Is It Really This Good? (Or is it good editing)

[ScottyB]

Obviously flight sim these days, with the number of addons you can get, is looking better than it ever has. However, stumbling across some quite simply incredible YouTube videos, I am wondering if these are a true reflection of these peoples setups, or if their video editing skills are just excellent.

For instance this video below.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2YTY-mAqGI

I would be interested to hear your comments. If I can get my sim to look and run that good, I would consider investing a bit more into this hobby....

[1061147]

As a Systems Engineer I can confirm this is legit.

Prepar3d 3 is amazing. Also this fellow is running an over clocked machine at 4.8ghz (bare in mind 5ghz is microwave haha) with most likely a 980gtx or 2 of them.

I myself am still in FSX with a 560ti on a i52500k with 16gb of ram and with rex have an enjoyable experiance but we are talking 3 generations back? So if your system is 3-4 years old then in terms of advances its time for a upgrade.

FSX / Prepar3d and now oculus rift.. its now a new error for flight sim to shine.

Simulators are not really about how powerful your graphics are altho it helps with the load what you really need is a solid CPU because you are using 1 system to simulate aircraft systems handled by multiple computers.

Thats a pretty basic explanation but each system is different and you get out what you put in. Even when FSX Launched the most powerful chip on the consumer market was not enough really for it to shine.

Ryan

[toprob]

For me, 90% of the battle is Prepar3D v3. V3 supplies the realistic visuals, which makes it look a lot better than any previous sim even at low settings, but of course the more power you have the smoother it's going to be.
I don't think that this particular video was recorded with high settings -- there's no weather, for example, and it suffers from one the major sins as far as I'm concerned -- no shadows. I know that the 'elite' have always shunned shadows from the FSX days, but with Prepar3D it is throwing away one of the most important visual aspects. The AI aircraft tend to 'hang' on the ground, with no real visual cue to link them to the ground. Prepar3D's shadows could do with a little more work, but I couldn't live without them.
I think that the way in which Prepar3D has been developed in stages has kind of hidden the fact that this is the result of a decade of developments in graphics. So even though it still has a lot of FSX's features -- default airports, mesh etc for example are no different -- FSX users shifting to v3 would certainly see that this is a much-improved simulator, not just another step but a leap forward.

[1061147]

Nice comments, I would love to jump over to p3d as well but I fear that on my machine it would not offer any improvement to what I currently have with FSX. I will most likely hold fire for my next build later in the year.

[chopper_nut]

Yeah me too. I've got v3 but FSX looks better for me. I don't think I'll be in a position to have a proper desktop PC for the foreseeable future so I'm better to run something that looks good on a laptop.

[NZ255]

I've got a 2500k and a gtx480. I get 40-20 fps in P3dv3 with airliners and scenery.

I'm thinking about upgrading as my machines getting on a bit but I might hold until the next generation of CPUs as sky lake as a prime number problem. You can google that if you're interested

[Agent X20]

One trick some folks use to improve quality is to playback a flight at half speed and then double the speed in the video editor.

[deeknow]

Don't hold back on P3D would be my advice, I'm also on an older generation rig now, 2500K (mild overclock) with a 560Ti and P3D performs better without a doubt, also visually is an improvement worth the upgrade for, if nothing just for the cockpit shadows. That and the fact pretty much everything I use or fly is compatible one way or the other.

[Splitpin]

"if nothing just for the cockpit shadows. That and the fact pretty much everything I use or fly is compatible one way or the other."
Well said

[Charl]

...it suffers from one the major sins as far as I'm concerned -- no shadows. I know that the 'elite' have always shunned shadows from the FSX days, but with Prepar3D it is throwing away one of the most important visual aspects. The AI aircraft tend to 'hang' on the ground, with no real visual cue to link them to the ground...

Well said.
There's a field of study waiting, I guess, for "what you are prepared to put up with in your sim". It has to do with expectation and how well you are able to BS yourself.
Epic Realism is not available in any sim to date, and the entire FSX (and to some degree P3D) discussion is inevitably qualified in some way - no shadows, no this, no that, but look how Epically Real it is!
Someone should invent an app which makes flapping your arms and making low-frequency noises through pursed lips, Epically Real.