Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 494
  • Created
  • Last Reply
11 hours ago, jay109 said:

and then realized a few days ago that AFS2 is by far the superior flight sim for graphics and performance in VR and is the obvious future of flight sims.  It's so much better I uninstalled P3D and have no plans to ever play it again. 

 

LOL It's like I hear myself talking. I said the same half a year or so ago. But I've returned to P3D (v4) completely now because AFS2 mainly is the sim of the FUTURE, not of the NOW. John said "AFS2 is a marathon not a sprint, all good things take time" and the devs of IPACS have the same philosophy. It's a good philosophy but it does mean that it will take YEARS (seriously) before AFS2 has the same depth as for instance P3D. The main thing that made me install P3D again was the lack of a weather engine in AFS2. (Although I also got tired of using VR all the time and the lack of depth in certain planes.) A flight sim without weather is er... not a flight sim imho. Whenever I talked about this IPACS reply was that it's not on their priority list right now and that it will take some time before they even start working on it. Now looking at how long it takes for IPACS to deliver the goods that actually ARE on their priority list, I don't expect weather to be part of AFS2 within the next two years. At least.

 

As John also said in the past a few times AFS2 is a GREAT sim for VR and for a short hop every now and then. And I will most probably use AFS2 for that when PNW has been released. But it's not a replacement for P3D at this moment. Obviously it depends on what you want from a flightsim but I am curious to see how long you will keep AFS2 as your only sim and when you are going to install P3D again. ^_^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Jimimac said:

Well now that p3d v4 has vr now I am thinking of purchasing  yes afs2 is really nice but I too miss having a nice weather engine and atc, have you tried vr yet in p3dv4 if so how does it look and run.

 

thanks,jim

 

Haven't tried it yet but afaik AFS2 is still superior when it comes to VR (when it comes to performance but also ease of use, like how the mouse works in VR). I myself stopped using VR completely because I got seriously fed up with the low resolution and also that you can't easily do something else while flying in VR, like reading a manual, searching the internet, posting a screenshot, following a tutorial, or simply looking around you: I felt a bit locked up in that virtual world. The weight on my head also prevented me to do longer flights. Since going back to 2D and P3D I feel a lot more free and my flight times have doubled. For now I can do without VR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, J van E said:

 

LOL It's like I hear myself talking. I said the same half a year or so ago. But I've returned to P3D (v4) completely now because AFS2 mainly is the sim of the FUTURE, not of the NOW. John said "AFS2 is a marathon not a sprint, all good things take time" and the devs of IPACS have the same philosophy. It's a good philosophy but it does mean that it will take YEARS (seriously) before AFS2 has the same depth as for instance P3D. The main thing that made me install P3D again was the lack of a weather engine in AFS2. (Although I also got tired of using VR all the time and the lack of depth in certain planes.) A flight sim without weather is er... not a flight sim imho. Whenever I talked about this IPACS reply was that it's not on their priority list right now and that it will take some time before they even start working on it. Now looking at how long it takes for IPACS to deliver the goods that actually ARE on their priority list, I don't expect weather to be part of AFS2 within the next two years. At least.

 

As John also said in the past a few times AFS2 is a GREAT sim for VR and for a short hop every now and then. And I will most probably use AFS2 for that when PNW has been released. But it's not a replacement for P3D at this moment. Obviously it depends on what you want from a flightsim but I am curious to see how long you will keep AFS2 as your only sim and when you are going to install P3D again. ^_^

I'm only interested in low level VFR flying in small GA aircraft in VR and I think that's why AFS2 is a perfect fit for me.  Most of the aircraft don't have the proper handling or sounds or depth like P3D but at least I can enjoy VFR flying in VR with gorgeous scenery and graphics at 90 fps and I know that the sim will only get better from here. 

 

I miss flying around in a DC-3 in Papua New Guinea like I did in P3D but I got so tired of dipping below 45 fps even though my PC is about as powerful as you can get.  I think that once PNW is released for AFS2 and we start getting some third party aircraft like the aforementioned DC-3 or the Beaver from MILVIZ I will forget all about flying a DC-3 in Papua New Guinea in P3D.  And that shouldn't be too far away - maybe a few months is my guess from what I've been reading.

 

But yes, I agree with you that AFS2 is the sim of the future not necessarily the sim of now but for my interests, it's the sim of now as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Jimimac said:

Well now that p3d v4 has vr now I am thinking of purchasing  yes afs2 is really nice but I too miss having a nice weather engine and atc, have you tried vr yet in p3dv4 if so how does it look and run.

 

thanks,jim

 

It doesn't run well at all especially when you compare it to AFS2.  With my 1080ti, i7-7700k I have to turn off all buildings and all auto-gen except for trees in P3D just to keep the fps above 45.  In ORBX airport regions it will dip below 45 fps which is unplayable in VR.  However, in AFS2 I can fly over New York City (using their "Northeastern USA" scenery with all graphics maxed out and pixel density set to 2.0 (max) and clouds and get perfectly smooth frame rate.  AFS2 really shows just how outdated these flight sim engines are (P3D, FSX, X-Plane 11, DCS, FSW).  For years we've been hearing about how you just can't have all of these auto-gen buildings and trees and everything else and expect a smooth frame rate because these objects max out the CPU and then AFS2 comes along and completely destroys that argument.  AFS2 proves that yes, we can have all of that and get perfectly smooth frame rates, and they accomplish that while also delivering the best looking flight sim ever.  

 

I've flying around southern California in AFS2.  I've flown into many of these airports in real life, many times, and I'm blown away every time I see them rendered in AFS2.  They look EXACTLY like the real thing.  I've never seen anything like it in a video game.  And these aren't even ORBX level sceneries but it's really hard to tell that they're not because they're so good.  The FBO's are in the same spots and so are the hangars.  And it's this incredible level of detail for the entire southwestern USA.  And then I remember waiting years and years for DCS developers to come out with their NTTR map (Nevada) and it's not even as good as what IPACS has done in AFS2 for an entire regions of the US (including Nevada) in a fraction of the amount of time.  When you think about what they've done with AFS2 and you compare it to other sims and developers it will really anger you that you bought into all of these delays and excuses for so long from these other developers.   I don't know how IPACS is doing all of this and doing it so well but I hope they see more and more success in the flight sim genre.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, J van E said:

 

Haven't tried it yet but afaik AFS2 is still superior when it comes to VR (when it comes to performance but also ease of use, like how the mouse works in VR). I myself stopped using VR completely because I got seriously fed up with the low resolution and also that you can't easily do something else while flying in VR, like reading a manual, searching the internet, posting a screenshot, following a tutorial, or simply looking around you: I felt a bit locked up in that virtual world. The weight on my head also prevented me to do longer flights. Since going back to 2D and P3D I feel a lot more free and my flight times have doubled. For now I can do without VR.

 

I forgot to mention... I understand being fed up with the low resolution and that's why I have the new Samsung Odyssey HMD on pre-order (arriving in November).  It's supposed to be Steam VR compatible and it has 78% more pixels than the Oculus Rift so I'm expecting to be far less irritated by the low resolution.  However, with pixel density set to 1.5 in the Oculus debug tool and pixel density set to 2.0 in AFS2, the resolution even on the Rift is very playable IMO but obviously could use a lot of improvement.  I'm hoping the Odyssey will be a big enough improvement to keep me happy for quite a while.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, jay109 said:

AFS2 really shows just how outdated these flight sim engines are (P3D, FSX, X-Plane 11, DCS, FSW).  For years we've been hearing about how you just can't have all of these auto-gen buildings and trees and everything else and expect a smooth frame rate because these objects max out the CPU and then AFS2 comes along and completely destroys that argument.  AFS2 proves that yes, we can have all of that and get perfectly smooth frame rates, and they accomplish that while also delivering the best looking flight sim ever.  

 

Well said... Like you said, the AF2 engine is a miracle. It's modern and powerful. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, jay109 said:

 

I forgot to mention... I understand being fed up with the low resolution and that's why I have the new Samsung Odyssey HMD on pre-order (arriving in November).  It's supposed to be Steam VR compatible and it has 78% more pixels than the Oculus Rift so I'm expecting to be far less irritated by the low resolution.  However, with pixel density set to 1.5 in the Oculus debug tool and pixel density set to 2.0 in AFS2, the resolution even on the Rift is very playable IMO but obviously could use a lot of improvement.  I'm hoping the Odyssey will be a big enough improvement to keep me happy for quite a while.

 

We're going off topic a bit here, but do please share your experience when you get the Odyssey. I like the Cessna in Rift but the more complex systems of multi engine aircraft are too blurry in VR for my taste, even on 2.0 oversampling, so I'm really after more pixels. Watching news of Pimax 8k very closely too of course.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Spit40 said:

 

We're going off topic a bit here, but do please share your experience when you get the Odyssey. I like the Cessna in Rift but the more complex systems of multi engine aircraft are too blurry in VR for my taste, even on 2.0 oversampling, so I'm really after more pixels. Watching news of Pimax 8k very closely too of course.

 

Will do.  One of the big problems with Pimax 8k, from what I understand, is that all of those millions of pixels are spread out across it's massive 200 deg field of view which means that the pixel density may not be much more than the Odyssey and yet your PC is going to have to try to display all of those pixels which it will probably not be able to at an acceptable frame rate even in something as optimized as AFS2.  An 8k HMD should not be released until we have foveated rendering which tracks the movement of your eyes and only displays high pixel density where your eyes are looking.  A highly efficient foveated rendering system would easily allow you to get great frame rates in an 8k, 200 deg FOV HMD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/16/2017 at 2:45 PM, John Venema said:

We have a bunch of new technology we are working with for some unannounced projects which will allow us to tackle very large photoreal products with all the usual FTX full fat region goodies included.

 

Hey John, is there any new tech coming to P3D that we can look forward to now that we have 64-bit and a more robust platform? If so, would you mind spilling a bean or two?

Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 17 October 2017 at 10:39 PM, jay109 said:

 

I forgot to mention... I understand being fed up with the low resolution and that's why I have the new Samsung Odyssey HMD on pre-order (arriving in November).  It's supposed to be Steam VR compatible and it has 78% more pixels than the Oculus Rift so I'm expecting to be far less irritated by the low resolution.  However, with pixel density set to 1.5 in the Oculus debug tool and pixel density set to 2.0 in AFS2, the resolution even on the Rift is very playable IMO but obviously could use a lot of improvement.  I'm hoping the Odyssey will be a big enough improvement to keep me happy for quite a while.

Hope you will let us know how the Samsung hmdi runs using afs2 may consider purchasing  if all is well.

 

jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/20/2017 at 6:47 AM, Jimimac said:

Hope you will let us know how the Samsung hmdi runs using afs2 may consider purchasing  if all is well.

 

jim

 

I just cancelled my Samsung Odyssey order and have pre-ordered Pimax 8K instead.  I found out that Pimax has a tech called brain warp which is similar to Asynchronous Time Warp by Oculus that basically doubles performance.  Also, the Odyssey doesn't seem to be geared toward games but the Pimax definitely is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/23/2017 at 8:31 PM, jay109 said:

 

I just cancelled my Samsung Odyssey order and have pre-ordered Pimax 8K instead.  I found out that Pimax has a tech called brain warp which is similar to Asynchronous Time Warp by Oculus that basically doubles performance.  Also, the Odyssey doesn't seem to be geared toward games but the Pimax definitely is.

 

I cancelled my Pimax Kickstarter pledge too.  I don't trust the company behind it and the technology just isn't there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...