Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
#4133543 - 06/13/15 03:36 PM Which sim and why?  
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice Offline
Veteran
- Ice  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
Oh boy. I'll probably hate myself for coming here and posting this, but I hate making uninformed decisions even if that decision is to "stay away."

Okay.... here goes.... what is the best sim to get and why?

A little background: I played FS9 when it came out, did most of the tutorial stuff and got to the point that I flew 2-engine props. I was also able to qualify to fly for a virtual airline although I didn't go forward with that. I got FSX but never really got into it due to 1) ugly terrain at low altitudes, 2) funny events occurring (mostly the sim pausing and telling me I crashed my aircraft due to over-stress), and 3) basically not knowing what I was doing. I played FSX a bit more with FSEconomy but it was more of "take off - fast forward through the flight - land."

What I'm looking for in a sim: Beautiful terrain and accurate if possible, good physics, good AI and tower comms. I'd like to fly a mix of trainer aircraft (C150/170/172), multi-engine props, military jets (F-14, F-16, F-18, A-10, etc.), and gliders. Not very interested in airliners but I'd like some private jet flights as well. As for add-ons, I've really not got much to spend so free is best.... but I understand some add-ons are definitely worth the money. However, if a sim is good to start with, won't that mean it'll require only minimal add-ons?

I'm aware of 3 choices - FSX (or the Steam equivalent), P3D, and XP10. So, which is best for me?


A few more particular questions:
1. I noticed A2A only makes stuff for FSX and P3D, not for XP10. Why?
2. Carenado makes stuff for all three sims... is there a difference between platforms for a particular aircraft?
3. I'm hoping to practice a few real-world stuff on the sim as well. I know FSX can do this, but what about the othes?

Thanks for any help!
behindcouch


- Ice
Inline advert (2nd and 3rd post)

#4133546 - 06/13/15 03:53 PM Re: Which sim and why? [Re: - Ice]  
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 20,834
Stormtrooper Offline
Lifer
Stormtrooper  Offline
Lifer

Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 20,834
I only fly FSX right now only because I've flooded so much money into it.

I will switch to P3D one day when I get the energy to transfer everything over.

XP10 won't touch....still burned by the FS2000 looking aircraft in XP9 I guess.

#4133621 - 06/13/15 07:20 PM Re: Which sim and why? [Re: - Ice]  
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 178
harryw Offline
Member
harryw  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 178
NV
There is another one you should keep your eye on:

http://www.aeroflyfs.com/

not the current version but version 2, which is due out Any Time Now (and has been for a year or so...)

Current version has beautiful terrain, very frame rate friendly and has an accurate flight model. It's good for tooling around the alps in a jet, but it has no weather, no ATC, virtually no add ons and only covers Switzerland.
Next version should fix all of the above drawbacks. The good thing is that there isn't 10+ years of legacy to support - it has potential.

Other than that I think Prepar3d 2.0 is your only option if you want a supported sim but just as FSX it's not a simple start-and-play program. My advice would be to try it out - they have a 30 day (or 60 day, not sure anymore) money back policy and it's your best chance for instant gratification. That will show you what you can expect without spending any money on add ons.
Also, Lockheed Martin is working on a Version 3, which will most likely be a step away from FSX and not a free upgrade. Might be a year or more away though.

Then there is FSX Steam edition (which I haven't tried out) and allegedly works very nice out of the box (or out of the internet in this case) with less autogen popping and better draw distances. Dovetail Games may plan further improvements but they won't touch the core code. I woudn't bet too much on this one.

#4133736 - 06/14/15 03:15 AM Re: Which sim and why? [Re: - Ice]  
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 75
BrettT Offline
Junior Member
BrettT  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 75
Louisiana
Honestly, Might be worth trying out all three. XP10 and FSX are on steam and steam is having its summer sale right now. I just picked up XP10 for $30. The academic version of P3D is $60. I just recently got both for my new system/cockpit. I will admit I started off with P3D but then when I saw steam was having it for $30 I figured it would be a shame to not grab it.

They both have their pluses and minus. Out of the box I feel XP10 has a better street matrix and runs smoother though has very little in the way of custom buildings and airports can be bare but feel they do a better job of making the remaining world accurate in streets/coastlines/ and other vector info. P3D does a better job of populating with non autogen scenery for specific landmarks and has better ATC interaction.

Both with probably need scenery/aircraft to get it where you want it

#4134108 - 06/14/15 10:03 PM Re: Which sim and why? [Re: - Ice]  
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice Offline
Veteran
- Ice  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
Unfortunately, I don't have the time and more importantly, the money to try all three. Plus, comparing for example a modded P3D with vanilla XP10 probably won't be fair to XP10 but again, I don't have the money to but both games and mod them more or less similarly then make comparisons.


- Ice
#4134538 - 06/15/15 07:21 PM Re: Which sim and why? [Re: - Ice]  
Joined: Nov 1999
Posts: 1,060
Talon Offline
Member
Talon  Offline
Member

Joined: Nov 1999
Posts: 1,060
Tampa, FL USA
Hey Ice,

I've been a long time FSX user and it is still my first choice for a civilian sim. Vanilla, it is not the prettiest, arguably none of the sims are. Still, it is worth the money. I recently purchased P3D V2 and find myself going back to FSX for several reasons: I think the FSX interface is nicer and more user-friendly. Also I've invested a lot of money in FSX with third-party add-ons, scenery, and aircraft. I can dl real-world weather in FSX, but not P3D. Also not every FSX add-on wants to play nice with P3D.

For example, I have scenery for King airport in St. Thomas. Due to the design, when imported into FSX, the buildings are invisible. My F1 King Air requires a P3D upgrade and I've seen other quirks with other scenery and aircraft in P3D.

P3D is beautiful, despite a bare-bones interface. It also delivers slightly better frame rates (based on observations) than FSX. The academic edition price is $60. On the other hand, you can get FSX: SE for $12.49 during Steam sale. The regular price is $25.

1. I think A2A made a business decision to develop for FSX and P3D because they are virtually the same platform. P3D is more refined but still based on FSX core (or something like that).

2. Carenado planes behave the same in either sim. I don't see any noticeable difference. I did notice that my P3D install of my Majestic Dash8 had a few tweaks (It was an update and never installed it in FSX so I can't tell if the tweaks are across the board).

3. All three will allow you to do what you are planning but you may want to look at some add-on ac for full fidelity.
a. A2A uses a special simulation plugin (or something like that) to model its aircraft. So they perform like the real deal - stalls, etc. Base FSX aircraft are fairly generic and perform well within the normal envelope.

b. P3D is essentially FSX improved

b. X-Plane is a plane simulator and the physics are quite spot on. I owned XP9 and only dabbled with the XP10 demo. I will say the planes feel right. XP10 may still be on Steam sale for around $30.

I threw out my response on the fly so I may not be 100% accurate with details and may have missed something or two. Still, I continue to get an enjoyable sim experience with FSX. Oh, there are tons of free add-ons on sites like AVSIM and Flightsim.com. You just have to shop around a bit to find what you are looking for. I've been a member on both sites since my FS9 days.

Regards,

--T


Support simulation in the classroom.
#4134557 - 06/15/15 08:08 PM Re: Which sim and why? [Re: - Ice]  
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 9,710
Legend Offline
Legsie is such a
Legend  Offline
Legsie is such a
Hotshot

Joined: May 2000
Posts: 9,710
Zutphen, NL / ShangHai, China
Considering you have to start, I'd go for P3D. It's much better out of the box than any FSX version, and there are many good add-ons for it - OrbX and Aerosoft bring out all their new add-ons for both FSX and P3D, and many old(er) or not-supported add-ons from other developers can still be installed (although it sometimes takes some fiddling). Must-have is IMHO EZDok, to change views easily.

I recently made the switch from FSX to P3D; so far I haven't looked back at FSX.


There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the universe is for it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more inexplicable.
There is another theory which states that this has already happened.
#4134782 - 06/16/15 12:36 PM Re: Which sim and why? [Re: - Ice]  
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice Offline
Veteran
- Ice  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
To those that are recommending P3D, can I ask for screenshots of my local area? I've done a similar request for FSX users in this thread, if somebody can post shots of the same areas for a FSX vs. P3D comparison, that would be awesome!

So far, I've been getting lots of help from Scoobe and what he is showing me is impressing me about XP10's capabilities if nothing but in the graphics/autogen area.

Does either P3D or XP10 have any tutorial stuff like in FSX?


- Ice
#4137026 - 06/20/15 06:02 PM Re: Which sim and why? [Re: - Ice]  
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 304
Domestos Offline
Member
Domestos  Offline
Member

Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 304
Bingham UK
XP10 is on sale on Steam fer another day, I reckon it's got the most 'growing room' of all of them at the moment.

#4197196 - 11/21/15 04:33 PM Re: Which sim and why? [Re: - Ice]  
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 22,854
Rick.50cal Offline
Lifer
Rick.50cal  Offline
Lifer

Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 22,854

P3D and FSX may be the present...

...but Xplane is the future.

Why?

Hardware for one.

Xplane 10 can be had in 64 bit version, to make use of ALL the computing power you have, and all that you will buy down the road. By contrast, the other two are already capped too small. Wanna run 20 gigs of ram? Xplane 64bit will use all of that and all your cores... FSX will ignore more and more of the new bigger better hardware.

This may not be a concern today... but as the aircraft gain in polys, texture sizes, and the terrain has much thicker meshes, insanely detailed textures, tons and tons of autogen, giant fleets of thinking AI, and payware airports so detailed that gum on pavement in parking lots is visible, with ground vehicles having thinking AI... and hardware three years from now... 64bit will crush it, and FSX / Prepar3d be crushed.

scenery for Xplane is coming along nicely. Many payware, massive freeware.

New aircraft... there are a few dozen payware planes and helos that are OUTSTANDING... but its still early days IMO.


Check these payware plane on Youtube:
X-Trident Bell 412HP

Saab 340A Leading Edge Sims

Carenado's line for Xplane includes a B1900 and Beech B200 King Air

CRJ-200 JRollon Team

DHC-6 By RWDesigns

PMDG DC-6 beautiful...

DC-3 Dakota Leading Edge Designs, avail at x-aviation.com

FlyJSim 727 and 737-200

Flight Factor 757 is licensed Boeing! Very high quality must buy


POLITICS, WAR, ECONOMY, CONTROVERSY! and other heated discussions and debates in the PWEC sub-forum at the bottom of this forum main page. See you there!
#4197321 - 11/21/15 11:34 PM Re: Which sim and why? [Re: - Ice]  
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,000
bonchie Offline
Member
bonchie  Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,000
People have been saying XP10 is the future for years.

It's not, mainly because the developers simply don't care about many of the things simmers find necessary. FSX's feature set has spoiled people and now P3D has done some great things with lighting and shadows to add to it.

#4197368 - 11/22/15 01:29 AM Re: Which sim and why? [Re: - Ice]  
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,939
Scoobe Offline
Senior Member
Scoobe  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,939
Two years ago, I would say there were a ton of things missing from XP that FSX and P3d had over it. That list has gotten considerably smaller. As of right now, there are still a few things that FSX\P3d do better.

1. Lack of Seasonal textures in XP (Rumors have it this is very close to happening, but I'm not sure who is working on it) Not a big deal for me, I also use only summer in FSX as its the only season that looks good to me.

2. Ai traffic. Default XP ai is horrible so I turn it off. There is an addon that adds Ai traffic, and does it with zero frame rate hit, but its not the fire and forget addon that FSX enjoys. It takes a lot of work to set it up and working. The developer is currently working on it, and I am confident this will become a great addon for X-plane, but its not there yet.

3. ATC. It works sort of but not really in X-plane. Default FSX atc is not great either, but much better than default XP atc. Radar contact is a must have addon for both, although it just does IFR. Still, it works great in X-plane and when I'm in the mood for ATC, that's what I use. Same with FSX. I'm not sure if this will ever get the attention it deserves for X-plane, other than getting radar contact to work with it.

Other than these items, X-plane graphically has surpassed FSX and P3d, if you have a beefy video card and take the time to set it up correctly. I get much better frame rates in XP the scenery never gets blurry or out of focus. The mesh is amazingly better looking. I don't get pauses or OOM errors. It just works.

Some people say XP has better flight models. I disagree with that statement. It all depends on the developer. Some XP aircraft fly amazing, some are crap. Same for FSX/P3d. If the author of the plane knows how to get the most out of that particular, platform, it will be amazing. If not, it flies like crap. The A2A cub, was and still is to me the best I've seen in a computer flight simulation. I've had a few in XP that have come very close, but that one is still my favorite, it just felt so right. Its the only reason I still keep FSX installed.

I do believe XP is the future, but I understand peoples reluctance to jump to another platform after spending a lot on FSX/P3d. The bright side is, you can run both on the same computer. No problems there.

Rob

Last edited by Scoobe; 11/22/15 01:30 AM.

Intel Core i7-3770K
GB (4 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 2000 (PC3 16000)
MSI GTX 960 GTX 4GB
#4197857 - 11/23/15 11:46 AM Re: Which sim and why? [Re: - Ice]  
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 9,710
Legend Offline
Legsie is such a
Legend  Offline
Legsie is such a
Hotshot

Joined: May 2000
Posts: 9,710
Zutphen, NL / ShangHai, China
Scoobe, one other point I've heard is that XP airports are all generic (runways are correct of course), but in FSX/{3D many airports are much more detailed. What's your feeling on that?

Personally I've switched from P3D 2.5 to FSX:SE recently. The Steam version has reduced the CTDs compared to the original FSX, and feels smoother. Plus, it allows me to use more add-ons than P3D (including AES).


There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the universe is for it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more inexplicable.
There is another theory which states that this has already happened.
#4198146 - 11/23/15 08:40 PM Re: Which sim and why? [Re: - Ice]  
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,939
Scoobe Offline
Senior Member
Scoobe  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,939
As for the generic airports in XP, they are adding more and more detailed airport scenery in X-plane within some of the updates through the "X-plane scenery gateway". Its kind of like crowd sourcing scenery. Quite a few are populated now and along with lots of freeware airports I've downloaded off of X-plane.org, plus some payware airports, There are not many airports left that are not populated. My XP directory is over 500GB now and growing. http://www.x-plane.com/2015/11/world-class-airports-coming-in-x-plane-10-45/

Most of these airports are created with "WED" and various free libraries available online. "WED" is a scenery creation program you download for free from X-planes website. You point and click to place objects (buildings, planes, fences trees, grass etc..) around the airport to make it as detailed as you want. Its very easy. For example, you can pick a terminal building out off a library of 20 or 30 buildings and pick the ones that match as close as possible to the airport you are doing. When done, you can upload it to X-planes site and if approved, it will appear in a future update. or you can upload it to X-plane.org or some other site for people to download. But if your not into making stuff, no proplem, there are tons of airports alreay created and if your is not, its easy to make it.

Some people start from scratch, and rather than use a stock building or object, they build a custom one that looks exactly like the real one using sketch-up. Its more time consuming, but you can make an exact replica of anything, you just need pics for reference.

The default X-plane airports, that have been worked on so far, have exceded what the default FSX airports look like. In FSX you get a few generic buildings that are placed in approximate positions, but like autogen, don't really look anything like it looks in real life. In X-plane, (although not all airports have been done yet), they look a lot close to the real thing, and in some cases, where custom objects were created, they are as good as any payware. In-fact, i don't buy too many payware airports anymore for x-plane, because the free stuff is in most cases, just as good or better. I've even deleted a payware airport I had, because the freeware one blew it away.

A few months ago, I got together with a guy on an X-plane.org site to create a rendition of Republic Airport in Farmingdale LI. We had both learned to fly there and we both still do. He had made some great custom buildings and objects, including the shopping center next to the airport and I populated it with planes and other objects including volumetric grass, tress, etc. It can out excellent, and is easy on the FPS, but its still a work in progress. He even created the Northport stacks, A reporting point when approaching the airport from the northeast.

Rob

























The real thing:





Last edited by Scoobe; 11/23/15 08:42 PM.

Intel Core i7-3770K
GB (4 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 2000 (PC3 16000)
MSI GTX 960 GTX 4GB
#4199055 - 11/25/15 05:56 PM Re: Which sim and why? [Re: Scoobe]  
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 22,854
Rick.50cal Offline
Lifer
Rick.50cal  Offline
Lifer

Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 22,854
Originally Posted By: Scoobe

3. ATC. It works sort of but not really in X-plane. Default FSX atc is not great either, but much better than default XP atc. Radar contact is a must have addon for both, although it just does IFR. Still, it works great in X-plane and when I'm in the mood for ATC, that's what I use. Same with FSX. I'm not sure if this will ever get the attention it deserves for X-plane, other than getting radar contact to work with it.



There is an equivalent of Vatsim for xplane, so you have real live humans telling you where to go.



Originally Posted By: Scoobe

Some people say XP has better flight models. I disagree with that statement. It all depends on the developer. Some XP aircraft fly amazing, some are crap. Same for FSX/P3d. If the author of the plane knows how to get the most out of that particular, platform, it will be amazing. If not, it flies like crap. The A2A cub, was and still is to me the best I've seen in a computer flight simulation. I've had a few in XP that have come very close, but that one is still my favorite, it just felt so right. Its the only reason I still keep FSX installed.



I haven't tried them, but some people feel that Carenado's planes fly just a bit nicer in Xplane than FSX. But that seems difficult to quantify and purely subjective.



Originally Posted By: Scoobe

I do believe XP is the future, but I understand peoples reluctance to jump to another platform after spending a lot on FSX/P3d. The bright side is, you can run both on the same computer. No problems there.
Rob



Agreed. And that's why I say FSX is still the present, because it still chugs along, has mountains of addons.

But it has limits. Lots of people complaining of program crashing (stability issues). This is where P3D seems to shine.

Plus no more than 4 gigs of RAM are being used, the program will just ignore the additional hardware.

So both those issues seem limiting for the future. I think this is why virtual pilots are taking to xplane at an accelerating rate. But FSX has such a massive head start that it could be 2020 before there is a tipping point. And even that might only happen if MS doesn't introduce a new flying product, since they are so far ahead on name recognition and distribution, marketing.

As the next few years go by, I expect more high quality payware planes to become a factor too.


POLITICS, WAR, ECONOMY, CONTROVERSY! and other heated discussions and debates in the PWEC sub-forum at the bottom of this forum main page. See you there!
#4199203 - 11/26/15 12:11 AM Re: Which sim and why? [Re: - Ice]  
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 313
robmypro Offline
Member
robmypro  Offline
Member

Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 313
People are complaining in P3D v3 as well, but the OOM crashes are harder to get than they were. But it is still 32 bit code.

#4199784 - 11/27/15 01:43 PM Re: Which sim and why? [Re: - Ice]  
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 22,854
Rick.50cal Offline
Lifer
Rick.50cal  Offline
Lifer

Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 22,854

Does MS have plans for a next gen flying simulation? Has anyone heard anything?

I mean, Flight bombed. MS Combat Flight Simulator... I think that's been abandoned. FSX is still sold... is there a replacement/sequel being considered?

Prepar3d may be sorta seen as a "sequel" of sorts, but is that really true? Seems more an incremental improvement for a big price jump.


POLITICS, WAR, ECONOMY, CONTROVERSY! and other heated discussions and debates in the PWEC sub-forum at the bottom of this forum main page. See you there!
#4199793 - 11/27/15 02:03 PM Re: Which sim and why? [Re: Rick.50cal]  
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,000
bonchie Offline
Member
bonchie  Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,000
Originally Posted By: Rick.50cal

Does MS have plans for a next gen flying simulation? Has anyone heard anything?

I mean, Flight bombed. MS Combat Flight Simulator... I think that's been abandoned. FSX is still sold... is there a replacement/sequel being considered?

Prepar3d may be sorta seen as a "sequel" of sorts, but is that really true? Seems more an incremental improvement for a big price jump.


No, MS does not. Dovetail, which bought the rights to the FSX/Flight engine (depending on who you ask) are making a new sim. My personal belief is that it'll likely be limited in scope and expanded via DLC vs. a true, full feature new worldwide simulator. But I could be wrong.

P3D on the other hand has a lot of myths surrounding it.

1) It's not that expensive. $60 + you can return it for a full refund if you want.

2) It's not a small incremental improvement. With the release of v3.0, I'd say it's about like the jump from FS9-FSX. There are lots of graphical things added, mainly lighting and shadows. Memory management has been greatly improved in v3.0 (the A#1 complaint about FSX) along with performance. And there's a ton going on new under the hood dealing with other nagging issues as well. At the end of the day FS9 didn't "look" that much different then FSX, but FSX had improved on a ton of stuff, some not readily apparent until addon developers caught up years later. There's a lot for addon developers to build on with P3D 3.0.

It's not perfect, but it's worth $60, especially since most FSX enthusiasts have no problem dropping that much or more on a single airplane.

But, if you do try it, have a good GFX card. IMO, anything under 4GB is a waste of time, although some people make it work.

#4199801 - 11/27/15 02:35 PM Re: Which sim and why? [Re: - Ice]  
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,561
oldpop Offline
Pop
oldpop  Offline
Pop
Member

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,561
PENSACOLA Fl USA
our Wing vcw-9, switched over to P3D some time back. We are now in 2.5. I'll say without a doubt that it is much more stable than FSX. Recently we began using the "ingame comms", with not FPS hits at all. We fly (mostly) the VRS FA18E. With a GTX560 I get 30+ FPS with almost Max settings. Very happy with it and waiting for VRS to move up to 3.0.:)


Pop
#4199908 - 11/27/15 08:47 PM Re: Which sim and why? [Re: - Ice]  
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 313
robmypro Offline
Member
robmypro  Offline
Member

Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 313
Steam 50% off. XP 10. Fyi.

Last edited by robmypro; 11/27/15 08:48 PM.

Moderated by  RacerGT 

Quick Search
Recent Articles
Support SimHQ

If you shop on Amazon use this Amazon link to support SimHQ
.
Social


Recent Topics
Carnival Cruise Ship Fire....... Again
by F4UDash4. 03/26/24 05:58 PM
Baltimore Bridge Collapse
by F4UDash4. 03/26/24 05:51 PM
The Oldest WWII Veterans
by F4UDash4. 03/24/24 09:21 PM
They got fired after this.
by Wigean. 03/20/24 08:19 PM
Grown ups joke time
by NoFlyBoy. 03/18/24 10:34 PM
Anyone Heard from Nimits?
by F4UDash4. 03/18/24 10:01 PM
RIP Gemini/Apollo astronaut Tom Stafford
by semmern. 03/18/24 02:14 PM
10 years after 3/8/2014
by NoFlyBoy. 03/17/24 10:25 AM
Copyright 1997-2016, SimHQ Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0