Upgrading from FSX to FS 2020

[emerydc8]

Now that I have my 48" overhead touchscreen up and working, I think it's time to say goodbye to FSX. I haven't really paid attention to which interface program would work with FS 2020 or what kind of problems users are having with FS 2020. Any suggestion about how to get started on this would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.

Jon

[garys]

FS 2020 is still currently in Alpha testing so will not be released until later this year sometime.

Gary Oliver and Mark have expressed interest in building a bridge like they have for P3D. I'm hoping they will be able to accomplish this as MS 2020 will include a SDK and looks simply stunning. I have my fingers crossed that they are both part of the testing team and will be able to have the bridge built and ready to go on the day of release :-)

[cagarini]

Now that I have my 48" overhead touchscreen up and working, I think it's time to say goodbye to FSX. I haven't really paid attention to which interface program would work with FS 2020 or what kind of problems users are having with FS 2020. Any suggestion about how to get started on this would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.

Jon

Jon,

just a suggestion...

In the meanwhile, and as garys has stated, there's still quite a while before MFS get's released, I would suggest an experience with X-Plane 11.

I don't know if you own that simulator, but in the last years I have re-installed it a few times with the purpose of using it as a visuals generator for PSX.

XP11 is about to receive what appears to be a significative progress in terms of performance - Vulkan graphics.

XP11.50 should bring Vulkan, and I am waiting for that to decide if I should give it yet another try, while I do not invest on a 2nd machine to run PSX independently from the visuals generator.

Only problem is XView is rather outdated, hasn't received any upgrades. But it still works more or less fine.

X-Plane already has slopped runways and taxiways, that with the appropriate Mesh can plausibly replicate their RW conterparts ( unfortunately it doesn't allow to edit the mesh for a specific area like an airport ... ). It usually provides a smoother ride than P3D or FSX, and it's cheaper to mantain with lot's of freeware stuff for scenery. Airport database is also updated frequently, so you don't have to spend lot's of money buying airports that are represented in default P3D / FSX like they were in 2006...

[emerydc8]

Thanks for the information guys. I didn't realize that FS 2020 wasn't really out yet. I'm not picky when it comes to visuals, so maybe I should look into X-plane instead. The problem I'm having with FSX is that it seems to take up too much processing power and it crashes quite often. Between X-plane and P3D, which one would take less processing power? Which would be the easiest to set up and interface with PSX?

Thanks,
Jon

[Britjet]

Jon,

Whichever software you go for I think it would be a temporary measure until 2020 comes out, which will hopefully be some time in Q3 of this year.
I think it is highly likely that there will be a bridging system to use it as a visual generator.
Until then, don't spend any money on all the other system add-ons.  In this respect, X-Plane seems to have more quality free stuff.
Personally I use P3D, and I'm happy with it for now, but there's still a lot of maintenance work that goes on under the hood, like FSX.
Peter.

[cagarini]

And, as much as I posted above, videos like the following one showing differences between the "looks" in default XP11 vs default MFS at Alfa stage, really make me start dreaming of one dy being able to use MFS visuals with PSX, although for sure only for taxiing... For flying, from takeoff to landing, PSX standalone is still my best choice...

https://youtu.be/8uo3uZdBiFE

[emerydc8]

Oersonally I use P3D, and I'm happy with it for now, but there's still a lot of maintenance work that goes on under the hood, like FSX.
Peter.

Thanks, Peter. I suppose most of the software bugs have been worked out of P3D as well as the interface software. As I mentioned above, I'm not picky about views, so it doesn't matter if FS 2020 is better than P3D or X-plane. I only need a visual generator to taxi and see the runway for landing, so maybe P3D would be the solution for me. I hear P3D uses less CPU power than FSX. Do you know if that's true? Also, is the setup for P3D similar to the setup for FSX?
Jon

[Britjet]

Hi Jon.
I think it is being generally accepted that P3D is miles better than FSX now because of all the development. And it's 64-bit, now of course. Provided you don't get into add-on territory it is very reliable.
I now have more add-ons than I care to think about on it and it doesn't crash.
Seriously though - I think when 2020 comes around a lot of entrenched opinions will change.
Peter

[Jeroen Hoppenbrouwers]

I hear P3D uses less CPU power than FSX.

Actually it uses more but in a good way. The original FSX was an old school single-threaded beast that could use only one of your CPU cores, no matter whether you had 2 or 4 or 8 or 16. P3D has changed this and will happily use everything you have, including more modern GPUs. So although it uses more CPU/GPU, it actually works much more like you want it to.


Hoppie

[andrej]

Jon,
If I am give my opinion in regards to X-Plane 11 vs. P3D, I would opt for X-Plane 11.
I have been loyal and vivid fan/user of MSFS platform (from FS98 till P3D), however there are several things that have changed my mind. I have spend fairly large amount on add-ons (scenery wise mainly), so the change was not easy for my wallet.

1. Graphics are just better - if you compare visuals of P3D vs. X-Plane 11, to me P3D look more cartoonish. Default atmospheric "feel", including clouds to me are better than default options in P3D.
2. Slopped runways and taxiways - to me this is a major reason for change.
3. Generally smoother (if used as scenery generator only).
4. Finally, freeware and very good add-on ZIBO (Boeing 737NG) - if you want to fly something smaller but fairly complex.
Installation of scenery and other add-ons is quite easy. Abundance of freeware add-ons (e.g. Better Pushback, plenty of scenery).

But, I must stress that X-Plane 11 lacks default winter/snow textures.

Having said that, if you do decide to go with P3D option, Gary Oliver and Mark have provided amazing P3D link and their plane providers greater amount immersion.

I am certain that I will consider FS2020 once it is out. I believe that our community (PSX) will be able to enjoy it relatively soon (thanks to Gary, Mark, and rest of the Simfest gurus). Still not knowing a lot of details about it (e.g. offer model, pricing model, connection requirements, etc.), it looks very promising and I do remain positive about the entire platform. I am certain that FS2020 will be a "game changer" for all flight sim enthusiasts.

Whatever you decide, I am certain that we will be FS2020 users eventually.

Cheers,

[emerydc8]

Thanks again to everyone for all the advice on this subject. It really demonstrates why this is such a great forum! It seems to be evenly split between X-plane and P3D. I'm used to FSX already, so I'm leaning towards P3D with the assumption that I should be able to set it up without too many problems. That's the major concern for me with my limited computer skills. I am actually happy with the FSX visuals but it keeps crashing so I have to try something else.
Jon

[Will]

Can anyone explain in a nutshell why the PSX community isn't working with Outerra?

I'm sure there are logical explanations; perhaps Outerra costs $1000, I really don't know.

Outerra is a scenery engine made for people to plug their apps into, so it seems like a partnership would make sense... they make a planetary scenery design package without a simulated airplane; PSX makes a simulated airplane without (much) planetary scenery. 

[cagarini]

In the old PS1 times there was even a FlightGear bridge - I would probably use such an option because it's free, and scenery wise is more than sufficient for my requirements...

Anyway, Jon, I really think that in your case you should probably opt for P3D. There's a good thing about that platform, if you decide to migrate into it - you can try it for $9 for a whole month buying a Developer license. If you like it you can buy one whenever you want to use PSX with P3D visuals and it'll enable it for 1 month.

At this time it's expected that LM announces P3D v5, so, buying the full version would be too expensive.

[Hardy Heinlin]

Can anyone explain in a nutshell why the PSX community isn't working with Outerra?

Not enough detailed airport sceneries?


|-|ardy

[ahaka]

The thing with P3D is that it is aimed at the professional market, and as part of that it comes with a feature called "ExternalSim", which shuts down the softwares own flight model and instead moves the visuals with positional data from an external source (in this case PSX). The motion you get with the PSX.net P3D ExternalSim is exceptionally smooth and natural. Hands down the best windshield add-on at the moment!

I agree that X-Plane has great realistic looking visuals and atmospheric rendering, but the PSX plugin is very old and does not work well with the current version.

Therefore if one needs a windshield view right now and can't wait to see what future brings, I would recommend P3D with the ExternalSim plugin.

[emerydc8]

At this time it's expected that LM announces P3D v5, so, buying the full version would be too expensive.

So what version should I buy? v4? What's the difference between the full version?

[emerydc8]

I'm looking at the professional license for $2300 or an academic license for $60. Is there another version?

[tsampaio]

Not want to put you more confuse but only to give you more options.

In my pc I have many simulators installed:
FSX (because not in years you have so soon a2a connie and b377 for msfs20)
XP11 (because everything mentioned above, and many super top quality addons that only exist for him)
XP10 (ohhhh yes, for visuals for PSX, and pmdg DC6)

So XP10 is more ugly than xp11 but beautiful enough for visuals to PSX specially that 99% of the flight is at hight cruise altitude. Also another advantage is that xp10 on an ssd loads super super fast and runs super smooth without any issues and super stable without any crashes and also at 64bits.

[emerydc8]

Thanks for the information.

[cagarini]

I'm looking at the professional license for $2300 or an academic license for $60. Is there another version?

There's the normal Professional License for $199,00 but I have been opting for the monthly professional dev license for $9,95 / month because I often don't use P3D and it would be a waste to pay the $199,00 "head-on"...

They're the 1st and the 4th mentioned on this page:
https://www.prepar3d.com/product-overview/prepar3d-license-comparison/

I believe we're not entitled to the Academic license anyway ;-)

Regarding XP10, mentioned by Tércio above, you can use the same XP11 license to activate a XP10 install. I used to use XP10 with PSX when XView was released - XP11 wasn't yet available at that time, and a good point mentioned by Tércio if you don't mind the not so up-2-date airports and visuals is smoothness provided by that older platform.

Some think Vulkan will bring smoothness and higher fps to XP11, specially if you run both XP and PSX on the same box, but we are yet to see...