Jump to content

Jeff_Fortuna

Members
  • Content Count

    27
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

30 Neutral

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    none
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Interesting thread. I have been using P3D and X-plane for a few years now (and had started with sims in the mid 80's with SubLogic's efforts. So I have been in this "game" for a while and have spent altogether too much money on it. My two cents would simply be that, from what I can tell from MSFS trailers + leaks, scenery is somewhat better (more accurate?) than P3D with something like ORBX True Earth or X-Plane with ortho (or ORBX). How much better is arguable - but I don't see a quantum leap in MSFS wrt scenery - again, relative to ORBX True Earth. Thus, I would simply say MSFS > P3D >= X-Plane given a well - outfitted (and expensive) P3D and X-Plane. Now, I happen to like P3D with EA. Yes, there are bugs, but I just find it more natural looking than what MSFS did. In any case, again, no quantum leap. X-Plane weather depiction is not good. So, I would say P3D > MSFS >> X-Plane, but the top 2 spots are arguable. Likely, AS weather is more accurate than MSFS's efforts, but that remains to be seen. Anyway, last thing is flight dynamics fidelity. Based on many opinions, I would argue that P3D with A2A is about equal to X-Plane's better planes noting that these sims use completely different approaches to flight dynamics. Now, from what I have heard about MSFS, I would rank things as X-Plane >= P3D (A2A) > MSFS. Again, I don't think there are huge differences. So, once again, each sim has strengths and weaknesses and I don't see any clear winners. So, this thread was about the costs. The OP was arguing that it doesn't matter which you choose, you will need addons. In that I totally agree. MSFS *may* require less to look and feel better overall but that remains to be seen. Therefore it *may* be the cheaper of the options (particularly if you add in things like ATC). However, for the near term I don't see abandoning P3D or X-Plane any time soon. I will also grab MSFS. It will actually be interesting to see which sim I end up using the most. In any case, just as the OP mentioned, what this adds up to is that I will be PAYING to support 3 sims instead of one. Thankfully I enjoy this hobby - or I wouldn't be happy about how much it costs.
  2. I thought it would be interesting to add a dissenting data point here. On my system - 9900k with a 2080 ti and very high settings at 4k, turning off HT is a total disaster. It causes long stutters of up to a couple of seconds as core 0 is overloaded. With HT on, the load is spread quite evenly over all 8 physical cores with good usage of hyperthreading. This is exactly what I would expect. Regardless of what threading library is used, HT should be handled intelligently. It may not work well in all situations - and on all systems - however, on average it shouldn't cause major problems. Therefore I would suspect that if, on a 9900k, P3D runs much better with HT off, something is wrong somewhere. I'm not denying that HT off may work better for some, but if one has a 9900k, I would encourage these folks to push the system harder and then try to figure out why the system doesn't run better with HT on. In other words, try to take advantage of what HT offers.
  3. Sometimes the license transferred and then there were other problems. Even the IE11 problem was not likely user error. At this point you are simply dragging this on for no reason. I get that you want to defend the developer at all costs. Good for you. Since my goal was never to drag OldProp through the mud, it was only to complain about a flawed licensing process (which, incidentally was working fine until this move to Orbx Central, which had plenty of issues on its own), I'm not going to rehash the issues that others have had with this license transfer. My complaint stands and there may still be others that will experience the same issue as I did because there is a bug in the process. Enough about this. The bigger issue is about the personal attacks. What I have learned is that there are some fundamentally awful people on these forums - not because they disagree but because they prefer personal attacks and insults to reasonable discourse. If you wish to defend this behavior, be my guest. You will only score points with those who also prefer to insult rather than discuss.
  4. I did not argue with you on this - other than the "fact" you presented that the process was seamless, because it isn't. It works for some users and not others, because there is a bug in the process. In fact, there are probably many bugs - I just found one... Perhaps my statement was a bit heavy handed, but it doesn't change the fact that not only did it not work, it may well happen to others. Again, licensing issues are frustrating and I will readily admit to being frustrated by these processes when they don't work. In NO WAY have I damaged the reputation of the developer - other than to point out that this licensing transfer process is flawed, which is categorically true. Incidentally, I don't see this as any different from a pilot stating a problem with a simulated plane - such as "stall characteristics are wrong". The pilot's statement doesn't damage the reputation of the developer. I was similarly confident in my claim about a bug in the license transfer process because I am knowledgeable enough to understand that things can and often do go wrong with software licensing and there was nothing I did to precipitate it and nothing I could do to fix it. By the way - "the process does not work for me" is not what I was getting at with my post. I already knew that this wasn't something that would just affect me. It actually turns out that there are a lot of issues transferring the license - on the //42 support forums - perhaps I should have just posted this there. The reason that discussion continued was that it was precipitated by a personal attack. I would argue that the only reason the personal attack was made was that the person that precipitated the attack was intolerant. This person felt it would be easier to call me "stupid" because he/she was, in fact, not knowledgeable enough to understand that user error was unlikely in this case. Then the person doubled down and insinuated that somehow I have obtained the product illegally. This was getting very close to slander and there are legal considerations... I have already clearly defended the developer in terms of their support efforts. I was also clear about what happened and what the issue was. I can't defend their licensing transfer - it is flawed and will likely frustrate others. However, perhaps this will prompt a fix. Many, many, many people have complained that these forums are highly defensive of developers and toxic to those that post criticism. In other words, anyone that dares criticize a product is subjected to public and personal ridicule. My sincere suggestion for all on these forums is to be receptive to product criticism because that is what drives improvement. Additionally, there is no problem with disagreeing with a criticism but it is quite another to engage in personal attacks.
  5. The problem wasn't caused by user error. You might not like the answer, because it goes against your understanding of how this process works. However, you are wrong. First, Orbx Central is the front end for Orbx's purchasing AND user accounts. As a result, it most certainly is involved in licensing. You can call it a distribution manager or a banana, but ultimately this software is the portal by which the user interacts with Orbx and their products. Therefore it is managing my licenses from MY perspective because I cannot download and use their products without this portal. The actual license server is, of course, not local to my machine, but this is a semantic argument. Second, I don't care if you think something is fishy. Once again, you are flatly wrong... Everything that you wrote below is complete junk because I just explained that there is a bug in the process. It isn't fishy, it is a bug. OldProp had my license for the software I purchased - because I was able to use the product and obtain updates - and I never said they didn't. In fact, I sent the support person a record of the purchase via PayPal. What they didn't have is a "record of the transaction" for the license. Therefore, the license transfer likely failed because it simply checked for the transaction record and couldn't find it. It is exceedingly unlikely that the error I received was caused by user error. All one has to do is press one button to transfer the license. If it doesn't work, there is likely a bug in the process. Pretty simple, really. The hard fact here is that your "intolerance" of other's opinion is very evident in your posts. Additionally, the fact that you will claim to be "guilty as charged" when your first response is to attack the person proves a feature of your character that should NOT be on display in a civil forum. I will admit to being frustrated by the process of licensing which made my first post sound somewhat more negative than it should have however that doesn't change the fact that there is a bug here that others may experience and I hope that relating my experience is helpful to someone else. I don't know specifically how OldProp manages their licenses but I do know how this process is supposed to work and I also know what can possibly go wrong. This knowledge is from developing software since the mid 80's AND having a doctoral degree in the area AND teaching these subjects at a university as a prof. In any case, as a software developer I was taught to NEVER "blame" the user. This is the kind of wisdom that we teach to those seeking to develop software in a professional capacity. Unfortunately, intolerance seems to be a hallmark of our society today. Again, I have no problem with you disagreeing with me. But instead of allowing me my opinion (which wasn't opinion at all - it was a fact that the process can fail AND this failure is NOT due to user error because the process is too simple for the user to screw up) you chose to be intolerant of it. Even now, when you are completely wrong AND don't seem to be able to understand what could go wrong depending on how this process is implemented, you are sticking to your guns. Amazing... Just to be clear, there is NOTHING that I can do to fix this - it was OldProp that had the licensing bug and therefore only they can resolve this - which they have promised to do on Monday once Orbx opens for business. Many companies have badly flawed licensing systems that can fail for a whole host of reasons, very often unrelated to user activity. These range from license server failures to blocked connections to bugs in the licensing software on both the client and server side. In my experience, MOST licensing problems I have seen are NOT user error (simply because the process is designed to be as simple as possible) - and I can provide ample evidence of this claim. Nothing is more frustrating than having a piece of software that one paid good money for rendered unusable because of a bug in the licensing process. Much to their credit, OldProp has been extremely helpful in fixing this problem - even on a Saturday evening. That said, as I mentioned, licensing problems are VERY frustrating for users and if I can point out a problem with the process and warn other users of the possibility of this problem, so much the better. What was not necessary was the intolerant personal attack from someone that seems to have a very misguided view of their own "expertise" in software systems.
  6. To go full circle on this... OldProp has been very helpful in getting to the bottom of this. As I suspected, there is a bug in the process which may well affect others. In my case, there was no transaction record for my license at OldProp despite the fact that I have a receipt from PayPal for the purchase and the fact that the product was licensed for use in VFX Central, which is OldProp's previous license manager. I have been using the product and receiving updates for over a year. So, in review... the process is NOT seamless because it is possible that due to a bug in licensing with OldProp, you may not be able to transfer your products to Orbx Central. As I mentioned before, this likely will NOT just affect me. I hope this helps others that are running into trouble transferring the license to Orbx Central. Luckily I still have a record of my transaction via PayPal. I may have been SOL without it...
  7. All you can do is attack me as being "not intelligent"? Really... Last time I checked I didn't come in here and insult anyone. I complained about a process, not a person. I have no problem with you disagreeing with my claim that their migration process is problematic - I can argue that case easily. But once you decide to use personal insults you actually violate the terms of the user agreement of the forum and your comment has NO value.
  8. I'm NOT "bashing" the process. I'm simply stating a fact. I will readily admit that licensing issues are something that I have no tolerance for, but I do suspect that there is something buggy about this transfer. I have indeed contacted OldProp support and they have tried to help. So far, though, we have no answer. If I had to guess, the problem is with Orbx Central, which has caused many users no end of problems in migrating Orbx products. I realize this isn't the same, but I don't come into this with much confidence. Interestingly, I had no difficulty with my Orbx products, but I waited to do that until AFTER the bugs were worked out of Orbx Central. Unfortunately, at this point I'm going to have to debug this process which is something I have negative interest in doing at the moment. On a few occasions over the years with software products I have encountered licensing issues that were so problematic for myself and other users that I was forced to give up on the product. I sincerely hope that this isn't one of them - I really like the product and I don't want to switch - but obviously I will have no choice to use something else if this cannot be resolved. By the way, I see it is OK to post positive feedback but not to post negative feedback? Besides, this is NOT about the product's functionality - Chase Plane is an excellent product as I'm sure the rest of OldProp's products are. This is simply about money and my ability to continue to use the product that I paid for. People often get upset when companies change the EULA or the licensing process when said changes render the product unusable. Simply take a minute and read through the threads regarding Orbx's migration to Orbx Central and the bugs in that migration process that, due to no fault of the end user, caused many folks to have an inoperable sim. Anyway, if it helps sound less "vindictive" I will put it this way for other users - My experience with this transfer is that it is NOT seamless and there MAY be others that experience the same problem. I will post a solution to this if one is found. The reason I have a great deal of confidence that others will run into this problem is that the process is supposed to be simple, my setup is not unusual in any way and everything else is working normally - including both my OldProp software and everything I have for Orbx under Orbx Central.
  9. The transfer process does NOT work seamlessly. In fact, it doesn't work at all. This is NOT an unrelated forum either. My post, really, is a heads-up for others. Many others WILL have this problem since this process should be very simple and yet it fails. It's not like I can do much wrong with this. Unfortunately, now, if I don't want to repurchase the product I will have to troubleshoot a buggy licensing system for Old Prop / Orbx. My debate is whether or not it is worth the effort or am I better off switching to a different product. Its not like I'm new to this - I have hundreds of licensed products for X-Plane and P3D. Most have good licensing processes. Some are very buggy. In EVERY case of buggy licensing I have run into it has NOT been user error on my part. I will provide an update on what Old Prop / Orbx did to fix the problem once I have sorted it out if I decide to go through the hassle...
  10. First, Old Prop did a password lockout. I have proof that they decided to arbitrarily reset my password because I keep track of what the password was. Anyway, after a password reset I was able to access my account. The transfer to Orbx failed. No products were transferred - as reported by Orbx - "0 OldProp products were added to your account". So, basically, this transfer DOES NOT WORK and may lock you out of future updates of the product. I will have to repurchase with Orbx to obtain updates which, of course, I will not be doing. So I have little choice but to switch to a competing product.
  11. I was told by Flysimware that NO license transfer will be done until the status of fspilotshop is known. This is perfectly fair and reasonable. The only problem is that it may be weeks or months before this is resolved. So no new update for me...
  12. Thank you both so much for the reply... I will contact FSW but the bigger question is in fact when to assume fspilotshop is out of business. I would say that all signs point to them packing it in, but right now it is just conjecture. Meanwhile I guess my access to this update is in limbo. There is already a thread here on avsim regarding the status of fspilotshop - I guess all I can do is monitor that...
  13. Unfortunately it looks like I will have to repurchase in order to get this update - which I am happy to do because I feel that these updates are worth the fee. Out of curiosity, is there anyone else in the same boat? I purchased this from fspilotshop a while ago and I would say there is very little chance of ever seeing an update from them. There website is down - possibly for good - and there have been no updates from fspilotshop for anything for a long time. I'm just not sure when to write fspilotshop off...
  14. It is true, they probably overdid the blue tint a bit near the horizon at night. It is about 13/255 near the horizon in the image I uploaded. That image was with vibrance on because my monitor is a bit dull but it is likely somewhat overdone on my part. Now that you mention it, I could probably drop the blue a bit. At night, overhead, from the same scene, the blue value was 2/255. The clouds are a bit bright as well. They come in at a whopping 2/255 red, 3/255 green and 5/255 blue. That is for some standard cumulus. So is there a "problem"? No. It doesn't matter how your monitor is "calibrated". It also doesn't matter if you have "cat eyes". It is easy to check the values at each pixel in the game and that is independent of how you have your monitor "calibrated". Note that a small blue tint can easily be corrected for - and even then my monitor may not be calibrated - and neither are my eyes! That's the thing - I can prove that you are, in fact, picky about the looks of your sim. More importantly, your opinion about how it looks isn't more correct - it just is what it is. I don't think REX needs to fix much at all and I hope that they don't. Chasing opinions about visual appearance is not going to be productive. As I mentioned before, people are very particular about the way the sim looks and that has nothing to do with reality. The bottom line is that when no additional shaders are applied, short of it being a tad too blue and maybe a bit too much cloud illumination at night, there doesn't seem to be a problem. These are small things that can be OBJECTIVELY pointed out and fixed. Instead, there seems to be comment after comment of people using shader upon shader, setting things up for crazy results and then complaining that their sim doesn't look "right" with EF. If I were REX, I would totally ignore all of this, set it up to realistically depict a scene in auto mode with no additional shaders and leave it at that - and basically that is exactly what they have done. They have provided plenty of adjustments that can be made to compensate for monitor variance. After that, users should be on their own. I would argue that it is extremely rare that there is NO ambient light at night. Therefore, the sky should be blue tinted at the horizon due to Rayleigh scattering. Clouds should also be slightly visible for the same reason. Short of living in far northern regions or perhaps in the great plains (from a North American perspective), there is ALWAYS illumination at night (so called "light pollution) from below. The effect might be slightly overdone in EF due to HDR, but it is present and will be most visible on the horizon which will be brightest AND bluest due to the increased atmospheric scattering as the viewer looks through more air. In fact, I would be disappointed if the horizon was black and the clouds were not visible at night. It would indicate that the atmosphere and reflected light from ground illumination was not modeled correctly.
  15. Images are from version .0506 but it doesn't matter - I didn't have a problem with any version I have used. I have wave animations with ultra, as designed. I usually turn them off, because they aren't worth the CPU cycles, IMHO. KLAX day: KLAX night
×
×
  • Create New...