darth_damian_000

From the posts I've read, it seems that the FSLabs A320 seems to be superior to Aerosoft's Airbus 320 series, in terms of how you control the plane. This is rather a debatable topic, especially now that the FSLabs product has only been out for such a short time. I haven't done much research on BBS airbus, but it nonetheless seems like a valid contender among the three. My question is about the widebodies. Aerosoft is deep in their A330 project, BBS's widebodies are also getting better by the day, and I read somewhere that FSLabs hinted and making a widebody series, but I could not find any info on that. In any case, the argument is that once the A320 series has been designed, it will be a smaller hurdle to jump over to make the subequent 330/340 widebodies, as the foundation has been laid. The question I would like to ask is, which developer should I wait for to complete their widebody project before I buy? But as these products haven't come out yet (we don't even know if they will come out), which developer would you prefer if you were to buy a widebody plane, and why? I would appreciate your opinions based on your experiences flying the a320 products, and what do you expect from them. All the best!

Hello. Although I don't see any issues, I have read about something about placing ORBX sceneries on the bottom of some list. Can anyone explain this whole thing about scenery items, what difference does it make if they're in different positions, how to change their positions, and what are the downsides of a misconfigured lists? Thanks.

Is steam mostly the reason why younger people got into simming?

Hey guys. I wonder, is the flight sim community expanding? shrinking? or is it stable? I spoke about this topic with a friend, who has been simming for way longer than I have. He says that the number of people simming around the world is in the "hundreds of thousands" area, out of an approximate (and seriously this is just an estimate) of 2 billion people (out of 7 billion) in the world who play games. This topic came up as a result of prices of add-ons. The prices, in my opinion, are in the medium range, with many add-on airports costing somewhere between $20 and $40, add-on aircraft between $50 and $150, and large scale ground scenery $40 - $100. Obviously the higher end of these ranges being the higher quality products. What does that say about supply and demand of such products? In any case, I do understand that these require tons of work and resources, so I would say most of the costs of products are.....reasonable. How would you assess the status of the flight simming community? I am looking for both facts and opinions.

Very well put dehowie. Thank you. A quick search gave me a quick response, not as elaborate as the ones I see here.

I'd like to hear opinions of users as well as from the developers themselves. After being a member of the community for a relatively short time, I noticed that people like various planes, whether or not they're obsolete. But how was it decided that some old propeller airplane will be the plane that PMDG would dedicate it's time and resources to it? Needless to say, PMDG does not half-&@($* anything. Despite not owning the DC-6 nor X plane, I can say with confidence that the product is very precise. But why the antique?

I read over the product description of AS16 and ASCA and I must say that the terminology used is so specific that I have no idea what it means. I presently own ASN, a weather engine, and it does a fine job. How does AS16 and ASCA amplify the experience? Furthermore, I do have REX Softclouds....is this product still useful for me? Thank you.

Thanks for all of your input guys. The reason I am considering the upgrade is because it is free, I assume this "free" deal is off the table if I have to do a clean install. I do understand the benefits of a clean install. After reading through these posts, it seems like it is the best thing to do. I just hear rumors of a 64 bit P3D, perhaps optimized for DX12 (not available on windows 7), and I figured this is a golden opportunity. Though I figured that I don't really feel sound knowing how all my system files will be merely migrated from an old OS onto a new one. Last night I was so ready to upgrade, but the fine insight I received here makes me think that I should wait for another PC upgrade that I will do sometime in the near future, which is when I will buy a fresh copy of Win10 and install it. Thanks again for the responses. I would still like to hear more of course

I am currently running Windows 7 on my system. I am satisfied with it, and for the hardware that I have, my P3D runs smoothly. I have zero OOMs under my belt after flying for about a year. The Windows 10 Free Upgrade offer is expiring in a month, and I am leaning toward upgrading. Windows 10 is the future, and all future upgrades will be made for that environment, so I am thinking I will take the plunge. My situation is that I have P3D V3.3 and I have...A LOT of add-ons, mostly airport sceneries and some PMDG and aerosoft planes, as well as the whole ORBX FTX enchilada (global, vector, open lc europe and alaska/canada). All of these are installed somewhere in C:\Lockheed Martin. 1) Do I simply upgrade to windows 10, and things remain as is? Do I have to uninstall and install my P3D and all of their add-ons? 2) For those of you who upgraded, are you regretting it? How was the transition for you? Thanks!

*tear* another one bites the dust

I am relatively new to flight simulation, and at this point, I have, unfortunately, sunk into a standard of "high expectations" from the add-ons that sometimes can be pricey. That is not to say the add-ons aren't worth the price, but their quality sometimes generates hype about upcoming projects. I would like to know why do developers keep everything a secret, and why do they update us, their customers, so rarely? It's like you have to look for updates on wikileaks, or perhaps find your way to a vault where only a country's top officials know the code! Is it some business tactic? Is it a conservative approach, making sure they dont release any products / information prematurely? Or is it because they don't work on these projects as long and frequently as I THINK they do? Is this some illusion that I have, as in, certain products take a very long time to develop when I expect them to be finished quicker? In the end, I do appreciate the work they do. By the quality of some add-ons that I tried, I can certainly understand why they would take so long.

Jack I used to have a similar approach to PMDGs next project, rationalizing why something would or would not get created by them but after they announced they're working on the DC-6 I am back to "anything is possible" because the Douglas planes are the last things I would expect from them. But who cares, because PMDG is happy to know that they generate great hype, and they are enjoying the publicity. After they've done such an amazing job on the 737 and 747, they've earned themselves the respect.

I don't speak French at all...but I can most certainly say this: 747 ... oui mais pour MD-11 ... le jeu est fait

No regrets. I haven't had a single OOM, CTD, I've been simming for about a year. I have A LOT of add-ons from many developers. Granted, there aren't as many add-ons as FSX. One thing I do is I keep it clean, meaning, if an add-on isn't certified for the version of P3D that you are using, I don't install it, as much as I would love it. There's this rule of thumb out there that if it's good for P3D V2, it's good for V3. Maybe I am too strict on this, but I don't go by that. I am happy with what I have, and many mainstream add-ons are compatible with V3. One thing I do miss is AI traffic, which I refuse to purchase, again, becuase I couldn't find a satisfactory add-on. I got used to it, but, I am still hoping that MyTraffic will release something for P3D. To sum it up, GO FOR IT!

I try to keep my simulator clean, meaning, if the manufacturer says that this isn't compatible with P3D V3.3, then I am not going to purchase it. I have been quite comfortable with this approach (no pun intended) and I've never had a CTD / OOM crash *knock on wood* since I first started simming about a year ago. However, the mainstream developer community's bias to North American and European airports (yes, yes, I know, OMDB, YSSY) has gotten me into a repetitive rut. Now that tropical sim and latin vfr have some products on sale, it would be the perfect opportunity to get this scenery. Unfortunately for me (I'm sure many would back me on this), these airports aren't certified for P3D V3, and puts me in a dilemma. I know when P3D V3 first came out, ORBX stressed that their sceneries are incompatible with V3 and installers will be put in place to satisfy their customers who made the upgrade. Now that the life story is over, I would like to ask you, P3D V3 (better, V 3.3 users), about your experiences with products certified for no later version than P3D V2.5. I would like to buy SAEZ, SGBL, and perhaps SGBR, and would like to hear some of the thought you all have on these, based on how they run, how they are on frames (regardless of what kind of build you have), and if there are perhaps any crashes or instabilities that occured to you as a result. Furthermore, if you are using ORBX global base and vector, how are they compatible? Thank you!