Also, Aerosoft disagrees with the assumption that the Steam version of FSX is the one with advantages over standard FSX:
http://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?...dont-think-so/
Quote:
The fact that many people feel it is faster because their STEAM version is less 'polluted' and probably less tweaked. The loss of VAS memory is troublesome and noteworthy, as it the fact that starting the STEAM version takes 40 seconds on my machine while the non STEAM version takes 11 seconds. For somebody like me who starts FSX 20 or more times that matters.
So while we like FSX on STEAM and will support it (the Airbus is now available), there is as far as I can see, absolutely no reason to switch. P3D still remains king of the hill with a huge margin.
|
As is being quoted in that thread, the main purpose for the Steam version was to bring back multiplayer fiuc ntionaöity into FSX after Gamespy was shut down. And that pretty much was at teh core of it so far. That is very different to what Lockheed has done with P3D, where there was focus on technical improvement and code optimization to also increase stability.
I conclude that my earlier assessment probably was correct: the future is P3D/P3D2, not Steam-FSX.