Jump to content

Aviator1985

members
  • Content Count

    102
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Aviator1985

  1. Or use some "special" date, like e.g. the actual aircraft's roll-out date (2.11.1992 for the A330)... like another developer used the actual aircraft's price-tag as a "price placeholder".
  2. Well to be fair, last Christmas we had our busses within the latest Sim available
  3. I thinks it's fair. As stated before it's a new version. Elsewhere you pay full price for new versions, which at best are really just updates or upgrades (And I'm not just talking about Flight Sim). If memory serves Aerosoft will even grant a discount on the A330 for A32X owners. I'd say that's more than fair.
  4. If you are not willing to move on, when it comes to the A32X, then why did you move on with your Sim-platform? I for one am happy Aerosoft opted for going all the way and use the time to focus on the new A32X version, when it was planned for longer than P3D v4 exists. You will never get a car model for free, just because you already own that same model of it's previous generation.
  5. I don't use 4k and currently don't see the need to go for it. I use P3D v4... so am I good with the 1070?
  6. Ok so I am in a similar situation seeking to upgrade hardware to get more out of P3D v4. I got an i7-4790k @ 4 GHz not OC, ASRock Z97 Extreme4, 16 GB DDR-1600, Windows 10 and the MSI GTX 970. Good thing I was talked out of replacing the whole thing as I initally intended to get myself i7-7700k, but the general consensus is that CPU-wise I wouldn't gain much (if at all) compared to what I have now. So that gives me more focus on the graphics side. And I am a little undecided if I should go with the GTX 1070 or GTX 1080ti. I wonder if it's worth the extra €300-400. At one point I don't want to get the 1070 and realize I should have gone all the way with the 1080ti.... and on the other hand I don't want to get the 1080ti and realize the 1070 would have been enough for my purposes. I got spoiled beyond recovery of the new dynamic lighting system. That's one thing I can't fly without anymore. Other nice features that would be nice is to extend LOD and autogen draw distance, although it's not that much of a biggy like dynamic lighting. And btw I got a 600W power unit. I guess that should be more than enough for the 1070, but if the 1080ti needs more that just adds to the price of upgrading to a 1080ti. Thanks for potential ideas. Cheers, Amadeo
  7. Do you really think that 32GB will be a problem within the next 2-3 years?? I feel like even 16GB might be enough for at least another year...! I think I may be able to extend my system life-time by getting a new GPU. So rather go with the 1080ti than the 1070??? I am willing to pay that money for the 1080ti, but only if it really is that much of an improvement over the 1070. If my CPU+MB+RAM combo will prevent the 1080ti to go much higher than the 1070 I'd rather go with the 1070 (although even with the 1070 I want to see a difference over my current 970). Btw.... is the 1080ti compatible with a Midi-Tower?
  8. That's because (at least the way I understand) Boeing is much more transparent and more willing to participate within the Flight Simulator world than Airbus.
  9. Well if the Embraer is a "valid" request... then so is Seoul .
  10. Wow I never expected this thread to this direction. When I initially read the title I thought it will be shut down or be flagged as rather irrelevant quickly. There are a lot of aircraft I'd like to see, but I don't see how pushing a developer to give a statement and trying to force them to commit to a decision will make much of a difference. And I am also on Anders Bermann's boat here, that I would prefer to see other more recent aircraft than an A340.
  11. Then I must have missed a lot. But anyway those are just some that popped into my head (that I didn't know of existing or in development and one or the other is highly outdated or half broke in P3D v3+) that I'd like to see... there might even be more. Yet I am of course realistic enough, that I won't see most of those in the next 1-2 years.
  12. What I'd really love to see is the Embraer 170/175/190/195 family.
  13. I am actually quite pleased that it might not be an Airbus (coming from an Airbus-Fan), as I feel there is an aircraft type out there much more needed than any additional Airbus to the ones already in existence/development.
  14. Ok here is my wishlist for what I'd like to see in the future, although I might repeat a lot what has been said: (Note that I will only list airports that are either not available and also not in development in premium quality or are highly outdated, at least to my knowledge) Aircraft: Embraer 170/175/190/195 (in my opinion one of those needed the most) Airbus A32X/A330 with CRT's Airbus A350 Airbus A380 Fokker 70/100 (although dying out) Scenery: Asia: RKSI - Seoul RJAA - Tokyo/Haneda ZBAA - Beijing VTBS - Bangkok Africa: FIMP - Mauritius FACT - Cape Town HAAB - Addis Ababa Europe: EDDK - Köln EFHK - Helsinki UKBB - Kiev LFPO - Paris/Orly EGAC - Belfast/City America: SBGR - Sao Paulo/Guarulhos SCEL - Santiago de Chile KDTW - Detroit (don't know what happened to that freeware one in development) Oceania: YPPH - Perth NZCH - Christchurch NFFN - Nadi
  15. Well there are implications on the A330 Preview Thread that it seems unlikely we will be getting an A350 or A380 when it comes to the questioned project. And considering there is probably no market for the A340, making it even less likely than the A350 or A380 in my opinion. If they're are not doing the A350, which in my opinion would sell the best out of the three mentioned, it's most probably going to be the A32Xneo the way I see it. A little Off-Topic, but what I'd really love to see are CRT's for the A32X and the A330. I might make myself unpopular with this, but I'd rather see that before anything else, when it comes to Airbus projects.
  16. So 4GB vram is going to do it for now you say, because I am really looking forward for that lighting and increased LOD. Obviously I will try out P3D v4 without touching my system and see how it goes... I might get that 1 TB SSD thou.
  17. Sorry for double replying, but I have changed my plans somewhat and didn't want to start a new thread for this and didn't want to edit the previous post with the quote for tidiness. Ok after browsing the web more I am kind of convinced to stick with my MB, CPU and 16 GB DDR3 (even when not the fastest DDR3) as the general consensus is I won't get too much of a gain (e.g. with a Z270 + i7-7700k + DDR4) to justify to spend the money on that. So I am faced with a new decision: a ) Get a GTX1070 + 1TB SSD* b ) Get a GTX1080ti Both options have more or less the same price tag and with the GTX 1080ti I will probably be covered on the GFX side when eventually upgrading MB + CPU. On the other hand me installing v4 on SSD depends on option a ). As a reminder I am using a i7-4790k @ 4 GHz (no OC), GTX 970, 16 GB DDR3, ASRock Z97 Extreme4, 250GB SSD, 2TB HDD, 600W Power Unit and I am currently not using 4K resolutions and am not desperate for that right now. So if you were me would it be a ) or b )??
  18. I know SSD's usually don't give you a performance boost when it comes to FPS, that is why I was able to save on it, because loading times don't bother me too much. If v4 however has a considerably higher loading time than v3 I might look into it. And in terms of GTX 1070... I might even look into the option of getting the GTX 1070 and extend my current PC's lifetime. But the difference between 970 and 1070 should be significant (not only for P3D, but mainly P3D) for me to consider this option. Any experiences on the matter?
  19. Thanks for the comments guys. Yeah I knew my current system was above average, even for today's standards. My main concern was the the GTX 970. But it seems it's just dependent on how heavy the 3rd party is going to be and I guess it'll take some time until it's going to eat up my resources. I was using v3 on a normal HDD, since the loading times didn't bother me that much, but I was always planning to get a 1 TB SSD just for P3D (and maybe one or the other long loading games), so I guess now is the time then?!
  20. ... and it's driving me nuts. The hype around P3D v4 is huge and has caught me as well, as I can't wait to finally fly without the worries of VAS. But at the same time it appears to be bittersweet news, as I can't believe my system appears to be getting grey hair already. To be fair, this was my first assembled system and I am more than pleased by the outcome. But I am saving for my next system.... this one I want to take my time and really get a good combo. Anyway my current system is an i7-4790k (4 GHz, so no OC), MSI GTX 970 Gaming 4G, 16GB DDR3-RAM, ASRock Z97 Extreme4, 600W Power Unit. Alright, here is my dilemma..... I am willing to invest around €2000 - €3000, which would be around Winter 2017. Obviously I don't want to wait that long. The big question is... will my current system do fine with v4?? I don't intend to go much above v3, when it comes to settings. I plan to keep them the same as v3 and maybe add some of the new goodies like dynamic lighting. Long story short: a ) Stick with that system and wait out the new system b ) Get a 1080ti now and just add it to the new pc I am afraid when I choose option b ), by the time I build up my new system there is something better for same value / that my current system won't get the most out of the 1080ti I don't need that huge LOD Radius right away. I am quite happy flying a '"v3 without OOM", but I can't stop thinking about it, because opinions seem to be polarized around the web when it comes to v4 and performance. I am already dreading the systems specs of v4, because a lot of people are implying that 4 GB vram (in the case of the GTX 970) might not even be enough for the Minimum. PS: I haven't spoiled myself yet with 4K. I still use 1980 x 1020, which I will happily use until the new system so don't try to talk me into 4K, because I am easily spoiled
  21. I also see no need to keep v3, when v4 is around, especially since so many devs have claimed their products will be v4 ready pretty quickly (at least much quicker than anticipated). The only thing I am worried about is vram. I mean I couldn't imagine why v4 would be more performance heavy than v3 on similar settings, I just hope my GTX 970 can handle it for a while. Saving for a complete new system (looking into an i7-7700k + GTX 1080ti,...), but it probably won't happen before 2018 (maybe End 2017)... and it would be quite a pain to wait that long to enjoy v4.
  22. I must admit it was some bittersweet news at first, as airports like RKSI, RJTT, VTBS or ZBAA haven't been announced or at least not to the degree where one would be confident enough for certain release. And I find it hard to imagine there'd be no marketplace for those four mentioned airports. Anyway, but since WSSS is one of those airport I crave for the most right now, and if the quality is anywhere near what those screenshots suggest (and if it really is A-team) I find myself extremely excited for this one. Can't wait to see some Tower shots
  23. What do the sounds heard in the cabin have to do with a physical virtual cabin being modelled (what Eric is actually reffering)?
  24. Actually it should be on the Scenery designers to sacrifice a little detail for performance and VAS. I mean is this a Flight (as in flying an airplane) Simulator and not Sims 4: Airport Employees. I couldn't care less for 3d grass.... some don't even look too good when viewing from above? Same goes for interiors. Good textures are more than enough. Being able to walk around inside the terminal and go through the gate to reach my cockpit after planning my flight in the office is obviously something I would happily enjoy. But as long as performance and especially VAS is an issue I urge Scenery designers to give more playroom to the aircraft designers. Don't you think independent displays is more important than being able to see the gate agent inside the terminal?? And you should really be more concerned about the correct taxi-route and keeping the plane on the taxiway line, rather than check if the grass is properly mowed. I am not saying that these aren't nice features, but if sacrifices should be made than on the scenery designers end and not the aircraft designers end. Thankfully most developers have option for these kinds of things. This made my day
×
×
  • Create New...