How realistic is the scale of this game?

[aphextwinandpcgamingguy4422812]

Let's say I flew from Colorado to Florida. Would it take 3 hours?

[Quinn]

If it takes three hours in realtime, it will in the game aswell.

[mikeytwc]

there are over 24000 airports, and this covers the entire world...
as long as the sim is running with no time acceleration, it will run real life flight times

[aphextwinandpcgamingguy4422812]

♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥.. I expected the game to pull an ETS2 and make it so that it's on a smaller scale. Thanks

[mikeytwc]

its definately incredible that you can do a trans-continental flight, takeoff, fly straight non-stop, land, refuel, depart to next destination...people seem to assume its boring....until you try it....
I ran a 13 hour flight and its was the best my FSX ever ran, since i bought FSX:boxed in 2006, and later acceleration...never could have gotten more than 2 hours air time, now I am able to make multi-leg journeys with no issues(On a real dinosaur of a computer)

[pirateinparadise]

I agree. DTG did what MS should have done years ago - FIXED FSX. It works the way that it was supposed to back in 2006. Why in the world the original dev team was now allowed to fix it is beyond me. MS just gave up on it, and they obviously weren't too far off if a new dev team can come along 8 years later and fix it in relatively short order.

Shame on you, MS. You, sirs, create vacuum.

[wildblu]

If you take your Piper J-3, you can fly from Miami to Denver in 13.5 hrs, including 5 refuel stops. If you take your F/A-18, you should make it in 2.5 hrs with one refuel stop (assuming cruise alt and speed).

However, if you fly the Concorde, you can arrive in 1 hr 18 min with no stops (if you use 16x time compression, you can arrive in less than 5 minutes -- well really 10 minutes or so since take-offs and landings require several minutes to complete).

[Quinn]

Originally posted by pirateinparadise:

I agree. DTG did what MS should have done years ago - FIXED FSX. It works the way that it was supposed to back in 2006. Why in the world the original dev team was now allowed to fix it is beyond me. MS just gave up on it, and they obviously weren't too far off if a new dev team can come along 8 years later and fix it in relatively short order.

Shame on you, MS. You, sirs, create vacuum.

I agreee completely. Although the game still has FPS issues, like the original.

[Jack Daniels]

Also DTG should fix the DX10 preview no needing Steve DX10 Fixer to be bought separetly.
I have for development environment FSX and for testing and better FPS i run FSX SE, but I cannot have Steve DX10 Fixer working on both at the same time, that is a shame.

[Stowthorns]

Dovetail can't do anything to FSX, that's why they're building their own sim. Lockheed Martin own the rights and everything to the FSX coding. That's why P3D is basically a 64bit FSX.

[Skal]

As far as I know FSX & ESP are different in theory. LM purchased ESP (the core of FSX but it is not FSX) which allows them to independently develop, market and sell under its own name and licenses (it is no longer a MS products) while FSX still belongs to MS and as such cannot be marketed or sold as anything but MS FSX with royalties going to MS. This doesn't mean it cannot be changed it just means that MS have to agree and no matter what the changes the product remains a MS products (an with that the royalties) and it will never be DTG FSX.

[Jack Daniels]

Steve DX10 Fixer doesn't touch the FSX code, and the same or better could be done by DTG.
Otherwise Steve DX10 Fixer should work for both (FSX and FSX SE) at the same time, but Steve refuse to do it arguing the complexity of that job.

[APUtech]

Originally posted by Fibution:

Let's say I flew from Colorado to Florida. Would it take 3 hours?

Yeah, the time scale is very close to the real thing. I use FSX:SE/FSX to keep my IFR skills sharp. In IFR you learn to use the chronograph for just about every facet of your IFR flight, so accurate time-scaling is critcal. A coast to coast flight, depending on your altitude and weather conditions will take between 6 and 7.5 hours in the default 73, so if it takes 3 hours to go from Colorado to Florida in realtime, it'll take at least that long in FSX.

[tlvx]

Originally posted by pirateinparadise:

I agree. DTG did what MS should have done years ago - FIXED FSX. It works the way that it was supposed to back in 2006. Why in the world the original dev team was now allowed to fix it is beyond me. MS just gave up on it, and they obviously weren't too far off if a new dev team can come along 8 years later and fix it in relatively short order.

Shame on you, MS. You, sirs, create vacuum.

Hardware was far less capable back in 2006. So, take almost any game from 2006, and when optimised for current operating systems, it will run much better on current hardware.

I've had FSX Deluxe since its initial release. It has always steadily improved, with hardware upgrades.

But, even now, the software has bottlenecks, that prevent it from truly reaching its maximum potential.

I doubt any new simulator could be as forward thinking as Microsoft's Flight Simulator X, so as to last nearly a decade.

[tlvx]

Originally posted by Stowthorns:

That's why P3D is basically a 64bit FSX.

Prepar3d is not 64 bit. There's no "basically" about it. It's just not 64 bit.

Thus, it is bound to the same memory constraints that FSX has.

[tlvx]

Originally posted by Fibution:

Let's say I flew from Colorado to Florida. Would it take 3 hours?

There were a few liberties taken with scaling, to make the game playable.

The earth - in the simulator - is a perfect sphere. In actuality, the shape of the earth is oblete, and bulges at the center.

The poles - in the simulator - are largely unflyable, due to the nature of the map size being forced into a small space.

The timezones are not accurate, in the simulator. Although, there are mods that can fix this.

The stars are not accurate, and eclipses do not occur, in the simulator.

Overall though, this is just about the closest thing you can get to a planetarium, in your living room.