FSX / Prepar3D screenshot comparison

[full]

Hi just thought I'd post a comparison of screen shots between FSX and Prepar3D.

My FSX has GEX and my own costom water and P3D is stock as it comes, both are locked at 60 Fps and exactly the same slider settings, FSX has the HDR bloom plugin enabled and P3D has its own bloom ticked in the settings menu.

The first two are FSX...

62334

62335

62336

62337

[kilo delta]

Ohhh..it's that Edgley Optica back again!


:cool:

[Bomber_12th]

If they were both bone-stock, and without any bloom effects turned on, I would fully expect to see both sims looking exactly alike (in this instance).

Love seeing that aircraft in development! I had the fortune of seeing one in person, once.

[Reddog]

Ercoupe?????

[full]

Thats a fair point John, I don't have a stock FSX installed.

Maybe I'll mod-up P3D....

Oh and the Ercoupe is getting textured as I type ;)

[Lionheart]

Good to hear about the Ercoupe! Love those birds.


I agree that the two sims would like almost identical if you had stock scenery for both, but.... They did improve the terrain textures. Comparing stock terrain shots would be interesting. I'll never forget first seeing Alaska in FSX, lol.... Desert!? In the mountains!?? lol...

[olderndirt]

The sun appears to have moved about ten degrees counterclockwise for the Prepar-3D shots and the shadows and what-not appear better.

[Skyhawk_310R]

It is among the more ironic possibilities that as MS morphs away from FS and toward what appears to be the closed architecture of Flight, that Lockheed Martin's Prepar3D is poised to carry forward the open architecture model of FSX even though it was never intended to be a PC game, but rather an entry level platform for training and simulation!

Practically any FSX aircraft you have should work well in Prepar3D and I have heard that so does the scenery though I have not tried it.

I know for a fact that any mission you have for FSX will work in Prepar3D provided you have the required aircraft and any other objects in your Prepar3D library.

As Lockheed Martin continues to develop Prepar3D I think there are a lot of future options available for the freeware and payware community. The FSX compatibility is very nice, but LM put a considerable emphasis on expanding the available world to include sub-surface water navigation plus significantly improved flight model support.

In the interest of full disclosure, I am a full time employee now of Lockheed Martin, and as a side project I did a small amount of beta testing for LM on the Prepar3D product. I am really excited about the future possibilities.

Ken

[napamule]

And the 'Ctrl+Z' read out line appears to be on 2nd line (as opposed to on 1st line in FSX). Ha. If they 'fixed' that then they probably 'fixed' a lot of other things, too. I hope so.
Chuck B
Napamule

[kjb]

Practically any FSX aircraft you have should work well in Prepar3D and I have heard that so does the scenery though I have not tried it.


I keep my scenery files in a separate directory and all of them have run under P3D with no incompatibilities. The photo sceneries look a bit strong on the red side of the color spectrum, but that's the only thing I've noticed. The only place I would expect snags is where the developer forces an installation location and doesn't provide a method for installing it under P3D. I like what LM has done.

It's more than ironic that LM picked up the ball after M$ fumbled. When I saw what Flight was going to be, I thought about other sims that became little more than games. It was sickening. The Austin Meyer April Fool's announcement (http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/xplane-news/message/1747) describes exactly how silly I thought the M$ decision was. Then P3D became more accessible and I felt a whole lot better, especially after spending some time with it :applause: LM has the apparent ability and interest in taking things to a new level. The future looks much brighter for those of us who wanted FS to become more than it was.

[Skyhawk_310R]

My only true disappointment at this time is the current impass between LM and Natural Point with regard to Track IR support. Natural Point wants LM to spend a considerable sum to integrate Natural Point's chosen driver software and LM wants Natural Point to use the same SimConnect driver interface that LM expects other developers to use.

I can understand a bit of Natural Point's concerns as they are worried that any future updates and versions might render their SimConect work void. But, truly that is a risk that is always present and Natural Point's view to use their driver presumes that future updates to Prepar3D won't cause compatibility issues that LM would have to spend more money on resolving.

My personal view is that any third party vender has the burden to choose to integrate his product into the platform -- not the other way around. One of the inputs I provided LM was a desire to see Track IR support developed and I know they were working it. But, it seems it stands at an impass. I guess Natural Point will have to make what is in their best business interest based on what sales they think may be motivated by Prepar3D compatibility.

Ken

[strikehawk]

Since I'm looking at a new rig to replace the one I bought in 04 I have been toying with the idea of P3D since I first heard about it. What kept me away were two fold the monthly "license" and the fact that I have a squirrel powered PC. With the new "academic" license and the positive things being posted here and elsewhere my plan is to install FS9, FSX and P3D on the new machine, I like to keep my options open, and maybe finally have the flight sim experience I have been missing this whole time. Maybe finally there will be a benchmark flight simulator that will live up to what was promised us years ago.

[Lionheart]

It's more than ironic that LM picked up the ball after M$ fumbled. When I saw what Flight was going to be, I thought about other sims that became little more than games. It was sickening. The Austin Meyer April Fool's announcement (http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/xplane-news/message/1747) describes exactly how silly I thought the M$ decision was. Then P3D became more accessible and I felt a whole lot better, especially after spending some time with it :applause: LM has the apparent ability and interest in taking things to a new level. The future looks much brighter for those of us who wanted FS to become more than it was.

My thoughts exactly. I was pretty depressed about the direction Flight went. Then P3D came to bat with a more affordable sim, and I heard about its smooth frame rates (my main complaint with FSX, besides hopping planes, blinking clouds, etc, etc, etc). I tried out the $9.95 Dev license and I havent been more happy in a VERY LONG TIME. :d



The sun appears to have moved about ten degrees counterclockwise for the Prepar-3D shots and the shadows and what-not appear better.

I noticed that too. Especially ground shadows of the plane, they are more precise.

[LonelyplanetXO]

Yep, I'd really love to try P3D but the Track IR issue is the showstopper for me. Hope they work it out.

LPXO