45 minutes in P3D v4.3 with my new rig and that was all, for me AF2 is the future.

  • Let me explain myself, since a few day I am enjoying Palm Spring with AF2 like I could never do (at that time) with FSX.

    You need to understand one thing, any plane that I choose in AF2 doens't affect anything performance wise.


    Yesterday it was rainy and boring so I decided to open P3D V4.3 (fresh install) and set up my Saitek yoke..


    Open ORBX KSAN (because with my humble 2600K I could not run it with decent FPS-no stutter), my first reaction was: what is wrong with the color??? Everything look drab and dull... So I played with the setting with not much success.. I said ok it must be California that look like this.


    I also could run my Aerosoft CRJ with P3D V4 and my old CPU so finally I could.


    Before you think I am bashing other companies I DON'T, not my style, I have been a simmer for so many years and owned so many stuff with all those companies.

    Now read how I felt, the CRJ cockpit look like almost like an old FSX stock plane, nothing compare to any AF2 plane... well not that bad but... I paid quite some money for that addon that I have waited for so long to come out.

    After I took off FPS where fine in the 30-35 but when I came back to land in KSAN stutter began and FPS dropped a bit. Landing was way better with my new I5 8600K but not that fluid when you are use to AF2.

    With AF2 I can spend time exploring and flying compare to loosing time tweaking P3D V4.3. I can't believe that with a new rig I still have to tweak P3D V4.3

    I then went to Palm Spring in P3D V4.3 to have a real comparison.... it lasted about 5 minute. It look way more rich with AF2, way more fluid even if it's ok in P3D.


    So BRAVO to IPACS a BIG bravo


    Ben


    Note: Maybe it's my setting, drivers (I have all the latest) or something else that is wrong on my rig that P3D is looking that bad but what do I have to do to make it look good? Read 5 X 500 pages books???

    BennyBoy. I5 8600K @ 4,3ghz, 16 ram, GTX 1060 6G @ UW @2560 X 1080. Sim: AF2 & P3D V4

  • P3D has many great features that's lacking in Aerofly FS 2, but it's time to move on. I seriously doubt the dated engine has any room for improvement. It just can't handle the more advanced graphics and VR whatever overhaul they make. All the more reason why we must support FS 2. It's the only way into the future, at least for now.

  • Glad you are happy with AFS2. After logging more than 500 hours in the program I abandoned it in favour of my old FSX because of the features AFS2 still lacks. The immersion of road traffic, ATC, AI, and the A2A aircraft drew me back. IPACS, I share this only to offer a balanced view as a foil to the above posts, and to encourage you to press on full steam ahead to reach the potential that you clearly have.


    - Kenneth

  • I really think that having just 45 minutes with P3D will not give anyone a complete impression about that sim. Apart of it, selecting the Aerosoft's CRJ was not a clever choice, being the CRJ one of the most bashed releases of recent times, as everybody could check in the respective forums.

    I would suggest getting more experience with P3D using better addons (there're dozens or maybe hundreds!) and firing up real weather, a good AI Traffic both in the air and in the seas, a good ATC program (there're at least three good ones, apart of the default which is not too bad). And of course very nice airports with aircraft like the PMDG B737-B777-B747, Carenado's fleet, TFDi B717, MilViz's fleet including lots of nice choppers, A2A's fleet, Leonardo SH MD82, Coolsky DC9, and the count continues.

    Of course, you should also need to have a good knowledge of the few P3D tweaks needed to have an almost 100% fluid simulator even with those addons already mentioned.

    Glad to know people are still happy with AFS2, but certainly is a sim of the future, once it reaches more developed aircraft system complexity, real weather, etc., etc., but as of today, at present, it still lacks a lot of features.

    Hopefully IPACS gets encouraged to release, at the earliest, the full potential capabilities of AFS2.

    Cheers, Ed

    Windows 7 Ultimate x64 | i7-5820k | 32GB RAM | 3xSSD Samsung 1TB | MSI GTX 1080Ti Gaming X 11GB | LG 29UC97C UW Curved | Oculus Rift VR | TM FCS HOTAS // Gaming Laptop ASUS ROG Strix Scar II GL704GW | Windows 10 Home | i7-8750H | 32GB RAM | 2TB SSD + 2TB HDD | Nvidia RTX 2070 | TM FCS HOTAS

  • Hi,to be honest I keep going back to p3dv4 lately because in single pass rendering it looks pretty good in VR. Afs2 looks better, no doubt, but flying feels so alone and a bit sterile. Trying to landy a2a Cessna in a wind gust feels more alive and way more exciting.


    Afs2 is the sim of the future of course. Smooth, stable, easy controls setup. Love it. Developers are super friendly and professional..if just there was some exciting weather, that would make a huge difference!! Enough scenery add-ons for AFS2 now. Let's focus on weather!!



    Cheers

    Jozeff

  • I used to fly a lot in X-Plane11 and I realised that during the last months I have spent way more time in AF2. I think what I like the most -despite the awesome performance- is that is so quick to make flights! I make the planning and in 5min I'm flying. Then something come up and I don't have to quit the sim, I just can select the approach to the destination and complete my session.


    I'd love to have the ATC, vehicles and all that stuff too to increase the immersion, which is what I really like. But by now I'm quite happy being able to make quick flights.

  • I have also used FSX for many years and P3D for 2 and recently looked at FS 2. Both where very poor on FPS but not only that the home made photo scenery looked blurred. In FS 2 it looks incredibly crisp and clear and I can push the FPS to almost 200 although normally have it throttled back.


    Its the old saying, "If you always do what you've always done, you'll always get what you've always got".