Minivation

Yes. I'm using v3.0 right now. Why so? That defeats the purpose of the comparison since FSX stock looks so ... empty. Point is, I feel like that the code behind ESP is incredibly inefficient at handling and balancing computer resources. Computers today usually have no issue handling games made in the mid-2000s. And yet here we are, 11 years after FSX, and we're still struggling to get decent fps out of high-end computers.

Apart from the usual graphics and performance frustrations, my main gripe goes to the lack of expandability of the ESP engine. 1. Custom ground polygons must be written using FS2002-style SCASM code. 2. There is no way to recreate switch and lever sounds without using a custom .dll gauge. 3. Turboprop engine start timing sequences can't be modified because the start animation is built into the .mdl file. 4. Again, in turboprops, the propeller doesn't start turning until combustion starts, which is unrealistic, especially for a free turbine like the PT6. 5. Flight dynamics have limited functionality and proper spins are very hard to come by. 6. Default GPS nav data is set to what it looked like in 2005-2006 and it's locked there. There is no way (as far as I know) that a user or 3rd party dev could completely overhaul the sim's native navaid, waypoint, airway, SID/STAR and approach databases. 7. Stock airports cannot be deleted or given a different ICAO code. 8. Airports must lie on an airport flatten polygon unless the dev is willing to spend time modelling each undulation of the surfaces. Don't get me wrong, I love flight sim (I'm using P3D3 right now). However, compared to other current game technologies (just look at how the cityscape looks like at sunset in GTA5, and all this presented to you in 60+fps!), flight sim tech leaves a lot to be desired.

That is one heck of a tricky shot! (Beautiful picture though) Since there's nothing I can use as a reference to scale how big the airplane is, I'm split between a 737-700 and a 767-300.