Reasons FSX Users Don't Move to P3D

[mmann]

There are good reasons why the majority of flight simmers stick with FSX:

1. Compatible with the widest range of the latest and greatest addons.
2. The license allows for using the simulator as entertainment.
3. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. I have never had an OOM, my frame rate clings to 30 (where I have it set) and my FSX runs very smooth.

[fsxar177]

Fun to see an 'opposing' thread.

While I do agree that P3D is moving us into the future, I still really wonder where the line is drawn on the licensing aspect. I know for myself, a developer license is self explanatory. However, others? Academic? I guess..

- Joseph

[Desert Rat]

Fun to see an 'opposing' thread.

While I do agree that P3D is moving us into the future, I still really wonder where the line is drawn on the licensing aspect. I know for myself, a developer license is self explanatory. However, others? Academic? I guess..

- Joseph

Business 101, make money. From their own point of view, the more sales the merrier. Only two things will affect this,
1: their licence from Microsoft and what it entails.*
2: Public perception.**

As long as the two criteria are not infringed, Lockheed P3D division will be happy to report to their bosses that sales are continuing, or even better, up. LM is still a business after all. Bottom line is EVERYTHING. Thinking otherwise is just naive.

Jamie

* Conditions of the source code useage may/or may not impact this, dependent on if MS gets a cut on the sales. Royalties, as such.
** Remember what happened in the news after 9/11? If similar happened from a weapons manufactures product, imagine how much stronger the public/media response would be. God forbid!!

[monk1]

Just personal preference of course but I don't want to spend more money on another 32 bit sim, not to mention all the add ons installing and set up. But for me that will change when it goes 64 bit. I'll be all over it at that point.

[CanadaKen]

But for me that will change when it goes 64 bit. I'll be all over it at that point.

Agree!!! FSX days will be over when P3D 64bit comes out. From what I understand that will be sooner than later.

CK

[JensOle]

There are good reasons why the majority of flight simmers stick with FSX:

1. Compatible with the widest range of the latest and greatest addons.
2. The license allows for using the simulator as entertainment.
3. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. I have never had an OOM, my frame rate clings to 30 (where I have it set) and my FSX runs very smooth.

No need for a heated argument over this, just some of my experience as a new P3D user:
(I had the same arguments as you for not getting P3D until I tested it... )

1. I would say that 90% or more of the addons we currently have for FSX works in P3D. A small % need some easy workarounds and a minimal % don't work. Almost all of the latest addons are fully compatible with P3D.
2. Who is stopping you from using P3D for entertainment (and learning)? I certainly are using it for both and I guess that is maybe the biggest marked for the academic version. Just LM that cant state it is actually doing entertainment.
3. You don't know how broke FSX is before you have tried P3D V2.5... that is my experience, it is so much better. The smooth and graphically much improved flight feeling in P3D has really been a revitalising of my simming.

Just my opinion.

[ejoiner]

There are good reasons why the majority of flight simmers stick with FSX:

1. Compatible with the widest range of the latest and greatest addons.
2. The license allows for using the simulator as entertainment.
3. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. I have never had an OOM, my frame rate clings to 30 (where I have it set) and my FSX runs very smooth.

This is the same set of reasons I stayed with FS9 until May 2014!

[DaveSHQ]

1. Use FSX how i want to
2. About 150GB of addons that i don't want to transfer over lol. Same reason my FSX SE is still Vanilla

[Naismith]

So tired of folks citing the licensing issue. Get over it folks.

[StormILM]

I'll admit I was stubborn as hell over moving from FS9 to FSX and that being because of how much I spent on FS9 addons but equally as important, PC specs and performance in the early days was pivotal to keep FS9 while easing into FSX. I agree, this type of discussion really isn't about creating any heated debate about which platform is superior, it's more about the direction of things and then eventual crossover to a superior/more evolved platform. Hopefully the Devs at all levels can help ease that transition for us users who've spent lots of hard earned money into all of this. I think P3D is the future(and add to that, perhaps other platforms) but FSX will still be relevant a few more years at least.

[joe bob]

So for us lazy folks who haven't taken the time to read between the educational only lines what is the deal. Is is a one time payment or a type of subscription? How much to pay for it and be done with it like the original FSX?
How solid is LMs deal. Can MS flex it's muscles if they think that it is successful enough that they want the whole pie? What if they tighten up the definition of educational?
Obviously I have not given this much attention, in fact I had hoped it would just go away so the FSX developer waters aren't muddied, but I don't want to be that guy, you know the one who says "will there be an FS9 version?" all the time.

[warchild]

There is another option. please see my post in the "Why users go to P3D" thread.

[skyhawka4m]

I've said it before I'll say it again FSX is my last flight simulator. If I do anything it'll be going over to DCS.

[airattackimages]

P3d is so much better that it's comical to watch people trash talk it.

[DaveSHQ]

P3d is so much better that it's comical to watch people trash talk it.

Which is funny since not one person has trashed talked P3D in this thread. However, it is turning into another P3D fanboi thread and should be moved to that forum.

[robert41]

My reason is that I already have FSX running very well. I am happy with it right now.
Good to hear that many older addons do work in P3D. This is a concern of mine.

[tommieboy]

There are good reasons why the majority of flight simmers stick with FSX:

1. Compatible with the widest range of the latest and greatest addons.
2. The license allows for using the simulator as entertainment.
3. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. I have never had an OOM, my frame rate clings to 30 (where I have it set) and my FSX runs very smooth.

For many of us, it's an issue of still running older hardware and OS's like XP Home for financial reasons. I've just bought a used 10" Galaxy notepad in anticipation on my desktop computer's demise; it is running on a wing and a prayer right now....once it goes, it will most likely be the end of flight sims for me. A new desktop computer is just not a priority in the coming years.....to many other things have been sitting on the back burner for too many years now. I've enjoyed repainting aircraft for FS9 and FSX for the past few years, but since Adobe Photoshop has gone to a yearly subscription service, that too is no longer an option. Hopefully I'll get my last couple of repaints for Virtavia's Martin Mars and R3Y Tradewind out before this computer kicks the bucket.

Tommy

[mmann]

Fun to see an 'opposing' thread.

- Joseph

Which is precisely why I started this thread. A subtle reminder that if I really wanted to consider P3D I would using the Prepar3D forum (with 8 Viewing) as opposed to the FSX forum (with 61 Viewing).

[Navy Chief]

Which is precisely why I started this thread. A subtle reminder that if I really wanted to consider P3D I would using the Prepar3D forum (with 8 Viewing) as opposed to the FSX forum (with 61 Viewing).

It is interesting to read both sides. I have had P3D since its initial release, but until this most recent version, I paid little attention to the sim. Really is amazing!

Although I uninstalled FSX-O, I plan to maintain FSX-SE on my system as well as I have SO many addons for it, both freeware and payware. As the number of developers grow who are updating their creations to work with P3Dv2.5, I believe so will the popularity of that sim. I could be wrong, but so far the indications (to me, at least) seem to point that direction.

FSX continues to evolve though. Consider the amount of adaptations/modifications it has gone through, I think it will "live" alongside P3D, DCS, and others for quite a while longer. NC

[JimmyRFR]

I have no issue with P3D. I've had it installed a few times since v2 was released, and have had (and let lapse) developer subscriptions a few times. If they continue to keep moving forward the way they have been, I will seriously consider switching at some point.

However, quite simply, I have no real strong urge to switch. I'd be switching simply for the sake of doing so. I've happily maintained my heavily-customized-via-symlinks FSX installation for quite some time now, going on two years I think, and everything is running really, really good. I lock at 30fps, and manage to maintain that in 99% of my flying, across a wide variety of payware aircraft and scenery. No stutters, no hiccups, no crashes, just start and go.

If I had problems with FSX, or if there were features strong enough to make me want them, then I'd reconsider.

Also in the back of my mind is some of the scenery that I've installed... My latest region to get a full 'makeover' is Hawaii. Installing the photoscenery, airport packs, FSDT airports, separate freeware autogen, and then making it all work cohesively together was a time consuming task. I have several regions like that were I have nearly every enhancement possible, with the time invested in making it all play nice together. I better have a damn good reason to do some of that over!!

[zswobbie1]

Cannot think of too many logical reasons as to why FSX users prefer to stick with an 8 year old program.

"FSX continues to evolve though. Consider the amount of adaptations/modifications it has gone through, I think it will "live" alongside P3D, DCS, and others for quite a while longer. "

This comment is a bit odd! FSx has not evolved at all, since Acceleration was released umpteen years ago.
Adaptions & Mods? Well, Apart from Acceleration & FSX: Gold ... NO evolution!
Yes, FSX:SE is the same FSX:Gold, but slightly modded for the Steam platform & Steam multiplayer.. An evolution/adaption/mod? Not Really! Will it live alongside P3D (modded/evolved/upgraded about 10 times since released? Well, will FS2004?

Maybe the only logical reason to stay are the tube liner add-ons that do not work (yet) with a modern sim.

FSX:SE was mentioned. Is this an evolution? I don't think so. Will it interest me to change?
My thoughts are that this has been re-released on Steam, the largest (?) gaming distributor, for the newbies, being a 'plug 'n play' install, with easy installable DLC's. It IS a bonus for the rest of us to have a game that we can install on-line, without disks, & with most add-ons working. Thanks, devs for climbing in & making your stuff work.

So, getting back to the topic...
Reasons why FSX users dont move?
1. Mmmmmm
2. Do I want PMDG? (personally, no!)
3. Get over the licensing ad nauseum debates.
4. Do I want a constantly upgraded sim?
5. ....

[Geomitrak]

Using the Estonia Migrator Tool, I haven't had a single problem so far with FSX add-ons in P3DV2.4 ( I stress 'so far' ). Even stuff like Accusim planes; the Stratocruiser with COTS, B-17, civilian Mustang, C-172 and Cherokee all work fine. FSX aircraft from Captain Sim ( 707 and 727 ) Alabeo and Carenado have no problems at all. Same goes for scenery, weather, Remote Flight apps, Plan G... no problem with any of them...so far.

[CG_1976]

Well since I got assigned to Vegas AOR by the USCG/USN, err dam desert land lock worse then Texas lol. I got a new computer AMD/ATI. I bought 4 Hard-drives cheap on the holidays, won a SSD drive from Poker at Gold Coast lol. So what did I do. Easy Re-installed Fs9 to one drive, then FSX/SE to another, P3DV2.5 and ekks first time the X-plane. They are all happy with W8.1. The only thing that throws a W8.1 fit is the Flight1 wrapper err. I went to FSX/SE due to W7 W8.1 support with potential for W10. P3D is the same. XP and Vista are scheduled for MS Execution Sentence soon anyway. Bottom line is I support all flight sims/payware supporting Window 7 and Higher. As for the term Academic, well that is wide open to define, my motto, "We never stop learning, if learning stops your Dead."

[Daube]

I am now an happy P3D user and I don't use FSX at all anymore. FSX is still on my hardrive but it doesn't work anymore, I've move so much files, messed some configs, etc.... it doesn't even launches. It's just a zombie sitting there for nothing but keeping some files.

However, I'd like to balance the arguments here a bit. P3D is not as perfect as some people say. Here is a little lit of big problems that FSX'ers should consider:

1- Addon compatibility:
Most FSX planes got converted or will get converted soon. Those who don't get converted are usually "simple" planes that just need to be copied in the correct folders. Situation is the same for sceneries.
So the FSX planes are not a problem. No, the real problem is the FS9 planes. They don't work at all anymore. They display nicely, but the virtual cockpit is not clickable anymore. So if you are a 2D pilot or a CTRL+E pilot, this won't be problematic. But the other pilots will have to forget about FS9 planes, which is quite sad.

2- Performance
I'll make it simple: over generic sceneries and photoreal sceneries, as long as you're far away from a complex piece of custom scenery object like a major aiport or anything like that, the performance of P3D is vastly superior to the FSX performance, provided you have a correct middle-range DX11 video card. But once you get close to heavy scenery, then the performance will drop down to a level possibly inferior to FSX. Yes, the performance of P3D in some place can be worse than the FSX performance. For example, if you fly over PNW from Orbx, and you get close to KSEA, or if you get close to a major city with FranceVFR 3DA technology, then the frames will drop to a very low level, much lower than what it was with FSX. This is due to the new P3D engine and the way it handles scenery and autogen objects. As a matter of fact, I wouldn't recommend P3D to a liner pilot who likes to fly his PMDG 777 over major airports with payware sceneries.

3- Rendering
This remark is for people who are still flying FSX in DX9 mode.
P3D rendering is superb. The autogen doesn't popup anymore, the HDR gives some nice lighting variations, and the scenery and cloud shadows are the icing on the cake. However, I'm still unable to get the same lovely colors I was getting with the ENB bloom tweaked by the REX guys (variant "SUNLIGHT"). The colors are a bit dull by default, even with all options enabled. I could compensate a lot by using SweetFX to boost the intensity of the colors a bit, and now it looks very nice... but not as nice as what I was getting with the ENB Sunlight mod.


These are the objective arguments I can think about for warning the FSX'ers. I can perfectly understand why somebody would want to stay with FSX, just like I could understand why somebody would want to stay with FS9 back when FSX came out. But for me, there's no way back now.

[PHo17]

There are good reasons why the majority of flight simmers stick with FSX:

...
3. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. I have never had an OOM, my frame rate clings to 30 (where I have it set) and my FSX runs very smooth.

You obviously don't have the size of FSX more than 230GB as I do. I've read that photo sceneries reserve memory permanently (loaded at the beginning) while using FSX. I have lot of sceneries and there are plenty of photo parts in them. So while using FSX (in spite of 64bit OS) the system memory knocks the "5G door" (and FSX it's door of heaven or hell 4GB ) now and then. That's why I have now and then OOM errors and according to that CDTs.

I haven't yet changed to P3D because it's also a 32bit program and there is the same problem lurking somewhere. I've tried XPlane but didn't like it. There are some shortages like poor AI. The very day P3D is compiled to a 64bit program I'll change to it.

Old people die. Same do old programs. It's sad but it's fact.

Pekka