stutters etc. will get the most scrutiny no matter what new enhancements the dev tries to push. And oftentimes, the new enhancements further kill performance which means we have to turn it off anyway. This issue plagues every developer (LM and LR), so DTG is not alone in this area. LR has a 3D world (no flat houses etc) and superior night lighting effects, but this means nothing when it is all going by like a slideshow. I applaud all of the new enhancements from all devs. you all have something up on the other guy. But basic "smooth" performance and the ground environment is something that I think is a core issue for a dev to take the lead on...and dominate this market. Warthunder is a battle game (not a sim) that I just fly around in...just for the smooth experience and decent eye candy. If anyone of you devs could capture that feeling...game over for the rest.

Hey, if P3D can step up their sim, then we benefit even more.

DTG has a interesting road ahead...3 other competitors and a demanding (sometimes unrealistic) audience. X plane and Flight Sim World will be in my future...and I say future. I really don't expect too much from either dev right now, both releasing new content that will take at least a year to iron out all of the bugs. So, I am looking to purchase both sims around mid to the end of "next" year. I simply refuse to waste my time with the bugs/conflicts that always occur with new releases (in this arena), and would rather wait for things to settle down and see what new hardware appears in the next 12-18 months to get a smoother flying experience. For now...its XP10 for me, it is stable and I have learned to appreciate what it is, and accept what it isn't. If pop up scenery and flat houses still plague FS World, then perhaps I will skip it...or just accept that nothing much can really be done with the old fsx engine, and get it solely for the missions. Either way, I think that DTG and LR will lead the pack in the future. Looking forward to learning more about what DTG brings to the table.

Try this thread for more info... http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/forums/topic/67094-klas-glitter-gulch/&page=5

For XP11 owners, Does the Miami-Atlantic coastline have taller buildings/apartments now? In XP 10, the area was desolate, as compared to how good NYC looked.

I had my issues with SMP's draw distance, performance, and support. I now only use SMP's forced cirrus layer to give me something in the sky. X-Enviro is definitely a promising "all in one" alternative.

I agree. It is a sim and, obviously, not the "real" thing. At what point do we enjoy what we do have as opposed to expecting "every" detail to be perfect? From what I see on this thread, X-Enviro looks like my next purchase.

Thanks.

Can X-Enviro draw clouds out to the horizon (looking from ground level)?

I currently run XP10 and have deleted all other flight sims. Not to say that XP10 is the best, but for me it is the least disappointing. Over the past 5+ years I have seen very little progress in FS development. For a while, LR all but abandoned XP (IMO) while they diverted resources to make mobile versions; while LM made very little enhancements and then decided to “charge” for an update (IMO). Then DTG (on an old and beaten platform) came with enthusiasm that died 24hrs after Flight School released. Their dev team just didn’t seem to get the point and I “began” to suspect that the full sim would crash and burn also. I just don’t think there is a big enough fan base to generate enough revenue to warrant any developer to “seriously” build a great flight simulator. LM and DTG are trying a shortcut through FSX that just doesn’t work, and LR does not seem to have sufficient resources to tackle things they constantly overlook, like performance. If FS had a “Call of Duty” or “GTA” fan base, you would have darn near perfect weather, ATC, and all the aircraft addons coming out of the same shop with a very limited (if any) 3rd party presence. FS is in a sad state; XP10 works for me because I accept that this is as good as it is going to get for the next 5+ years considering that no one has made any serious progress in the last 5 years. We are basically left with inefficient base sim platforms and 3rd party companies showing great screenshots that the users never experience due to performance limitations. This year has shown me that LR, LM and DTG are not capable of doing anything great with their products.

As someone mentioned, a slider for tall buildings and lights in the distance (and let the user decide) is best. I once edited the LOD for “very tall” buildings and could see the Miami coast skyline from Ft Lauderdale. It’s a PITA to do this manually, but the visual benefit (eliminated most of the fading buildings) was worth it, and the performance impact was not noticeable on my machine. I don’t see how LR can be so proud of light reflections etc. when we still have pop up lights and performance barriers that prevent them from addressing other long standing issues. XP10 is my only flight sim right now (long since gave up on the others) because it does serve my passion for Helis and GA flying, but LR's focus seems to miss the “major” issues with every update. XP11 will have to get a major overhaul before I upgrade.

XP10 (or XP11) does not take advantage of SLI or a well implemented multi-core setup. From what I have seen, most people who claim high FPS are limited in their settings (objects, AA etc) and cant really take advantage of all that XP10 has to offer from a visual perspective. Also XP10 has always suffered from poor AA in HDR mode. I like XP10 for what it is; and XP10 is currently the best sim for the type of flying (GA and Heli) that I do. I just don't see how visual enhancements in XP11 can be seen as better when performance will hinder users from enjoying these enhancements at high settings with good AA etc. With all of these sims (P3D, XP etc) and add-ons (aircraft, scenery, clouds etc).....the sticking point has always been performance (smoothness etc). Not one DEV (from what I have seen) has been able to get the performance side done right by fully taking advantage of what modern hardware has to offer. All of these new updates and platform versions seem to focus on "more", but with these performance barriers, more is actually less...performance. I just don't see how XP11 warrants an upgrade from XP10 if it suffers from the same performance issues when maxed out.

It took XP10 years to become a usable product worth the money I initially paid when it was released. New visual enhancements etc sound good, but, for me, performance needs to be the priority to make anything new really shine. I know I will get XP11 at some point in the future, but I will wait to see if LR is really committed to getting the performance/code to a place that ties well with modern hardware. For now, XP10 is at a stable place on my machine and I see no reason to fight with new bugs, aircraft upgrades, tweaks that will most likely come with XP11.