Jump to content

Excellent news about A320Neo and Concorde for P3D first - THANK YOU!


Rob Ainscough

Recommended Posts

Rob Ainscough

Glad to see your team is growing.

Couldn't care less about MSFS ... after taking off in the handicapped PMDG 737 out of PDX and flying over Portland in MSFS these SU updates just seem to keep making MSFS worse and worse ... it's frankly just garbage graphics in MSFS (even more so when Photogrammetry is enabled, OMG what a mess).  I just don't get how MSFS fans can turn a blind eye to these obvious issues in MSFS:

uc?export=view&id=1q5Zy4TXRJ8sIAurRwThQg

Wall of bridges in Portland?

uc?export=view&id=14nN-a6hr4EjZNzieYTwti

Water looks horrible with obvious gaps in tiling.

IMG_41172.thumb.jpg.7700cab301b8e7e64174f328df1d4329.jpg

Buildings with water roof tops?

Shoreline shadows that chase over the water?

Grainy clouds that are over done with shadows and strange puffy formations and clouds that are just white blob reflections on water?  

And the list of visual problems with MSFS goes on and on ... I just don't get the attraction let alone understand how MSFS users just ignore these problems?  When P3D has visual problems (and it does) the world is coming to an end, but when MSFS has even worse visual problems all is good??

MSFS is "next generation" ... 2 years of updates and still has significant problems.  Maybe in 10 years by the time I retire it will be fixed?

Thank you for taking care of your P3D customer base first, appreciated.

Rob.

 

 

 

  • Like 19
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Eric Fisher

I'm hoping the A330 is coming to P3D. That was not addressed in the announcement even though he spoke of the NEO coming to P3D. 

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Rob Ainscough
28 minutes ago, Alex Pugh said:

That’s a lot of salt. 

Gotta get rid of the bad taste somehow ... only took me 2 minutes to ruin my steak.

Link to comment
Jose Rodrigues

There is a lot of fanboyism towards MSFS. I don't know if it has to do with the age or the characteristics of the target audience but just yesterday I saw someone in another forum being completely mocked by several idiots just for wishing to have a quality addon (study level). "why? we don't need that!"

In the end I remembered my FS9 and FSX days when I used to fly using NAV/GPS... bingo! I think many, many people are still in that phase.

PS: being completely honest I know that if it wasn't for the amount of money invested in the P3D platform and the quality of the addons I have I would have migrated like many did... but damn, I'm glad I don't need to migrate because I have everything I need! I don't know how it is with the fanboys but I speak for myself...

PPS: sorry for the grammar.

  • Like 14
Link to comment
Richard McDonald Woods

@Rob. I was surprised that you are so negative about MSFS :o

Link to comment
Rob Ainscough
4 hours ago, Richard McDonald Woods said:

@Rob. I was surprised that you are so negative about MSFS :o

I'm being realistic ... are you suggesting those screenshots look good to you?  The only way they look good to me is if I do indeed rub some "salt" in my eyes.

I guess I'm surprise people are so positive when MSFS has some really obvious flaws.  I'll take P3D visual glitches any day vs. MSFS walled bridges and water roof tops ... it's not like I was "searching" for MSFS issues, enable Photogrammetry (a major selling point for MSFS), takeoff from PDX (my home airport) and fly over Portland (and that is with all my settings at Ultra or max in MSFS).  How do people NOT ignore P3D visual issues but DO ignore the MSFS ones?  I can turn Photogrammetry off, but then I get skyscraper buildings in place of radio towers ... fly around San Francisco, Sutro tower is a giant skyscraper, I pointed out to MSFS over 2 years ago and still the issue is present today.

I'm guessing the answer to MSFS popularity is that it provides more for free out of the box, and "free" is the key.  It takes some investment to make P3D look better than MSFS.  I can't fix the Photogrammetry issues with MSFS, I can fix graphical issues in P3D.

I installed the PMDG 737 in MSFS and was VERY disappointed, it was NOT progress, not even "on par" with the P3D version.

I see a ton of user optimism for MSFS, but none for P3D ... yet MSFS is over 2 years in for us early BETA users and I'm just NOT seeing the progress, DX12 implementation is a performance joke, a long list of graphics problems.  So you tell me Richard, why?

Cheers, Rob.

 

  • Like 11
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Ivan Majetic

Finally someone who has a high reputation in flight sim community said the sad truth about MSFS. 

  • Like 10
Link to comment
Ross McDonagh
9 hours ago, Jose Rodrigues said:

I don't know if it has to do with the age or the characteristics of the target audience but just yesterday I saw someone in another forum being completely mocked by several idiots just for wishing to have a quality addon (study level). "why? we don't need that!"

Yes, a lot of it does.  The rest of it is the “but it’s so beautiful” crowd.  But meanwhile @Rob Ainscoughvery clearly points out the visual flaws-to which the fanboy replies would be “dude you’re old”  A lot of the MSFS crowd have been extremely disrespectful to long time simmers like myself and @David Grayon fb posts and elsewhere on the FS inter webs. 
 

As for the new products-I for one am hoping the A330 comes first tho it seems it won’t.  We’ve got plenty of narrow bodies to fly.  The flight sim world desperately needs an FSL quality A330 with all the variants.  

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Alex Pugh
4 hours ago, Rob Ainscough said:

How do people NOT ignore P3D visual issues but DO ignore the MSFS ones?

I don't really see MSFS users ignoring the issues you've pointed out. They've been talked about to death. On the whole, MSFS has advanced graphical fidelity in flight sims, warts and all. Let me repeat a key phrase: on the whole. Yes, it has it's flaws, but that out-of-the-box experience matters to consumers, and you'd be hard pressed to convince them with two side-by-side images of default installs of MSFS and P3D that the latter is superior. That's not me talking, that's the market. 

 

4 hours ago, Rob Ainscough said:

 I can't fix the Photogrammetry issues with MSFS, I can fix graphical issues in P3D.

Some things, sure. But what about TrueSky? Even with MSFS' volcanic-ash clouds (which are getting better, thankfully), it's a generational leap ahead of every other sim. Same thing with lighting. MSFS is way ahead of P3D. I don't see anyone fixing that. 

Oh and btw it took me 5 seconds to search for a freeware fix for bridges it Portland:

https://flightsim.to/file/2374/portland-or-bridges

4 hours ago, Rob Ainscough said:

I installed the PMDG 737 in MSFS and was VERY disappointed, it was NOT progress, not even "on par" with the P3D version.

Again, on the whole it's a step forward and it'll only get better assuming Asobo follows through on things like the WXR API, fixing limitations of C++/WASM add-ons, etc. The VC is a massive improvement over the P3D version, and it'd be impossible to get something that high fidelity in P3D without tanking frames, massive stutters, or running out of VRAM and getting that lovely DXGI error.

 

4 hours ago, Rob Ainscough said:

I see a ton of user optimism for MSFS, but none for P3D ... 

Because they see MSFS getting world and sim updates 4 or 5 times a year. There's a roadmap. There are Twitch streams with the devs. With LM, you get silence and weak-tea updates every 5 or 6 months. 

I say all of this knowing I'll continue to use both MSFS and P3D for the foreseeable future. They both have their pros and cons, with P3D's biggest strength is being way more open and less sandboxed than MSFS at the moment. 

  • Like 15
Link to comment
Jose Rodrigues
2 hours ago, Alex Pugh said:

Because they see MSFS getting world and sim updates 4 or 5 times a year. There's a roadmap. There are Twitch streams with the devs. With LM, you get silence and weak-tea updates every 5 or 6 months.

True.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
David Porrett

Well, I've got to say I'm trying to love MSFS but it's not doing it for me.

Link to comment
Rob Ainscough
4 hours ago, Alex Pugh said:

MSFS has advanced graphical fidelity

DX11 is not more advanced than DX12 with ray tracing support.  Have you tried DX12 in MSFS, it's a horrible performance experience with no added visual benefit, it was tossed out there to check a box rather than to provide a useful feature for users.

4 hours ago, Alex Pugh said:

Oh and btw it took me 5 seconds to search for a freeware fix for bridges it Portland

Nice fix, but there are many more examples in other areas of this problem?

On a "whole" MSFS is not a step forward and although it gets a lot more PR, the updates often break more than they try to fix and long standing problems remain untouched.

I'll disagree on the MSFS VC being an improvement (especially reflections in cockpit windows and watching the shadows "paint" as you fly).  IF you compare a high resolution textured P3D PBR VC to an MSFS PBR VC they are very similar (not enough of a difference to matter) ... but again the point is I'm not looking for a trade-off replacement simulator, I'm looking for a better simulator and MSFS isn't accomplishing that nor checking the right boxes for me.

MSFS controls performance by controlling the LoDRadius?  When I fly real world, I can see building/structures more than 4-5 miles away ... have you tried adjusting the LoDRadius of MSFS manually to go beyond that 4-5 mile radius?  I have, performance drops drastically (7-14 FPS) and that's just to "try" and get close to the same LoDRadius I get in P3D at 40-70 FPS.  This IS a big issue for me and I pointed it out in the early MSFS beta pre-release.  It's on the MSFS road map as "investigating" ... some 2 years later.  The grainy compression and/or low quality shader implementation of MSFS graphics is horrible, again more graphics compromises to keep FPS up.

I use MSFS also, fire it up, install and updates, wait 10+ minutes for PMDG 737 to load (fear how much longer more complex aircraft will take to load like FSL A320 in MSFS, 20 minutes, 30 minutes??).  People complaining of long load times in P3D seem perfectly happy waiting for even LONGER times in MSFS.  But I think as "whole" I need something more than a lateral shift of "pros and cons" to get me motivated to fully transition to MSFS.

I'm not going to predict the future because I know how Microsoft operate (worked with their technologies for over 30 years), when they're done with something, they're done, thanks for all support but we couldn't care less now (MS Flight, FSX, and a slew of other software development technologies that have come and gone).  

IMHO, given the size of the flight simulator market (yes it's still niche even with MSFS) it would have been a better for someone like Microsoft approach Austin (XP), approach Lockheed Martin, and see if they wanted to work on a joint venture ... this would have truly "served" end users at all levels and benefit everyone.  Instead, Microsoft tried the strong arm approach, SSDD from MS.

I'll keep trying MSFS, but P3D is still being developed and progressing (slowly), XP is still being developed with XP12, and something else ??  ;)  Everyone re-inventing the same wheel but with their on set of Pro's and Con's.  Unity and cooperation between the major vendors would have been more appropriate for such a niche market.

Rob.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Thierry Nguepdjo

I've only recently (in the last two weeks) started to shift over from P3D to MSFS now that higher fidelity aircraft are beginning to appear. Rob pointed out some of the visual issues with MSFS. That said, in my opinion, there is no arguing that overall, the visuals are far far better than P3D. That seems pretty basic to me.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
David Porrett

What concerns me is that the developers use a voting system for issues or new features - if it is going to be a serious sim then they should be addressing issues important for that goal - not necessarily what fad gamers think is important..

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Vimal Anandharaman

Regarding load times, as mentioned probably a thousand times by various developers, the first load in for the aircraft will always be long. After that any subsequent load ins are amusingly quick ( for me at least). 
 

Also even non photogrammetry cities looks far better in MSFS than any default cities in P3D. Yes P3D has its moments, but I cannot match up its visuals to MSFS. Of course MSFS has it issues, no one is denying that but I feel it’s pros outweigh its cons greatly. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Jean-Claude Bailly

Some posters here would be well inclined to remember this short sentence: "All what is excessive is insignificant" (Charles-Maurice de Talleyrand-Perigord 18th Century).

It summarises pretty well this stupid "war of sims" and the excessive praising and criticisms thrown without any regard to objectivity and respect, as if the work done by many developers on both platforms was to be blamed simply because they accept to work on - or prioritise - P3D or MSFS (or even X Plane) instead of focusing on the one "I" prefer!

It is also good to remember some developers complaining bitterly a year ago (and creating threads on several fora to defend their point) about Asobo/Microsoft for not cooperating with them so that they may adapt their product to the new platform making it "impossible" to provide such product, only to realise a few months later that this very product was (better) developed by an unknown entity able to circumvent the said obstacles...

Let's keep an open humble mind and some control over our feelings and opinions, this is only a hobby. We have enough stupid wars in the real world! We need peace in our leisure time.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Rob Ainscough

Jean-Claude,

I don't remember that sentence and if I did, I wouldn't agree with it when it comes to "simulation" ... you've place your statement out of context and I have no idea what it has to do with those images and issues I listed?  No "feelings" involved, just the reality of said problems ... no war also.

In the meantime I enjoyed this little loop in P3D just for fun, nothing planned or setup.

TruSky clouds look great, cloud reflections work correctly, terrain shadows rendering correctly, performance excellent, LoDRadius perfect ... a little too much haze for my taste, but no significant surprises.

My mind is open, but MSFS isn't showing me the way forward 2+ years later.

Cheers, Rob.

Link to comment
Sam Kharey

Just upgraded to P3D v5 (from 4.5) in anticipation for Concorde. So much visual improvement and it's a robust, solid, well-supported sim, despite its flaws. I think FSLabs made the right choice to continue to support P3D.

 

Sam Kharey

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Jean-Claude Bailly

A historic quotation is - by definition - always out of context! For the rest, I leave it to your own analysis.

Link to comment
Jose Rodrigues

What? wait ten, twenty... thirty minutes just to "open" the plane?!? sorry, but no.

I don't know how the.... target audience doesn't complain about it, and knowing what hormones and fanboyism are like, it doesn't give up halfway through "loading".

I repeat, for me it would be a giant no-no.

PS: another issue is (still) no historic weather.

Link to comment
Alex Pugh
11 minutes ago, Jose Rodrigues said:

What? wait ten, twenty... thirty minutes just to "open" the plane?!? sorry, but no.

I don't know how the.... target audience doesn't complain about it, and knowing what hormones and fanboyism are like, it doesn't give up halfway through "loading".

I repeat, for me it would be a giant no-no.

PS: another issue is (still) no historic weather.

…only on the first load or after an update. It’s really not that big of a deal. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Aaron Brand
48 minutes ago, Alex Pugh said:

…only on the first load or after an update. It’s really not that big of a deal.

For you maybe....

Link to comment
stephen speak

The sad truth of it all is many developers are abandoning P3D in their droves for msfs..what to me is a game..not a sim..you can’t put P3D on a games console..so to me there’s a difference..uk2000 have stopped developing P3D..so basically have abandoned the people who paid for their products so they could further develop them..I hope I’m right and FSLabs don’t go down that route and abandon serious simmers in favour of gamers..I know it’s a contentious subject but that’s how I see it..and I’ve been simming since fs98..so seen this develop into what it is now 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Jose Rodrigues

It is normal for everyone to rush out to conquer a new and virgin territory like MSFS. Even "companies" with strange names have appeared....

What is not normal (and I have taken notes for the future) was to abandon customers of another platform. But as I say, I took notes. Not another dollar from me!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Danny Moore
It is normal for everyone to rush out to conquer a new and virgin territory like MSFS. Even "companies" with strange names have appeared....
What is not normal (and I have taken notes for the future) was to abandon customers of another platform. But as I say, I took notes. Not another dollar from me!

Every developer was a stranger when they first came out. Competition is a good things as it brings out new innovations to the community. As far as not spending another dollar on those who left P3D. Then where do you plan to buy your scenery, aircraft and utilities from if P3Dv6 is released? Maybe from a stranger? What is wrong with this community is people are so one sided. Here’s a little secret. Your allowed to use both sims and enjoy what each has to offer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Daniel Glover

There are some very interesting opinions in here. As always, to each there own. People use flight sim for various different reasons. I use it for fun and for brushing up on my procedural instrument skills. Initially it was P3D, then P3D + XP, then P3D + XP + MFS and the evolution of the platforms I use has continued and now I use just one once more.

Back to some resemblance of the actual topic, I am looking forward very much so to what FSL can do with theA330, unfortunately I will not be picking up the P3D version since that boat has sailed but I will watch further development closely since I know that FSL has somewhat of a knack if you will for producing very nice aircraft.

Link to comment
Jose Rodrigues
3 hours ago, Danny Moore said:

Then where do you plan to buy your scenery, aircraft and utilities from if P3Dv6 is released?

From none of them because they "abandoned the platform".

PS: and thats a BIG problem with v6. v5.3 may be my last P3D!

Link to comment
Bob Zolto

As far as developers "abandoning" P3d, MSFS is where the money is right now.  Free upgrades to aircraft and airports in P32d are just that "free."  Developing and selling  for MSFS and its thousands of newbies to simming is the golden goose right now.  In time, and probably, not that far away, many of those newbies will drift away to the latest new shooter and consequently, developing will slow. I wonder who many who have purchased the PMDG 737 are daunted by the complexity.

Link to comment
Rob Ainscough
6 hours ago, Danny Moore said:

Then where do you plan to buy your scenery, aircraft and utilities from if P3Dv6 is released?

I bought 12 new Airports under the ORBX distribution umbrella ... Digital Design, MK-Studio, FlyTampa, and several others just recently because they have PBR support, DL, sloped runway and taxiway, material scripting support and more.  I got the iFly 737Ng updates with PBR support again for P3D.  I also bought the PBR plus update for Majestic Q400.  FSLabs has continued to update their product line for P3D and will be releasing new products in P3D first.  Even A2A have done a PBR update.  There are plenty of new P3D products coming out, but I guess if you are only consumed by MSFS then you wouldn't know.  There are definitely some "questionable" quality products coming out for P3D, but same goes with MSFS.

Seems to me SimMarket has a very long list of new products for P3D V5.

If people think I'm salty for MSFS, then perhaps look in the mirror and see how peppery you are for P3D :)   If there is any salt to be had here from some of the posts it would seem to be related to MSFS being 2nd on the list for aircraft availability.

Cheers, Rob.

Link to comment
Rob Ainscough
8 hours ago, Alex Pugh said:

only on the first load or after an update. It’s really not that big of a deal.

Then something isn't working right for me ... 2nd, 3rd, 4th loads I'm still waiting 10 minutes ... I'll open up a ticket with PMDG.  BUT, I'm guessing the 10 minute wait is because PMDG are building up all the necessary nav data because Asobo/SDK haven't provided what they need?  I'm assuming if new airports are added then the process will need to run again (long scan of files and building a database)?

Does WASM C++ support Parallel.For to handle threaded processing across multiple cores or does one need to go thru threading hoops under WASM?  If not, might explain the long wait when loading PMDG 737.

Cheers, Rob.

Link to comment
David Murden

Hi Rob,

I added a new airport only today LIME and after the first load of the PMDG (around 4 mins) its loaded as fast as any aircraft since. Also after the same after a new airport is added. 

The housers in the water came with the airport, the developer has never fixed it. Ive never seen Porland look that bad.

Glad your still enjoying P3D.

All the best

Dave.

Link to comment
Rob Ainscough

If I enable Photogrammetry many cities or locations with bridges look that bad ... Portland just happened to be my home town.  I have both Steam version and MS Store version and they both produce the same results, I was using Mir's PDX but that area doesn't extend that far.

I'll submit a ticket to PMDG.

Unrelated, I'm building panels for the A32x series to replace GoFlight panels and/or other custom panels (all laser cut/engraved), if anyone is interested contact me (PM), they work for both P3D, XP, and MSFS  ;) 

Cheers, Rob.

EDIT: I can also do a very clean/clear backlighting option for those night flyers

 

Link to comment
Rob Ainscough

I stand corrected it was Bill W., published under Mir's Flightbeam Studios.

Cheers, Rob.

Link to comment
Robert Sutherland

Your simulator is not your football team. You can switch as and when you like. I believe there will be a time where MSFS is going to be the simulator to go with -- it might not be right now (at least in my opinion) but I see it as a platform that is maturing all the time and it'll be great to see FSL aircraft in it. 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Thierry Nguepdjo
16 hours ago, David Murden said:

The housers in the water came with the airport, the developer has never fixed it. Ive never seen Porland look that bad.

Glad your still enjoying P3D.

All the best

Dave.

Looks worse in real life...

 

16 hours ago, Rob Ainscough said:

 

If people think I'm salty for MSFS, then perhaps look in the mirror and see how peppery you are for P3D :)   If there is any salt to be had here from some of the posts it would seem to be related to MSFS being 2nd on the list for aircraft availability.

Cheers, Rob.

Rob, for what it's worth, you do come across as very negative to the new platform. And as someone who still has P3D (4.5) on my system and only recently started to migrate, I don't think I'm "peppery" towards it at all. Your remarks over the last two years or so regarding MSFS have come across a certain way to many people. It is what it is.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Rob Ainscough
4 hours ago, Thierry Nguepdjo said:

Rob, for what it's worth, you do come across as very negative to the new platform.

I could say the same about all the people who had/have valid complaints about P3D or XP.  There is a right and there is a wrong and there is a doesn't matter.  I've objectively pointed out many issues regarding MSFS from the initial Beta to now, just as I have over the many years with LM dev team (anyone on the Beta team(s) can confirm this).

Other than my error in PDX primary 3D modeler,  do you see anything not accurate?  I'm sure my remarks have come across a certain way, just as other's remarks have come across a certain way ... so long as the remarks are accurate I really don't see that anything other than "it is what it is".  The only "surprise" to me is the willingness of users to ignore all the MSFS problems, but not the P3D ones? 

I don't post to make people like what I say or agree with me (not my objective), I post as accurately as I can with my experience (and screenshots) and I'm not going to predict what MSFS may or may not fix or do, same for what LM may or may not do, same for what Austin may or may not do.

For some MSFS is a step forward, for my usage case MSFS is a step backwards hence why I'm glad FSLabs understand their is still a P3D market and that market is important to them ... you just aint' gonna sell tens of thousand $200+ aircraft on MSFS ... the base user size in this price range will not change because of a new platform.  So where is that remote CDU/EFB etc. functionality in MSFS (certainly not available in PMDG 737) ... see what I mean by a step backwards? 

I do see CONSIDERABLE inaccuracy when it comes to comments about P3D, but the majority here seem to agree with me on MSFS problems, problems that have persisted since MSFS initial Beta.

Cheers, Rob.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Danny Moore
22 hours ago, Rob Ainscough said:

I bought 12 new Airports under the ORBX distribution umbrella ... Digital Design, MK-Studio, FlyTampa, and several others just recently because they have PBR support, DL, sloped runway and taxiway, material scripting support and more.  I got the iFly 737Ng updates with PBR support again for P3D.  I also bought the PBR plus update for Majestic Q400.  FSLabs has continued to update their product line for P3D and will be releasing new products in P3D first.  Even A2A have done a PBR update.  There are plenty of new P3D products coming out, but I guess if you are only consumed by MSFS then you wouldn't know.  There are definitely some "questionable" quality products coming out for P3D, but same goes with MSFS.

Seems to me SimMarket has a very long list of new products for P3D V5.

If people think I'm salty for MSFS, then perhaps look in the mirror and see how peppery you are for P3D :)   If there is any salt to be had here from some of the posts it would seem to be related to MSFS being 2nd on the list for aircraft availability.

Cheers, Rob.

Don't know why you quoted me when I was responding to another users when he said he wasn't going to spend another dime on those who left P3D. I also said I support more than one sim. I made no reference to you being salty or said anything negative about P3D so I don't get this look in the mirror comment. 

Link to comment
Ray Proudfoot

I’ve been reluctant to buy MSFS ever since it came out nearly two years ago. My reasons are simple. It was in alpha for quite a long time during which many things were fixed or improved.

Then there was an announcement saying it was going to beta. Fine, I thought. They’re happy with things. It was only when it was made available for sale after just a few months of beta testing the alarm bells started ringing for me.

How could it be in beta for such a short time? Well the answer was perhaps LM announcing v5 of P3D. Maybe Microsoft wanted to jump the gun.

Part of my duties over at AvSim is monitoring the forums and it soon became clear all was not well. There were frequent major updates and some rushed hot fixes. Lots of complaints. Why weren’t these updates part of the beta program?

I came to the conclusion it had been rushed out. You don’t see comparable updates from LM. There tends to be around 4-5 updates over the 3-4 year life cycle of P3D with only an occasional hot fix.

Until these huge forced updates cease I will not entertain buying it. And when I do it will only be for low-level VFR flights which is where its scenery excels.

As a serious competitor to P3D it not even close in my opinion. I’m more interested in flying my aircraft than admiring the view.

And how much is there to view when you’re 11 miles up flying at Mach 2 over open ocean? :D

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Rob Ainscough
On 5/15/2022 at 3:16 AM, Danny Moore said:

Then where do you plan to buy your scenery, aircraft and utilities from if P3Dv6 is released? Maybe from a stranger?

I'm sorry, I misunderstood, I thought you were indicating there are no more P3D developers working on projects for P3D.

Cheers, Rob.

Link to comment
Ray Proudfoot

@Sam Kharey, you’ve laughed at my post. Why don’t you explain your reasons for doing that? If you disagree try being grown-up and explain what has amused you.

Are we not permitted to have reservations about MSFS?

Link to comment
Rob Ainscough
33 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

I’m more interested in flying my aircraft than admiring the view.

I don't think you'll find the view that admirable ... those screenshots I posted (via my iPhone  -- a normal screen capture would only make them look worse) are just scratching the surface of many other visual issues that still persist 2+ years later.  By the time MSFS catches up to P3D V5 feature set (assuming it does and we see multi-monitor and multi-channel support in the distant future), we'll be on P3D V8 and XP14 leverage all available hardware with no constraints to what the XBOX can do or not do.

Cheers, Rob.

Link to comment
  • Tom van der Elst locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...