Microsoft FSX vs Steam FSX ?

I have owned Microsoft FSX since its inception, however I'm beginning to see pay ware add-ons advertising compatibility with Steam FSX. Would that indicate that the product(s) are not compatible with the Microsoft version? Also, is there a difference between Microsoft FSX and Steam FSX?

The main difference(s) between Steam and regular FSX are that the Steam version uses the Steam lobby to connect to multiplayer, as opposed to Gamespy, and apparently doesn't ship with the SDK. My understanding for addons is that all are compatible with regular, and most "simple" addons such as scenery and aircraft are compatible with steam, but other more complicated ones need a bit of reworking. I don't think there's any Steam-only addons EXCEPT for the DLC purchasable through the Steam client itself.

Thank you.

FSX:SE has to be on-line to work!

I'm giving some very serious thought to moving to Steam FSX, the main reason being it allows you to install and play FSX on multiple PCs under your steam account. I have a desktop which is my usual FSX platform, and also a home laptop, and a powerful work laptop.

 

I have been able to install and play FSX on these three machines from my disc version (the activation seems to work ok), but NOT the FSX acceleration pack, I get an error when running FSX saying it's not activated, but it doesn't give me the window to enter the activation code. Looks like the Microsoft activation service for the acceleration pack is no longer working.

 

However, I don't have many FSX add-ons, just GEX and UTX Europe. For someone with a large investment in add-ons, who has one FSX PC, and no desire for multiplayer, I don't see any reason to move to the steam version - at least until they add any compelling new fixes/features to it (I'd personally love to see decent mesh, without the platform/trench runway and lake issues)

If Steam doesn't come with an SDK, why is there an SDK folder in the FSX:SE directory?

 

I would make the move to Steam. The FSX:SE platform seems more stable and appears to have better performance. Both statements are based on my experience of having both FSX and FSX:SE. The developers are working on changes to their installers to make their software able to be installed onto Steam.

Hi Iain,

 

Basically, the main difference is that FSX:SE has been set up to use the Steam multiplayer system, also with slight tweaks to make it work on more modern PC's.

Dovetail has got Steam to re-distribute FSX... Just to remember, it still is a 9 year old program.

 

My thoughts, as I have posted elsewhere, is that Steam is probably the largest gaming distributor & Steam's target market are the gamers out there. So, my opinion is that Steam is targeting their gaming market, for the guys & newbies that want to try a non-combat flight sim, that is more-or-less plug 'n play, with their DLC's bering released. As can be seen, there are quite a few now, Most of them are 5-6 years old, with 1x original & another forthcoming as Steam only releases.

 

Secondly, for those 'oldies'of us that know how to add planes & scenery, it is a bonus. But, my biggest concern is that it has to be run on-line.

 

A more interesting discussion would be FSX vs FSX:SE vs P3D! (without ANY licence discussions please)

If Steam doesn't come with an SDK, why is there an SDK folder in the FSX:SE directory?

 

The Steam SDK folder is missing all of the tools which makes it next to useless.

 

peace,

the Bean

A more interesting discussion would be FSX vs FSX:SE vs P3D! (without ANY licence discussions please)

 

Yet it is the Prepar3D License that prevents it being compared to FSX which is a personal/consumer entertainment product.

 

P3D can only properly be compared with Microsoft ESP or X-Plane for Professional Use.

A more interesting discussion would be FSX vs FSX:SE vs P3D! (without ANY licence discussions please)

Yet it is the Prepar3D License that prevents it being compared to FSX which is a personal/consumer entertainment product.

 

P3D can only properly be compared with Microsoft ESP or X-Plane for Professional Use.

Well, that didn't take long. [emoji57]

FS2004, FSX and P3D can all still be flown online with FSHost AND all together .... but you can't fly FSX-SE with FSHost.

 

Sounds like FSX-SE can't use VATSIM then (not sure).

 

FSX-SE comes up short with that major problem. Are they working on fixing this situation?

The Steam SDK folder is missing all of the tools which makes it next to useless.

 

peace,

the Bean

 

I just copied all the missing files from my disc version sdk and have had no problems, I have also heard that P3D SDK will work as well.

Decided to bite the bullet and got FSX:SE this evening. So far so good. Hard to judge if the performance is any different, but it's definitely not worse. I might try a side-by-side test with the same config file if I get some time this weekend.

I had both installed and running for a few weeks, then I got rid of my old Deluxe Edition to simplify addon installations. To me, the advantages to using FSX-SE over FSX are:

 

1. Service Packs plus "Deluxe and/or "Acceleration" or their equivalents are included.

 

2. Performance of SE is slightly better on modern machines due to some modernization tweaks.

 

3. FSX-SE is being actively supported and developed by its new dev team and publisher. This implies that future modernizations and enhancements are likely.

 

There are only two disadvantages that I have found:

 

1. Not all addons will work yet with SE. I have found that this failure can be mostly an installer issue in many cases (but not all cases- VATSIM & most PMDG airplanes, for example), where the installers are hard-coded with the wrong FSX installation path but the addons themselves will work fine if they are correctly installed manually. Based on online info, many addon developers/publishers are working to tweak their products for SE, so this issue will go away over time.

 

2. You must have Internet connectivity to log into Steam and launch the game, and the Steam offline mode simply does not work for FSX. This is not an issue for me, but could be for some users.

EDIT TO ADD: Steam has just announced that the imminent update, now in public beta, will allow FSX:SE to run in OFFLINE Mode, thereby eliminating this FORMER disadvantage. This development also reinforces my "advantage #3" above. :)

I had a boxed version install of FSX:A that had been stable, well performing, and well configured for several years. I grabbed the Steam edition just to see what the experience would be like for newcomers to the hobby, or old-timers that might see it as an opportunity to get back into it.

 

Within 2 weeks I switched to using my FSX:SE installation exclusively. My existing installation ran well, but my FSX:SE installation definitely performed better. Both in terms of frame-rates and smoothness.

 

Everybody has different add-on needs, but all of my most important aircraft and development tools were able to work with FSX:SE.

 

I got FSInn/FSCopilot running in FSX:SE after a little effort. So FSX:SE can work with Vatsim.

I just copied all the missing files from my disc version sdk and have had no problems, I have also heard that P3D SDK will work as well.

 

Problem is, not all of us have a disk version to do that with...

The problem is some are putting a value on the SDK and are expecting that everyone else will have the same appreciation. Unless the end user is interested in doing modifications that require the SDK, there is no need for the average simmer to even worry about whether the SDK is or isn't included.

agreed, there are two types of FSX user:

 

Those that only want to play it.

Those that also like to fiddle with it.

 

For the former FSX:SE is definitely the better choice now.

Decided to bite the bullet and got FSX:SE this evening. So far so good. Hard to judge if the performance is any different, but it's definitely not worse. I might try a side-by-side test with the same config file if I get some time this weekend.

 

Quite a few have done tests comparing the two. Some report better frame rates.

Many don't. So far, I haven't seen that. If anything, in some cases SE is slightly lower.

But in one test I saw, when running a complex plane and high load scenery, SE started

out slightly lower than box FSX "MS", but as the VAS was filled up, SE started to do better

than MS. There is no doubt that SE uses memory better, and can handle higher loads

without OOM than MS. This was the main attraction for me, and why I decided to buy

SE to try it. When running the 737NGX, being I'm still using a 32 bit OS, I can only load

so much scenery density before I'll run out of VAS and OOM. I'm hoping that with SE I'll

be able to run more dense scenery than MS. The NGX SE installer and SP1d update is due

to be released this weekend, so hopefully I'll be able to try the plane with SE and see

how it pans out vs MS. In one test that was done on utoob, SE came out looking pretty

good when under high load, and did much better than MS, which OOM'ed pretty fast in

the test, where SE kept chugging along and completed the whole test flight without

crashing. VAS was getting real low at one point, but it didn't crater.

 

The NGX update for this weekend will also add some other tweaks like being able to use

ASN radar, more realistic terrain sweep on the ND, and a few other things.

But it's not the full SP2, which hopefully will come out in the future. I'm hoping they can

straighten out the slight issue with the VC geometry, and still be able to keep the HGS

function intact. If they can't, they will keep the same VC geometry.

Which I can live with, being as I use the HGS a lot. A must have for an artificial SWA

buoy.. And I use it for most of my pseudo BBJ's also.

 

Guess I spoke too late.. The 737NGX SE updates are done, and I'm downloading

them now.. Yee haw! Lots of tweaks too, according to the list..

And the P3D version has been released too.

Problem is, not all of us have a disk version to do that with...

 

You can download the SDK from P3D for free, http://www.prepar3d.com/support/sdk/

Well, that didn't take long. [emoji57]

 

"Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun, the moon, and the truth." - Buddha

"Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun, the moon, and the truth." - Buddha

It's not an issue of lies, a cover up, or misdirection. The OP just wanted a comparison of the two systems without discussion of the EULA coming up and hijacking the thread.

 

But you gotta love the Buddha, he's always got the nicest quotes

It's not an issue of lies, a cover up, or misdirection. The OP just wanted a comparison of the two systems without discussion of the EULA coming up and hijacking the thread.

 

What's the point? The comparison between FSX and P3D has been done to death already.

Yes. No one has brought up the EULA before and talked it to death.

Ok, I've settled it for the Lenovo W540. I've done a straight comparison with the same settings file and saved flight (Rio de Janeiro, daytime, clear weather, Learjet, 30 degree banked turn off runway at 80% throttle).

 

Results are:

 

FSX deluxe disc: 30-50 FPS

FSX deluxe + acceleration disc: 50-70 FPS

FSX:SE 60-80 FPS