• Which the release of FS2020 we see an explosition of activity on the forun and of course we are very happy to see this. But having all questions about FS2020 in one forum becomes a bit messy. So therefore we would like to ask you all to use the following guidelines when posting your questions:

    • Tag FS2020 specific questions with the MSFS2020 tag.
    • Questions about making 3D assets can be posted in the 3D asset design forum. Either post them in the subforum of the modelling tool you use or in the general forum if they are general.
    • Questions about aircraft design can be posted in the Aircraft design forum
    • Questions about airport design can be posted in the FS2020 airport design forum. Once airport development tools have been updated for FS2020 you can post tool speciifc questions in the subforums of those tools as well of course.
    • Questions about terrain design can be posted in the FS2020 terrain design forum.
    • Questions about SimConnect can be posted in the SimConnect forum.

    Any other question that is not specific to an aspect of development or tool can be posted in the General chat forum.

    By following these guidelines we make sure that the forums remain easy to read for everybody and also that the right people can find your post to answer it.

Prepar3d - Simply Stunning (HD)

Looks great! What are the differences in performance, looks, and usage from FSX? Many of us are trying to get a sense of the product and whether we should get a license and get started so words of encouragement from early adopters would be very welcome. Also, what is your thoughts on loading current FSX scenery for testing?

Thanks much
Dave
 
Sorry, already asked and answered - but please keep reporting your evaluations!

Thanks much
 
Hey Dave,

In my experience the shaders have been totally overhauled and overall the performance seems better than FSX. I get stutters and occasion frame rate drops in FSX with the same scenery and settings, whereas P3D I'm able to lock in at 24fps on a 1920x1080 HD monitor.

In terms of usage, currently the UI is undergoing work so no intial screen, it loads straight into a flight. Real world weather is not yet implemented but is in process. The "multi-player" system is also being overhauled and right now only supports peer to peer connections.

Loading in scenery and simobjects are as simple as FSX.

There's a few planes missing compared to FSX, I've been able to port most of mine in, except the 3rd party ones that require simconnect modules to be installed.

Cheers,
Dean.
 
Hey Dave,

In my experience the shaders have been totally overhauled and overall the performance seems better than FSX. I get stutters and occasion frame rate drops in FSX with the same scenery and settings, whereas P3D I'm able to lock in at 24fps on a 1920x1080 HD monitor.

Cheers,
Dean.

So, if better SHADERS make so much difference, then, there would appear to be plenty of POTENTIAL to improve FSX, by using "BETTER" Shaders.

Discarding the Obvious for copyright/licencing reasons (copy P3D Sharders to FSX), which also has potential technical issues of matching & compatabily, it should be possible to make much BETTER shaders for FSX ... since Lockheed can do it, then they have shown that it can be done.

$64,000 Queston is what changes have Lockheed done to make the shaders cause such a significant improvement in the visuals ??

It looks that of all things one could do to Improve current FSX, better shaders might be the biggest Bang for your Buck.

I expect therfore to see "Improved Shader Addons" come spewing out from FSX developers in 2011 !!! Easy Money !! lol

Geoff
 
...have you tested the shaders in FSX?

Well --- I suspect, "IF" I did, I would find that FSX crashes, because the P3D Shaders would not be fully Compatible FSX. :eek:

That being said, there seems to have been some significant improvements a nd updates in the shader code, that would work in FSX, if the actual FSX Shaders were further developed in the same way that was done in P3D. :D

Geoff
 
May look stunning.
£500? NO WAY!
Not worth a tiny penny more than FSX

That depends entirely on how one wishes to use it, to be honest. Prepar3D offers far, far more than just what one sees on the surface. It fully supports many features that are absolutely required for a commercial level simulator, but have zero usefulness for a entertainment product, such as:

IR Sensor View
Multi-Channel
The Multi-Channel capability allows the user to add additional displays while maintaining system performance. This is accomplished by sharing the rendering process across multiple computers in a synchronized fashion. Since the systems are synchronized, the overall frame rate for the simulation is determined by the slowest or most computationally bound computer.

Multi-channel systems can be composed of multiple flat panel displays or a series of projectors in conjunction with a dome surface. For high end systems, an additional hardware gen-lock capability can be used to provide more accurate synchronization.

Regardless of the system configuration, the maximum number of supported channels is 100.
 
Actually I'd love to have render to texture and IR sensor in FSX. It would be possible to make a LITENING targeting pod, or Maverick live feed.

I've seen Osprey simulation based on Prepar3d on one Lockheed Martin video, with in-air refuelling, I'd play that too.
 
May look stunning.
£500? NO WAY!
Not worth a tiny penny more than FSX

US$499 is not the same as £500 and yes that would be a lot. In fact that price, £500, is closer to the Microsoft ESP cost, but not Prepar3D. In any case you can join the developer network for 9.95 per month and get two copies of Prepar3D. There are no licensing restrictions and I assume that as a member of FSDeveloper you would be in that category of developer anyway.

BTW, version 1.1 of Prepar3D has been announced:

http://www.prepar3d.com/2011/03/08/prepar3d-1-1-release-update/

I guess 1.1 of FSX will be coming out soon.... :p
 
Back
Top