Some perspective.
Default MSFS 787 with Default scenery vs Qualitywings 787 with Flytampa OMDB. Both in Ultra settings.
P3D V5
MSFS
P3D V5
MSFS
P3D V5 Dubai City scape - Flytampa Addon
MSFS Default Scenery
MSFS
P3D V5
MSFS
MSFS Default Scenery
16 Likes
And that is why many prefer Falcon BMS over DCS xD
Some prefer gameplay, others just graphics.
That said, you have just started a war.
4 Likes
To be honest, P3D looks pretty good for an initial release in 2010 and FSX, which is the basis for P3D, in 2006.
I know, P3D has additional graphic effects and all, just saying it’s holding up not too badly.
Why can’t we have nice graphics like MSFS and the same functionality as P3D? It just keeps to not compute for me. Taking features out on purpose.
Nice screenshots 
6 Likes
Also another comparison: 200$ for P3D professional + 80$ for the qualitywings 787+ 31$ for Fly Tampa’s OMDB. For a total of 311$. MSFS’s premium deluxe costs 120$.
And we haven’t started talking about Orbx vector, trees, active sky, PTA, etc.
47 Likes
Honestly, I think I will continue having a great experience in P3Dv5 with A2A aircraft in Orbx True Earth Socal. Visually, of course not on par with MFS, but functionally, a much better experience. Everything just works.
Fingers crossed MFS give me the same experience sometime in 2021.
9 Likes
I didn’t mean that P3D is bad, not at all, just for me it has really showed its age.
I still remain optimistic regarding MS and Asobo’s commitment to MSFS, I am sure that they want to add as many partners as possible and give them the tools they need to create their products. Just a matter of patience.
22 Likes
I’m not sure why you’re comparing default MSFS vs P3D with add-ons.
Not that there’s any competition anyway. MSFS trounces P3D in terms of graphics no matter how much stuff you load onto it, but comparisons should be made in even conditions.
19 Likes
We will. It will just take a bit of time.
Also very nice screenshots took a bit of setting up thanks. I stayed on p3dv4 knowing this sim was coming out.
1 Like
I will say I’ve flown almost every version since 1983 and each release there are stunning changes . Also,almost every release since 1995, there have been release updates (service packs back then) and with each update, vast flight improvements. For a complete overhaul, I think we are about to witness a whole new experience. Once MSFS updates the system to DX12, (like in P3D v5), then I think the system will meet its potential.
As for realism between the two systems, out of the box MSFS is more realistic. It’s only the P3D add-ons that allow P3D to be a real trainer. However P3D has some limitations that don’t allow certain physics to be applied. Now with MSFS, these limitations are removed. Give this 1-2 years, and I think we will see the next official sim. Remember P3D is just updated releases of FSX. 
Just my two cents.
Ron
11 Likes
I just remove P3D v5 because I am having pretty good results here with 2020. One thing that is sticking FS 2020 with me is the scenery as I take off and land. or when flying low. Also the environment around surise or new sunset is amazing. The way the house and landscape looks is awesome. I found that once at a altitude of about 8000 or higher, Orbx true earth in P3D looks similar to FS 2020. However here in 2020 True Earth is planet wide. One day the aircrafts will do well in FS 2020, just takes time. Even P3D v5 with hotfix 2 is having growing pains. 2020 has growing pains too, hard to believe it is only 2 month old.
7 Likes
you do realise the P3D screenshtos have all the addons thrown in they are NOT default p3d screenshots lol P3D looks like FSX defaault ie dated and old
5 Likes
P3D is just emmmmmmmmmm lets leave it
1 Like
Now weigh up the cost of p3d + scenery for every region you want to fly and hardrive space vs base msfs
4 Likes
I will add on problem I have with Fs 2020 is I am flying a lot more and not getting other things done.
8 Likes
I understand that LM is working on something behind closed doors…as to what?.. I haven’t got a clue…but I am letting my imagination run wild…just for a short while. As someone said, P3D with Google earth…now that could be a marriage made in heaven.
In the meantime, MFS is parked on my hard drive waiting for it to mature a fair bit more. P3d is not as “pretty” but at least its functional.
4 Likes
Graphics are probably the only thing that’s better about MSFS, everything else in P3D is better. Especially functionality.
4 Likes
P3D looks very dark. Like it has an OC but no clouds …
Something is not correct.
2 Likes
The lighting in MSFS is insanely good. P3D is lacking indirect illumination which is probably the main reason it looks dark and pale.
Now imagine msfs with raytraced global illumination !
3 Likes
GTX cards world wide will start exploding en masse.
MsFS is also just an updated version of FSX. They just changed more than Lockheed did. MsFS is not a clean sheet project. Why would you claim otherwise?
Also, why have basic necessities been taken out instead of keeping them (metric units I am talking to you).
You can not even fly certain approaches in MsFS because the course snaps to the localizer no matter what and the vectors are often not like they are in the charts.
MsFS still has similar limitations to P3D and FSX. The flight model is modernized, not redesigned.
It’s baffling that we have less functionality than in previous versions and they are supposed to be added back now?
I do have fun with MsFS but also see errors and regressions. It’s safe to say that it was released prematurely, no matter what marketing is saying.
3 Likes