FSX
Reading these for and against threads I am not sure of the point of the discussion. Is it that P3D is superior to FSX or that the users of P3D see themselves as superior to users of FSX?
Reading these for and against threads I am not sure of the point of the discussion. Is it that P3D is superior to FSX or that the users of P3D see themselves as superior to users of FSX?
Why I havnt moved to P3d.
1. FSX in DX10 is fine. Still same install for 5 years.
2. I have too much money invested.
3. FSX doesnt change so developers have a fixed playing field.
4. P3D is just FSX rebooted. Just like steam version, when they change things , some things break and developers have to go back to drawing board.
5. Some developers charge same price for FSX and P3D others charge more, still havnt figured out why. If it is a licence issue, than all developers would be / should be charging more.
6 Its stll 32 bit, when it goes to 64 bit, we will start the circle all over again.
7. P3D has cloud shadow, yes they look nice but i have being without them for this long I can wait.
8. Am considering Xplane 10, but that too has its problems. need CD etc etc. Every time a major revision need to repurchase unless im wrong.
Is P3D better, looks that way, I have no arguements with that. But im happy with FSX.
Smile and have a lovely day
Intel 4790K @ 4.8GHz , 16 Gig Cas 10 2100 MHz ram, Nvidia GTX 970, 4Gig Video, Windows 7 64 Bit, Gigabyte GA Z87X-UD3H
I note that both of these for/against 'discussions' are taking place in the FSX forum.
Have we nothing better to do?
Dave
Well, we know that MS will not rewrite it in 64bit, as the license for FSX is with Dovetail.Originally Posted by Jafo
FSX is a 32bit program whose core has not been improved in about a decade.
When hardware [and its OS] is very much going 64bit by the minute FSX will always be a dinosaur [and only become more so as time progresses]
Nothing will make FSX multi-core aware or capable of addressing ram beyond the 32bit threshold. Getting it to be 'high memory aware' is a bandaid fix...sort of wet, soggy bandaid that slips off...
If MS were to rewrite it in 64bit I think people might then realise just how clunky it is/was ...
Why I havnt moved to P3d.
1. FSX in DX10 is fine. Still same install for 5 years. - You have compared your install with?
2. I have too much money invested. - You spend money for a game, you do not 'invest'.
3. FSX doesnt change so developers have a fixed playing field. - a few inovations, TacPac etc
4. P3D is just FSX rebooted. Just like steam version, when they change things , some things break and developers have to go back to drawing board. - You MUST be aware of the 10x upgrades & versions?
5. Some developers charge same price for FSX and P3D others charge more, still havnt figured out why. If it is a licence issue, than all developers would be / should be charging more. - Some do charge a professional/traing price for a professional/training add-on.
6 Its stll 32 bit, when it goes to 64 bit, we will start the circle all over again. - YUP, as it will be a different sim. We will all start from scratch again.
7. P3D has cloud shadow, yes they look nice but i have being without them for this long I can wait. - It has a lot more than just cloud shadow. Have you seen that, or any other differences?
8. Am considering Xplane 10, but that too has its problems. need CD etc etc. Every time a major revision need to repurchase unless im wrong. ?? re the needing CD etc? FSX also needs the DVD in to play, unless it has been illegally patched. X-plane comes with 10 DVD's & costs a lot more. Your reasons for considering X-Plane? & Yes, it IS a 64bit program.
Is P3D better, looks that way, I have no arguements with that. But im happy with FSX.
Smile and have a lovely dayYou too
Not really, this is fun!
Nothing wrong with a good discussion! In fact this thread is quite educational!
That's incorrect I'm afraid. FSX doesn't need a no-cd patch.. it runs quite happily without any DVD's and always has done8. Am considering Xplane 10, but that too has its problems. need CD etc etc. Every time a major revision need to repurchase unless im wrong. ?? re the needing CD etc? FSX also needs the DVD in to play, unless it has been illegally patched. X-plane comes with 10 DVD's & costs a lot more. Your reasons for considering X-Plane? & Yes, it IS a 64bit program.
ATB
DaveB
Yes, FSX does not need the CD [other than for the install - obviously] ..That's incorrect I'm afraid. FSX doesn't need a no-cd patch.. it runs quite happily without any DVD's and always has done
ATB
DaveB
These discussions are definitely educational....not ever user is au-fait with the intricacies of either or both or all three...whatever...
Ooops, sorry about that. I was getting it mixed up with FS2004. Phew, my memory @ my age!That's incorrect I'm afraid. FSX doesn't need a no-cd patch.. it runs quite happily without any DVD's and always has done
ATB
DaveB
For me....FSX will be my last simulator. I purchased P3D for my local aviation museum as they have a sim to educate the public as to how an aeroplane flies etc, but its not for me. The shadowing was very nice, but as I have said before I have my FSX setup just as I like it, with local scenery and autogen and on which I 'fly' the aeroplanes that I fly and experience in real life. I'm not interested in 64bit this and whatever, I have a simulator that I believe is close to the real thing, gives me great satisfaction when used and enjoyment at the same time. Isn't that what it is really all about?
I this morning (before I pop off to work) have spent 30 mins flying around my local area and taken in the sights, knowing full well that I won't be able to do it tomorrow as the weather looks poo. And enjoyed every minute of it.
Besides this, I still have a house and car to run, and know that in the future, that there will be other complications thrown my way. So, I'm sticking with what I know and appreciate and when its all over, will be able to look back and think of how good the sim was a worthwhile refresher and training aid. P3D looks wonderful, but I simply am 1) not interested or 2) can't see myself forking out for something that I have already and enjoy using. Just my person thoughts.
Best wishes,
Martin
To be honest, my Fsx runs just fine, and I see no need at all to change. Yes, p3d may run better, yes, it may have cloud shadows ( though I have them for fsx too), but fsx has all I need for the moment. I don't know why I would pay another $60 or so for what is essentialy an upgrade and then spend several hours reinstalling all my addons. Heck, I just spent quite a lot more to keep this forum afloat....I can spend the money only once...
You can find most of my repaints for FSX/P3D in the library here on the outhouse.
For MFS paints go to flightsim.to
Missed the point. Orbx provdes a FSX P3d installer, one price both sims. Some provide teh same plane for FSX and P3d with the P3D version being mowe expenxve even though it is the same addon. It is ame plane not professional add on. And i still havnt figured out why.5. Some developers charge same price for FSX and P3D others charge more, still havnt figured out why. If it is a licence issue, than all developers would be / should be charging more. - Some do charge a professional/traing price for a professional/training add-on.
Intel 4790K @ 4.8GHz , 16 Gig Cas 10 2100 MHz ram, Nvidia GTX 970, 4Gig Video, Windows 7 64 Bit, Gigabyte GA Z87X-UD3H
Very well said! I am happy with FSX, it does what I want it to do.
And that really is the bottom line! If you're happy with your sim, by all means DON'T change over. I was never happy with FSX, which is why I have moved over to P3D.Very well said! I am happy with FSX, it does what I want it to do.
We can conclude that we agree to disagree!
Johan
Not really missing the point... I did say SOME, not all!
For me, the motivation to move comes in part with the realization of improved performance. 'Performance' meaning; smoother motion (even frames), higher FPS, lower VAS. So, at risk of going ever so slightly off topic, the question I'd really like to get answered this: Assuming they are set up as similarly as possible, will I get better performance from FSX-SE with DX10 Fixer, or P3D2v5?
FSX-SE has better VAS performance (proven) as does DX-10 with standard FSX. Do they provide even more improvement together? Users claim improved FPS and smoothness with both DX-10 and FSX-SE, but this seems anecdotal as I have not seen any measured results from a properly controlled test to support this. As for P3D, I haven't followed it as closely, but again, users seem to agree that VAS usage and smoothness is improved. Not sure about FPS.
Thoughts?
Your English is better than my French, German, Italian, Spanish.... so no worries my friends!
I've just looked on the LM P3D site at licence options and see I am red crossed as a mere personal entertainment consumer.
As one would expect from a simulator based on Microsoft ESP and not FSX. I took one look at ESP (when it was first announced by Microsoft) and realized it was not aimed at the same market as FSX.
Mike Mann
I would agree with that, 100%. If you like what you have, keep it. If it doesn't satisfy you, explore elsewhere.And that really is the bottom line! If you're happy with your sim, by all means DON'T change over. I was never happy with FSX, which is why I have moved over to P3D.
We can conclude that we agree to disagree!
Johan
Just do as I do: run all 3 sims.
Dave
I'm afraid my SSD isn't big enough for that!
A quote from another flight sim site:
"I'm actually getting really tired of the constant changes in P3D. Especially because this time a whole reinstall is required. I dont want to do a fresh install now, so I´m not updating to v2.5 and if I needed to do a fresh one, I would seriously consider FSX."
Of course if P3D ever becomes a 64-bit sim; the troubles will multiply faster than tribbles.
Mike Mann
That`s the main reason,why i do not use P3D.
Mike
People complain that M$ stopped developing FS. People complain that LM are developing FS. Can't win!
Members who have read this thread: 1
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks