Jump to content


Welcome dear guest,

We like to ask you to log-in or to create an account if you don't have an account. Being a member of this forum allows you to post messages and gives you access to the free downloads. It is by far the fastest way to get any support for the many products we sell. Creating an account is fast and easy, certainly if you already have a Twitter or Facebook account. Do note we take your privacy very serious and will never allow any other company to access your information.
 
Wir bitten Sie, sich mit Ihren Log-in Daten im Forum anzumelden oder sich einen neuen Account anzulegen falls Sie noch über keinen verfügen. Als Mitglied des Forums können Sie Ihre Mitteilungen an andere Mitglieder oder an uns posten und Sie erhalten Zugriff auf kostenlose Downloads. Außerdem ist die Nutzung unseres Forums bei weitem der schnellste Weg um Support für die vielen Produkte zu bekommen, die wir verkaufen. Einen Account zu erstellen geht einfach und schnell, vor allem wenn Sie bereits bei Twitter oder Facebook registriert sind. Sie können sicher sein, dass wir die Privatsphäre unserer Mitglieder schätzen und schützen. Es wird keiner weiteren Firma gestattet Einsicht in Ihre Daten zu nehmen.]
 
Nos gustaría pedirle que accediese a su cuenta, si la tiene, o que cree una cuenta, si es que no la tiene. Pertenecer a este foro le permite colocar mensajes y le da acceso a las descargas gratuitas. Es con mucho la forma mas rápida de obtener cualquier tipo de soporte para la multitud de productos que comercializamos. Crear una cuenta es rápido y fácil, y  lo es mas si tiene una cuenta en Twitter o en Facebook. Considere además que nos tomamos su privacidad muy en serio y que nunca permitiremos a ninguna otra compañía que tenga acceso a su información.
 
Gostaríamos solicitar que acesse a sua conta, se você já tem uma ou que crie una nova. Pertencer a este foro permite que você possa postar e permite usar as nossas descargas gratuitas. É a forma mais rápida de ter suporte nos muitos produtos que vendemos- Criar uma conta é rápido e fácil, mais ainda se você tem conta no Twitter ou no Facebook. Acrescentar que nos levamos muito a serio a sua privacidade, e que jamais vamos permitir o acesso aos seus dados a outras companhias.
 
Nous vous demandons de vous identifier ou créer un compte si vous n'avez pas encore de compte. Etre membre de ce forum vous permet de poster des messages et vous donne accès à des téléchargements gratuits. C'est le moyen le plus rapide pour obtenir un support pour les nombreux produits que nous vendons. Créer un compte est rapide et facile, surtout si vous avez déjà un compte Twitter ou Facebook. Ne noter que nous prenons votre vie privée très au sérieux et ne permettrons jamais à une autre société pour accéder à vos informations.
Guest Message by DevFuse
Photo

Prepar3d, is it good?


  • Locked Topic This topic is closed
65 replies to this topic

#1 Walter Almaraz

Walter Almaraz

    Major

  • _Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 149 Posts:

Posted 29 April 2012 - 05:21

Hi all,

Well I investigated everything related about this simulator, I know that is much better than FSX and another features. But I'm not sure if I buy or not.

Should I buy Prepar3d?

Regards,
Walter Almaraz
  • 0

Windows 7 Ultimate SP1 64 Bits, Intel® Core™ i7 CPU 860 @ 2.80GHz, RAM 8,00 GB DDR3 1333 Mhz, NVIDIA GForce 650 Ti Boost 2 GB

Sometimes the problem is between the chair and the computer :/


#2 Matt_Smith

Matt_Smith

    Devil's advocate

  • Assistant Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4865 Posts:

Posted 29 April 2012 - 10:16

By all means buy it, after all 50 USD is nothing! But be warned, it will take you time porting over all your fsx addons. Which to be frank is boring and a total pain in the ass, but if you do the research all the info needed to get nearly all fsx addons into P3D and working is out there on various fora. I'm doing it at the moment, and from early tests I wont be going back to fsx.
  • 1

Bottoms up!

Please don't PM for support issues
 
Justice for the 96 15/04/89

 

6cgjtt-5.png


#3 Jet_Airliner

Jet_Airliner

    Captain

  • _Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 55 Posts:

Posted 29 April 2012 - 10:50

By all means buy it, after all 50 USD is nothing! But be warned, it will take you time porting over all your fsx addons. Which to be frank is boring and a total pain in the ass, but if you do the research all the info needed to get nearly all fsx addons into P3D and working is out there on various fora. I'm doing it at the moment, and from early tests I wont be going back to fsx.

And what's the point? All said that it has the just about the same perfomance as FSX.
  • 0

i5 2500K @ 4.5Ghz | 4GBX2 1600GHz DDR3 | GTX570 | GA-Z68X-UD3P-B3 | Tt650W | 1TB SATA |


ALEX OSTROUMOV


#4 Matt_Smith

Matt_Smith

    Devil's advocate

  • Assistant Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4865 Posts:

Posted 29 April 2012 - 11:21

The point being P3D is a current product, with developers still working on it.
  • 0

Bottoms up!

Please don't PM for support issues
 
Justice for the 96 15/04/89

 

6cgjtt-5.png


#5 Jet_Airliner

Jet_Airliner

    Captain

  • _Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 55 Posts:

Posted 29 April 2012 - 13:25

The point being P3D is a current product, with developers still working on it.

Currently, there are not so many reasons to change from FSX to P3D, because lockheed didn't do SO much. If you have 2500k-2700k and GTX400-500 you still going to have same troubles with FPS in urban areas and big airports. Updated GUI and small fixes is not enogh....Well at least not for me.

P3D is made for commercial use, like training people for money in your cockpit and so on, because FSX can't be used for this.
  • 0

i5 2500K @ 4.5Ghz | 4GBX2 1600GHz DDR3 | GTX570 | GA-Z68X-UD3P-B3 | Tt650W | 1TB SATA |


ALEX OSTROUMOV


#6 Matt_Smith

Matt_Smith

    Devil's advocate

  • Assistant Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4865 Posts:

Posted 29 April 2012 - 14:07

You can back up all these statements with concrete evidence? Also your interpretation of the EULA is suspect. Personally, I have no issues with FPS on my system, neither with FSX or P3D.
  • 0

Bottoms up!

Please don't PM for support issues
 
Justice for the 96 15/04/89

 

6cgjtt-5.png


#7 Chris_327

Chris_327

    Major

  • _Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 234 Posts:

Posted 29 April 2012 - 15:52

From the interview with John Venema at Orbx on ASN:
What’s the big “visual” difference between FSX and Prepar3D

There is none. They are the same fundamental engine so everything looks identical. The only difference is the P3D has no stuttering and jerkiness and handles textures much more efficiently so there are hardly any blurries (of course your mileage varies according to your PC).

There is one slight difference in the shaders which gives P3D a much warmer “pink” tone to it which I quite like. They just need to reduce the pink tone on the snow and it will be perfect. The cool thing about P3D is that there is actually an active development team working on the code which we can liaise with and raise issues like that.

We prefer to work with living breathing developers rather than frozen dead 2006 FSX code which will never be improved.
  • 2
Cheers,
Chris
Posted Image

#8 Walter Almaraz

Walter Almaraz

    Major

  • _Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 149 Posts:

Posted 29 April 2012 - 16:44

Thanks for your answers, at the moment Prepar3d have a good future, I have FSX with good FPS but sometimes, FPS go to the south with no reason (and for this situation, I'm still in FS9) :(
  • 0

Windows 7 Ultimate SP1 64 Bits, Intel® Core™ i7 CPU 860 @ 2.80GHz, RAM 8,00 GB DDR3 1333 Mhz, NVIDIA GForce 650 Ti Boost 2 GB

Sometimes the problem is between the chair and the computer :/


#9 tempelhof

tempelhof

    Colonel

  • _Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 310 Posts:

Posted 29 April 2012 - 17:01

You can back up all these statements with concrete evidence? Also your interpretation of the EULA is suspect. Personally, I have no issues with FPS on my system, neither with FSX or P3D.

Here are the results from someone who compared the performance of FSX to P3D:
http://simmerhead.wo...-prepar3d-v1-2/

Some people say P3D runs smoother than FSX, but that's pretty much it.
  • 0
Cheers,
Tom

#10 Matt_Smith

Matt_Smith

    Devil's advocate

  • Assistant Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4865 Posts:

Posted 29 April 2012 - 17:06

Good find, though new benchmarking is needed for V1.3.
  • 0

Bottoms up!

Please don't PM for support issues
 
Justice for the 96 15/04/89

 

6cgjtt-5.png


#11 tempelhof

tempelhof

    Colonel

  • _Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 310 Posts:

Posted 29 April 2012 - 17:10

Yeah, that would be good.

From what I read in the forums, it seems that those people who have performance problems with FSX are more likeley to find P3D an improvement. But we all know about the placebo effect, so numbers are needed.

On the other hand, the people who have a well-balanced FSX setup seem not to see a great improvement in P3D.
  • 0
Cheers,
Tom

#12 Matt_Smith

Matt_Smith

    Devil's advocate

  • Assistant Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4865 Posts:

Posted 29 April 2012 - 18:04

I'll let you know how I get on lol. Ive just spent all afternoon porting over Gb's of scenery and addons :wacko:
  • 0

Bottoms up!

Please don't PM for support issues
 
Justice for the 96 15/04/89

 

6cgjtt-5.png


#13 Jet_Airliner

Jet_Airliner

    Captain

  • _Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 55 Posts:

Posted 29 April 2012 - 19:12

You can back up all these statements with concrete evidence? Also your interpretation of the EULA is suspect. Personally, I have no issues with FPS on my system, neither with FSX or P3D.

Yes. You can go to youtube and watch P3D videos. Also you can google screenshots and so on.

I would consider to move to P3D if lockheeds would make their sim simmilar to MS FLIGHT in terms of perfomance.

It's ridiculous to have lags in 2006 game on 2012 overclocked PC even with addons. And all this without good shadowing, global lightning, normal weather engine with realistic clouds.
  • 0

i5 2500K @ 4.5Ghz | 4GBX2 1600GHz DDR3 | GTX570 | GA-Z68X-UD3P-B3 | Tt650W | 1TB SATA |


ALEX OSTROUMOV


#14 tempelhof

tempelhof

    Colonel

  • _Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 310 Posts:

Posted 29 April 2012 - 19:32

My problem with P3D, apart from the EULA issues and the lack of support from some addon developers is simply that I'm not sure what Lockheed's priorities are regarding future improvements of the sim platform. I mean, it's a sim intended for professional use and I have a feeling that adding more eye candy to the 3D engine or any kind of "fun stuff" is simply not a top priority for them.

It seems to me that they are more concerned about stability improvements and additions to the SDK, as well as pro-features like running the sim in a distributed environment.

Just compare MS Flight and P3D. I think both sims are based on FSX and they were developed in roughly the same time frame. On first sight, MS seems to have done a lot more work than Lockheed, at least in terms of what I consider important (I really don't care about the bathymetry stuff in P3D). So let's see what P3D 2.0 brings for us simmers. In its current state, P3D is too less of an improvement for me in order to take the plunge.
  • 0
Cheers,
Tom

#15 Matt_Smith

Matt_Smith

    Devil's advocate

  • Assistant Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4865 Posts:

Posted 29 April 2012 - 19:51

Comparing P3D to Flight is a big no no. It just cant be done. Its like comparing a Sopwith 1 1/2 Strutter to the Eurofighter Typhoon :lol:

As for lack of developer support it's no real issue, if I can make their software work in P3D anyone can.
  • 0

Bottoms up!

Please don't PM for support issues
 
Justice for the 96 15/04/89

 

6cgjtt-5.png


#16 Paul K

Paul K

    Colonel

  • _Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 490 Posts:

Posted 29 April 2012 - 21:12

No no no, don't compare MS Flight to anything at all ! Hmmm...okay, compare it to Super Mario if you absolutely must...

Anyway...Matt, I'm very much watching the P3D conversations here and elsewhere. Is this really the future of flight sim as we know it ? Is P3D V.2 with DX11 going to render your entire collection of FSX add-ons unusable ? Someone else is going to have to go over the parapet brandishing his credit card on this one.
  • 0

Not every damned thing is 'awesome' or 'iconic'.


#17 Matt_Smith

Matt_Smith

    Devil's advocate

  • Assistant Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4865 Posts:

Posted 29 April 2012 - 22:54

Flight and Super Mario, there's a thought.... Think I might dig out the NES and give Mario Bros a blast :lol:

As for is P3D the future, I dunno, my magic 8 ball's in the shop being fixed. Does it suit me for what I use, its looking that way but the jury is out still. Yes I have some performance gains so far, flight is definately smoother from what I have tested and working with 3 screens and uber wide resolutions is definately improved but I really need more time using it and the next version of REX lol. As a bonus you get the JustFlight Constellation and P38 thrown in. Neither ground breaking, but the P38 is a hoot to fly and both are well above the fidelity FSX and Flight offers out of the box. So far I have working in P3D: PMDG Jetstream, Aerosoft Catalina, Aerosoft Beaver, nearly all Carenado's offerings for FSX (Jetprop, A36 and C337 don't work yet), CS 707, 727 and 757 and all of RealAir's offerings bar theCitabria which I don't own. Scenery wise, I don't think there's any major compatibility issues other than no AES or AESLite but if like me you fly GA most of the time you wont miss it much. The biggest ball ache is porting everything over with out the need for FSX to be installed. I'm not too sure VistaMare package of dll's work, but that could be down to my home made dll.xml not working. And is possibly more a reflection of my XML programming skills? Don't ask me how it works with IVAO or VATSIM, as to be frank I couldn't care less about either as I tend to fly online with a few friends in a casual learning environment.

As for V2, I hope it breaks compatibility. Yes I will loose out on 200+ addons I have but, I will hopefully gain in loosing all the legacy crud that is FSX and get a simulator that can utilise the modern hardware I invest in to its utmost without the mention of "plausible world".

Is P3D worth the 50 USD (£31)? That depends really on your situation. What types of flying you do what types of aircraft you fly. At the end of the day thats about the same price as a PMDG addon and offers a whole lot more scope.
  • 0

Bottoms up!

Please don't PM for support issues
 
Justice for the 96 15/04/89

 

6cgjtt-5.png


#18 hotelfox

hotelfox

    Major

  • _Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 176 Posts:

Posted 30 April 2012 - 15:33

What about the ATC interface? I heard that it isn' t transparent as in FSX. Did P3D already fix it?
  • 0
Regards from Bavaria,


HF

#19 Matt_Smith

Matt_Smith

    Devil's advocate

  • Assistant Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4865 Posts:

Posted 30 April 2012 - 15:37

Is being different really a bug? FSX and P3D ATC is abysmal anyway.
  • 0

Bottoms up!

Please don't PM for support issues
 
Justice for the 96 15/04/89

 

6cgjtt-5.png


#20 hotelfox

hotelfox

    Major

  • _Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 176 Posts:

Posted 30 April 2012 - 18:17

Is being different really a bug? FSX and P3D ATC is abysmal anyway.


How do you rate ATC in FSX and P3D? Just in case that you might need the pertinent question to your answer :) !
  • 0
Regards from Bavaria,


HF

#21 Matt_Smith

Matt_Smith

    Devil's advocate

  • Assistant Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4865 Posts:

Posted 30 April 2012 - 18:27

Seeing as both FSX and P3D share the same atc, I rate it as abysmal. It could be only slightly worse but a hell of a lot better. I was going to write a list of whats wrong with FSX atc, I thought it would be quicker to write whats right, so instead heres a list of whats right:









I couldn'f find one thing right with it, sorry :lol:
  • 0

Bottoms up!

Please don't PM for support issues
 
Justice for the 96 15/04/89

 

6cgjtt-5.png


#22 hotelfox

hotelfox

    Major

  • _Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 176 Posts:

Posted 30 April 2012 - 18:49

Seeing as both FSX and P3D share the same atc, I rate it as abysmal. It could be only slightly worse but a hell of a lot better. I was going to write a list of whats wrong with FSX atc, I thought it would be quicker to write whats right, so instead heres a list of whats right:

I couldn'f find one thing right with it, sorry :lol:


No need to tell me, Matt. I was a member of the ATC in the German Navy (Marineflieger) for 8 years ...

I simply mentioned the ATC interface beause I take it as an indication how P3D treat their stuff. Probably I should say 'one' indication but I' m sure you already got what I mean.
  • 0
Regards from Bavaria,


HF

#23 Matt_Smith

Matt_Smith

    Devil's advocate

  • Assistant Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4865 Posts:

Posted 30 April 2012 - 19:09

ATC in german Navy, cool. My only experience of ATC is through flying in the UK and US.
  • 0

Bottoms up!

Please don't PM for support issues
 
Justice for the 96 15/04/89

 

6cgjtt-5.png


#24 Robert S

Robert S

    1 Mile High 5280

  • _Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1118 Posts:

Posted 30 April 2012 - 20:31

Hi Matt,
First off, thanks for taking the time to share your experiences on P3D with us here.

I have a small question: I see that the $50 version includes a small watermark in the upper right hand corner, - do you have this same version and if so, is it noticeable or is it something that gets forgotton after a bit...

Thanks!
  • 0
Posted Image

#25 hotelfox

hotelfox

    Major

  • _Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 176 Posts:

Posted 30 April 2012 - 20:43

Hi Matt,
First off, thanks for taking the time to share your experiences on P3D with us here.

I have a small question: I see that the $50 version includes a small watermark in the upper right hand corner, - do you have this same version and if so, is it noticeable or is it something that gets forgotton after a bit...

Thanks!


Well - I' m not Matt but I know that it is only visible when you leave full screen mode. Take a look here. Note the watermark in the top right corner.
  • 0
Regards from Bavaria,


HF

#26 Eric Bakker

Eric Bakker

    Deputy Sheriff

  • Assistant Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1812 Posts:

Posted 30 April 2012 - 22:01

The watermark in the Academic ($50) version is barely visible in full screen mode. I forget it after a while.
If you have the menubar visible it is a text on the menubar, a bit like the menunames. So one more text on the bar is not important to me. I don't like a menubar anyway.
  • 0

twotter_banner_flybe.jpg


#27 Matt_Smith

Matt_Smith

    Devil's advocate

  • Assistant Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4865 Posts:

Posted 30 April 2012 - 22:17

I was a bit weary of this watermark before purchase, its very subtle, as everyone's beat to me it :) After a while I don't notice it unless a really look for it.
  • 0

Bottoms up!

Please don't PM for support issues
 
Justice for the 96 15/04/89

 

6cgjtt-5.png


#28 nzeddy

nzeddy

    Captain

  • _Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 69 Posts:

Posted 01 May 2012 - 02:09

I'm waiting for V2.
  • 0

- Eddy


#29 Walter Almaraz

Walter Almaraz

    Major

  • _Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 149 Posts:

Posted 01 May 2012 - 21:58

Hey guys thanks for sharing your views and some extra information about Prepar3d, well my decision at the moment is wait. (I hope that LM make a license for entertainment purposes only) :)

Regards,
Walter Almaraz
  • 0

Windows 7 Ultimate SP1 64 Bits, Intel® Core™ i7 CPU 860 @ 2.80GHz, RAM 8,00 GB DDR3 1333 Mhz, NVIDIA GForce 650 Ti Boost 2 GB

Sometimes the problem is between the chair and the computer :/


#30 Mathijs Kok

Mathijs Kok

    Aerosoft Forum Administrator

  • Root Admin
  • 27877 Posts:

Posted 02 May 2012 - 08:42

Hey guys thanks for sharing your views and some extra information about Prepar3d, well my decision at the moment is wait. (I hope that LM make a license for entertainment purposes only) :)

Regards,
Walter Almaraz


For sure that will not happen, they are simply not in that market.
  • 0

On behalf of Aerosoft and with kind regards, Mathijs Kok
Aerosoft_LOGO.gif
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook
Please note that support is not done via Private Messages. If you prefer support via email click here.

Please excuse me for writing English in German forums, I do read and speak the language but when I write it people tend to look funny at me.

GATC.png


#31 Jet_Airliner

Jet_Airliner

    Captain

  • _Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 55 Posts:

Posted 02 May 2012 - 09:21

Comparing P3D to Flight is a big no no. It just cant be done.

If you read carefully, you will see that i said "in term of perfomance". Microsoft did optimize FSX very well for MS FLIGHT. I think that, if we would have MS FLIGHT perfomance in FSX, there would be no more fps optimizing threads any more, because FSX made everybody to buy rediculously expensive computer, which can today handle nearly any application.
  • 0

i5 2500K @ 4.5Ghz | 4GBX2 1600GHz DDR3 | GTX570 | GA-Z68X-UD3P-B3 | Tt650W | 1TB SATA |


ALEX OSTROUMOV


#32 Mathijs Kok

Mathijs Kok

    Aerosoft Forum Administrator

  • Root Admin
  • 27877 Posts:

Posted 02 May 2012 - 11:52

If you read carefully, you will see that i said "in term of perfomance". Microsoft did optimize FSX very well for MS FLIGHT. I think that, if we would have MS FLIGHT perfomance in FSX, there would be no more fps optimizing threads any more, because FSX made everybody to buy rediculously expensive computer, which can today handle nearly any application.


If you call removing many options 'optimizing' you are right. If you would add all functions of FSX and give it reasonable sight distances, it would most likely be as fast as FSX.
  • 0

On behalf of Aerosoft and with kind regards, Mathijs Kok
Aerosoft_LOGO.gif
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook
Please note that support is not done via Private Messages. If you prefer support via email click here.

Please excuse me for writing English in German forums, I do read and speak the language but when I write it people tend to look funny at me.

GATC.png


#33 Matt_Smith

Matt_Smith

    Devil's advocate

  • Assistant Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4865 Posts:

Posted 02 May 2012 - 12:29

If you call removing many options 'optimizing' you are right. If you would add all functions of FSX and give it reasonable sight distances, it would most likely be as fast as FSX.


Which goes back to me saying you can't compare Flight and P3D :lol:

Apples and Oranges.
  • 0

Bottoms up!

Please don't PM for support issues
 
Justice for the 96 15/04/89

 

6cgjtt-5.png


#34 tempelhof

tempelhof

    Colonel

  • _Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 310 Posts:

Posted 02 May 2012 - 15:28

If you call removing many options 'optimizing' you are right. If you would add all functions of FSX and give it reasonable sight distances, it would most likely be as fast as FSX.

If you talk about the lack of AI traffic: fair enough. But I don't get thing about the sight distances.

I just made a comparison flight from Maui to the big island of Hawaii along the UPP 120° radial to see if there were any notable differences in the distance. But I simply fail to see that Flight is inferior to FSX in that respect. I have the scenery sliders in FSX set all the way to the right (except water effects and ground shadows). No matter at what location on the screen I look, Flight is either equal or more detailed compared to FSX.

Would be interested to see if Prepar3D achieves better results, since I hear that the autogen there has been refined.

52nm:
Posted ImagePosted Image

42nm:
Posted ImagePosted Image

35nm:
Posted ImagePosted Image

12nm:
Posted ImagePosted Image

7nm:
Posted ImagePosted Image

1nm:
Posted ImagePosted Image
  • 0
Cheers,
Tom

#35 Jet_Airliner

Jet_Airliner

    Captain

  • _Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 55 Posts:

Posted 02 May 2012 - 15:48

If you call removing many options 'optimizing' you are right. If you would add all functions of FSX and give it reasonable sight distances, it would most likely be as fast as FSX.

Well for me, in MS FLIGHT, there was like 3-4 times higher dencity autogen compared to FSX. There were other stuff like global shadowing (even from autogen and aircraft parts), moving trees, better lightning at night and other stuff. Proof is above.

You want to say that FSX has all that? FLIGHT just lacks an SDK and complicated GUI as flight sim had. But in FLIGHT you get 40-50-60fps in high dencity areas with full overcast and so on without sluttering.
  • 0

i5 2500K @ 4.5Ghz | 4GBX2 1600GHz DDR3 | GTX570 | GA-Z68X-UD3P-B3 | Tt650W | 1TB SATA |


ALEX OSTROUMOV


#36 Matt_Smith

Matt_Smith

    Devil's advocate

  • Assistant Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4865 Posts:

Posted 02 May 2012 - 16:28

But as said before, in order to achieve that, MS deleted most of the world :lol: along with all the AI :big_boss_s: Add back into the equation the AI and watch your FPS plummet. While were on about high density areas, on my rig in FSX at Mega Airport Heathow and VFR london at 5760*1080 resolution, JustFlights Traffic X set to 35% for both GA and Airlines, I can get a solid 30 fps, stable without stutters. Add to that REX and it will blow Flight out of the water every single day.
  • 0

Bottoms up!

Please don't PM for support issues
 
Justice for the 96 15/04/89

 

6cgjtt-5.png


#37 Mathijs Kok

Mathijs Kok

    Aerosoft Forum Administrator

  • Root Admin
  • 27877 Posts:

Posted 02 May 2012 - 16:39

Well for me, in MS FLIGHT, there was like 3-4 times higher dencity autogen compared to FSX. There were other stuff like global shadowing (even from autogen and aircraft parts), moving trees, better lightning at night and other stuff. Proof is above.

You want to say that FSX has all that? FLIGHT just lacks an SDK and complicated GUI as flight sim had. But in FLIGHT you get 40-50-60fps in high dencity areas with full overcast and so on without sluttering.


I would say that FSX has stuff like multi engines aircraft, turbine and turboprop engines (currently FLIGHT cannot handle that). I can also see Hawaii from 130 miles away(that's what I mean with long sight lines). The sea close to the islands looks a lot better as FSX knows about water depth and can show shallows. I also think it has at least 50.000 add-ons, a whole world to fly in, radio navigation, other traffic etc. If you look inside FLIGHT you get a good idea of the amount of simvars available (and most of those are updated all the time) and you find a very small number, Even stuff like the engines seem simplified (I have not seen any effect of temperature or air density (if FLIGHT even has that)). As most people say, it looks great but it is not really a flight simulator as we see it. And MS has been rather clear, there will not be an SDK, there will be add-ons but they will all be made under supervision from MS. We would be happy to make some for them of course. We like FLIGHT for sure, it is bringing in new young simmers and that is great.

But it is good to see there are still people enjoying and discussing FLIGHT. After the initial attention it seems to have faded back into a very low interest level. We saw an effect on sales that lasted less then a week in in our latest market survey only 10% of our customer told us they used FLIGHT in the last 4 weeks.
  • 0

On behalf of Aerosoft and with kind regards, Mathijs Kok
Aerosoft_LOGO.gif
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook
Please note that support is not done via Private Messages. If you prefer support via email click here.

Please excuse me for writing English in German forums, I do read and speak the language but when I write it people tend to look funny at me.

GATC.png


#38 tempelhof

tempelhof

    Colonel

  • _Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 310 Posts:

Posted 02 May 2012 - 16:42

Matt,

But as said before, in order to achieve that, MS deleted most of the world :lol: along with all the AI :big_boss_s: Add back into the equation the AI and watch your FPS plummet.

that's just an assumption, not a fact. There were speculations that the AI was removed from Flight because it would need to be synchronized among all players in the session. You don't get AI aircraft in FSX multiplayer either (not sure about road traffic atm).

While were on about high density areas, on my rig in FSX at Mega Airport Heathow and VFR london at 5760*1080 resolution, JustFlights Traffic X set to 35% for both GA and Airlines, I can get a solid 30 fps, stable without stutters.

Good for you! I can't comment on that because I don't have all of the said products, but I suppose it wouldn't be solid 30fps for me.


Add to that REX and it will blow Flight out of the water every single day.

The fair weather theme in Flight sucks, granted. But the other weather themes will actually blow REX out of the water (that might change with REX essential though).
  • 0
Cheers,
Tom

#39 Mathijs Kok

Mathijs Kok

    Aerosoft Forum Administrator

  • Root Admin
  • 27877 Posts:

Posted 02 May 2012 - 16:42

Btw looking at your images I think you got detail range set to a low setting as I get way and way more autogen the your images show. Even so, with the far nicer water close to the island I actually prefer the FSX images. If you would use higher water settings even that will look almost as good as FLIGHT. And I get would get 40+ fps on my sub $1000 machine on all those images. Even with a complex aircraft like the Bronco (that has at least 30 different systems FLIGHT can's use, lol). As other said, apples and pears. The moment you can land an airliner with ATC, real time weather, AI traffic on an big detailed airport we can really compare. Right now we are comparing apples and pears. Fine apples and fine pears, but not comparable.
  • 0

On behalf of Aerosoft and with kind regards, Mathijs Kok
Aerosoft_LOGO.gif
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook
Please note that support is not done via Private Messages. If you prefer support via email click here.

Please excuse me for writing English in German forums, I do read and speak the language but when I write it people tend to look funny at me.

GATC.png


#40 tempelhof

tempelhof

    Colonel

  • _Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 310 Posts:

Posted 02 May 2012 - 16:59

I can also see Hawaii from 130 miles away(that's what I mean with long sight lines).

Not I get what you mean. Haven't tried that as it wouldn't make much sense for me at the moment to fly that far away from the islands.

Btw looking at your images I think you got detail range set to a low setting as I get way and way more autogen the your images show.

These are my scenery settings:
Posted Image


But the problem of popping autogen in FSX is well known (it also happens in Flight, but only in dense areas). I have FSX locked to 30fps in the display driver and applied some config tweaks to actually give more CPU time to the scenery engine. But FSX still has a hard time to display autogen in the distance. That's why I was asking how this would look in P3D.

Even so, with the far nicer water close to the island I actually prefer the FSX images. If you would use higher water settings even that will look almost as good as FLIGHT.

Both sims run smooth for me, most of the time. They have different sets of features. In Flight I have no AI traffic, but ground shadows, cockpit shadows and all kinds of other stuff that would kill frame rates in FSX.

I don't want to side-track the discussion any further with Flight vs FSX comparison. The initial question that led to it: What did Lockheed do in the last 3 years??? And what are they going to do in the future?
  • 0
Cheers,
Tom




0 User(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users