Farewell FSX - off to Prepar3d forum.

[Barnes]

No matter what PC I have owned I have never been able to get a good FPS in FSX when it comes to scenery.

I have now swapped everything over to P3D and can get decent FPS on scenary that I bought log ago but abandoned.

Guess I will mainly post my repaints, comments etc on that forum now. Might see you there!

[mmann]

Until Prepar3D changes the EULA to allow it to be used for entertainment, I'll have to stick with FSX or move to X-Plane or FlightGear.

[Francois]

I don't like it one bit..... and hence am NOT entertained. That means I can use it any way I want to.

[dhazelgrove]

Until Prepar3D changes the EULA to allow it to be used for entertainment, I'll have to stick with FSX or move to X-Plane or FlightGear.

Define 'entertainment'.

Dave

[Naismith]

There is so much misunderstanding of P3D - anyone is entitled to use it. LM have said this time and time again, if they were a person as opposed to a corporate entity they would be blue in the face by now.
But there are just as many issues maybe more with P3D as there are with FSX. Start adding stuff to it and it soon slows down as per FSX. It is akin to FSX before it was SP2'd and accelerated. Some claim it to be more stable, I am not convinced, again the naked sim may be as was FSX, but once you start adding to it expect issues.
Yes LM have done stuff to it so one would hope there were improvements, but bear in mind FSX is now approaching 7 years old and its fixes 6 years.
I am looking forward to what LM do with the next generation of our sim.

[TheGrunt]

There is so much misunderstanding of P3D - anyone is entitled to use it. LM have said this time and time again, if they were a person as opposed to a corporate entity they would be blue in the face by now.
But there are just as many issues maybe more with P3D as there are with FSX. Start adding stuff to it and it soon slows down as per FSX. It is akin to FSX before it was SP2'd and accelerated. Some claim it to be more stable, I am not convinced, again the naked sim may be as was FSX, but once you start adding to it expect issues.
Yes LM have done stuff to it so one would hope there were improvements, but bear in mind FSX is now approaching 7 years old and its fixes 6 years.
I am looking forward to what LM do with the next generation of our sim.

I've used solely P3D now since 1.4 came out and it works hugely better than FSX, at least for me and that is all that matters personally. And it really isn't "FSX before it was SP2'd and accelerated", because it includes all that code and is fully Acceleration compatible. Developement started from where ACES left it 2009.

[Naismith]

I accept that except there is no front end, where did that go? And the ATC box - that was a step backwards - there is other stuff which means it sits unused on my HD though I see a bright future.

[TheGrunt]

I accept that except there is no front end, where did that go?

Was there front end for ESP? Prepar3D is based on ESP code, not FSX, though the game engine itself is basically the same. I use freeware SimLauncher isntead, which beats FSX frontend 100-0.

And the ATC box - that was a step backwards - there is other stuff which means it sits unused on my HD though I see a bright future.

True, ATC box isn't the way it is in FSX. They bumped into problems with transparent window and the way ESP/FSX was handling them when making other optimizations to the code. I myself don't mind at all window being opaque, as it is open quite short time at once. Annoying black flash when opening the window can be avoided fully using pseudo full screen script with autohotkey.

[Hughes-MDflyer4]

I wouldn't say that any hard core flight simmer uses P3D or FSX for "entertainment purposes." I'm certainly not entertained, I'm just learning about aviation and how to operate aircraft, as well as develop add-ons. :mixedsmi:

[Roger]

I guess we're all different...for me flightsim is pure escape and I don't see that in their eula, but the eula only exists in it's present form to appease MS who no longer give a damn about flightsim. If P3D.V2 is dx10/11 then I will jump, especially if they manage to go 64 bit. If not I will probably stick with FsX/A.

[MCDesigns]

I guess we're all different...for me flightsim is pure escape and I don't see that in their eula, but the eula only exists in it's present form to appease MS who no longer give a damn about flightsim. If P3D.V2 is dx10/11 then I will jump, especially if they manage to go 64 bit. If not I will probably stick with FsX/A.

I am with you Roger! I want to support P3D also, but my main issue, and I know there is really no such thing as a garuantee, but what is to stop them from pulling the plug on non pro users at any given time? What is to stop MS of not giving 2 cents when they realize LM is making money off the entertainment based user group, (US!), and decide they want a piece of the pie now? I know ORBX is really backing LM and P3D, but you also have respected developers like PMDG and Flight1 that don't allow their products used in P3D, guess time will tell.

[mmann]

I wouldn't say that any hard core flight simmer uses P3D or FSX for "entertainment purposes." I'm certainly not entertained, I'm just learning about aviation and how to operate aircraft, as well as develop add-ons. :mixedsmi:

Your use would be protected by the EULA. I use FSX for entertainment; so if Prepar3D can't or won't change their EULA, I could not agree to the EULA which would preclude me from using their product.

[skyhawka4m]

sorry to see you go.....but I'm sticking to FSX till the end. Way too much invested and not about to start over.

[ShawnG]

Lockheed martin legally can't change their EULA. developing for pro flight training is the condition under which they purchased ESP, anything else would mean having to buy the rights for the consumer end from Microsoft. so we have this "wink wink, nudge nudge" situation. Lockheed Martin would probably love it if everyone ignored their EULA and bought it for whatever purpose, but they are legally bound to say otherwise. So buy it and promise not to have any fun. seems simple.

[AussieMan]

Just to touch on a few of the comments above.

To begin my system is Windows 8 Pro, with Intel i5-2500 CPU @ 3.6GHZ with 8GB RAM with a GeForce 9600GT Video card with 1GB on board.

I only have P3D installed on my computer. I have 95% of ORBX products running. The only thing missing are a few airports. I am also running about 100 scenery addon files and including repaints I have over 700 aircraft. I also run Active Sky as there is no default Real Weather.

I have P3D locked at 30FPS and constantly get that rate although I may experience a drop to about 23FPS flying into somewhere like Melbourne, Brisbane, Sydney, London or Seattle. Previously in FSX those airports attracted a drop down to something like 12 -15 FPS. In FSX I had the FPS locked at 30 but was struggling to get above 20FPS. So I can see between 50% and 70% increase in FPS.

Also when I am using a joystick or my CH yoke I find I am getting smoother results to my input. With FSX the slightest movement of either the elevators or ailerons would either put the aircraft into an almost vertical climb or a barrel roll.

So you can see I am more than happy with P3D. By the way I am using the Academic version and I can actually land larger planes with little or no bounce .

By the way what is entertainment? I use it mainly for relaxation.

Also Barnes, welcome to the New World.

[dhazelgrove]

One major point about P3D - namely the cost of the product.

$199 seems excessive to me.

Dave

[TheGrunt]

I want to support P3D also, but my main issue, and I know there is really no such thing as a garuantee, but what is to stop them from pulling the plug on non pro users at any given time?

Is there a guarantee, that MS continues to operate their FSX activation servers for the years to come?

[Montie]

One major point about P3D - namely the cost of the product.

$199 seems excessive to me.

Dave

The Academic license is available at $49.95 I believe. I will wait and see what Prepar3d V2 can do before switching.

[DaveWG]

I tried P3d for a while, but didn't find any improvement over FSX performance wise. Indeed, with the same scenery, aircraft, AI, settings etc, overall performance was lower than FSX in DX10 mode.
As my FSX is now pretty stable and performs well, combined with a few niggles with P3d I don't see any reason for me to swap at the moment.
Things may change when V2.0 comes out, and I will certainly give it a try.

[MudMarine]

I paid $80 for fsx when it first came out. It's NEVER worked for me! It was so bad it pretty much ended the enjoyment I got from simming. That is until P3D came along. I paid $49 for it and it's a life saver! All of the fsx addons I bought for fsx work with it. P3D saved the hobby of flight simulation for me! I've said it before and I'll say it a again, for me, fsx was is a piece of garbage! I know it works for other people and that's great! But for me fsx was a waste of money.

[falcon409]

Your use would be protected by the EULA. I use FSX for entertainment; so if Prepar3D can't or won't change their EULA, I could not agree to the EULA which would preclude me from using their product.

Mike, you're overthinking this to the excess. I would imagine that within our community there are far more average users who have purchased the Academic version for $49. than any other option LM has at the moment. Don't take the EULA literally. . .LM's legal department has to earn their money too and the EULA is their contribution. I promise the EULA Police won't come knocking if you purchase P3D. Now, be forewarned however. There is a new version being worked which probably won't be out until sometime next year. One of the supposed changes could be that it will fully support 64bit technology and if that happens LM could see a surge in "Academic Students" going over to P3D. It will also be a completely new purchase, so just understand that if you buy now, you'll also have to do it all over again if this new version has the expected "bells & whistles". Bottom line, don't make deciding to purchase any harder than it needs to be. If you want it. . . .buy it.

[stansdds]

I'm still sitting on the sidelines, waiting to see what comes about with P3D v.2. FSX runs well enough for me as it is, to take advantage of DX10 or DX11 or a 64 bit version of FSX, I would have to build a new computer and move to Windows 7, none of that is in my budget with the current economy and now my wife is enjoying a 20% pay cut thanks to sequestration.

[Brian_Gladden]

I can say... I had a terrific and fairly stable FSX instal for about a year. Then out of the blue, I got random CTD's and other problems that would never go away. Now, with P3d I Use the $10 a month developer license (Hey... I am a published FS addon developer... right? I know it's been a while though) and I have been very happy with P3d. Only thing I don't like is Flight 1's issue with it so no addons like AFX and Instant scenery. I am however starting to get the hang of ADEX. It's kinda like going backwards a little to the days of Airport 2.1 when I go so used to adding objects in sim.

Anyway, My rig runs P3d fine and I have tons of AI (A killer on any system) and I run a solid 20 fps just like FSX did when it worked. The only thing I don't like is that clouds really drag my system down. I use FS Real weather lite for real time weather. and an opening screen would be helpful.

Other than that I'm a very happy LM customer.

[Dangerousdave26]

One major point about P3D - namely the cost of the product.

$199 seems excessive to me.

Dave

If we look at the amount of money in addons the typical user purchases over a life time in Flight Simulator I think that price is far too low if I were the developer.

How many of us have 1000s of dollars tied up in hardware and software just to enhance our FS experience.

For a stable 64 bit platform with an accurately modeled world (mesh, landclass, waterbodies, and roads) I would pay more than the $199.

That is why I am also waiting for P3D version 2.0.

[Skyhawk_310R]

Until Prepar3D changes the EULA to allow it to be used for entertainment, I'll have to stick with FSX or move to X-Plane or FlightGear.

That's the part I think so many people are glossing over. Microsoft retains considerable influence on this issue. Their EULA with Lockheed Martin is very clear. LM is prohibited from releasing Prepar3D for entertainment purposes. Their contract with Microsoft restricts its use to training. That is precisely why the EULA of Prepar3D restricts its use to training. People should understand it was Microsoft who specified that limitation to disallow LM to becoming a potential competitor in the PC gaming industry. LM has no desires or strategic plans to change the mission of Prepar3D from training. Frankly, a lot of people have purchased Prepar3D for reasons of entertainment knowing it violates the EULA.

How much longer is Microsoft going to ignore what is happening? I certainly don't know. But, it cannot be forever. Without question a large number of people are using the Prepar3D product outside its specified EULA. It is certainly one of the more frustrating realities that a business retains control over something they have abandoned. Microsoft has abandoned flight simulator games and it seems very doubtful they will ever enter it again. But, contractually, they control how their software is used.

Few people thought the RIAA would ever successfully prosecute and heavily fine end users for violations of their copyrights. But, they did. Would Microsoft do the same? I would say doubtfully, but I also never expected the RIAA to do what they did, and the courts backed the RIAA 100% of the way despite great protests. I just thnk people ought to understand what the EULA for FSX and Prepar3D both say. It is a legally enforceable agreement, and frankly, anytime someone uses Prepar3D for gaming entertainment, then they are violating a legally binding contract.

Ken