I've been looking for a no-nonsense comparison video between FSX Play and GSPro since I got my GC3, but almost every video stops short of what I *really* want to know. The graphics on both are amazing, and I agree with Jake that I'll go outside if I need better than either system! What I want to know is how do the "ball dynamics" compare. I mean to say that both systems take the same data output from the launch monitor and simulate what might/should/will happen in the real world. I just can't believe all these platforms perform equally well (or poor). Consider your 3rd shot on the 8th or your 2nd shot on the 9th at PB as extreme examples. IRL you're hitting on a flat mat with a perfect surface, but in the game you're hitting from awfully thick rough on a terrible sidehill lie. The 3rd on 8 is downhill, without a lot of spin, to a slick green running away. The 2nd on 9 is a 250-yard shot to a small target with water all along the right. These shots are nowhere near as easy as the video makes it look. Does either FSX Play or GSPro handle such a shot differently? Do they use variables or even random chance to make the resulting shot more realistic? Otherwise, why should I care how great the graphics are if every shot I hit on either is a flat shot from a perfect lie? My hope is that better software (like FSX Play or GSPro) will address this difficulty better than, say, Awesome Golf or E6 iPad version. Any thoughts? I'll probably use GSPro regardless (for the sheer variety of courses not available on the FSX platform), I'm interested to know what you think, as someone who has compared them.
FWIW I heard your comment about "ball physics" at the end and your feeling like GSPro handled that a little better. That's a start. However, I'm looking further. I take your comment to mean how the ball traveled in the simulator compared to how you felt it at the strike. That's not really what I'm referring to. I'm focusing on how the ball reacts to the conditions in the game (rough, lie, slope, firmness) and not how the ball reacts to your impact on the launch monitor. Put differently, I can't most people (including many professionals) making a bogey from the left and short of 8 and a par from the right and long on 9. Would those two shots have played differently on GSPro? More realistically?
Great question. This is my answer: the only software I play is GSPro, the ball physics are excellent and replicate the real world the best I have seen. The lie is adjusted based off where your ball is. On the map of the hole on the lower right it tells you what you lie is and even though you are hitting off of a flat surface, the ball reacts like it is coming out of that lie. I’m am a massive fan of GSPro. I am also a scratch golfer. It wouldn’t be fun if it didn’t replicate reality well.
@@HFHGolf I think this less talked-about aspect of simulator golf is where GSPro software shines. The community-driven, open-source development world brings more input and refinement to the final product. Not to mention the fact that lots of simulator play is about creating fun - not replicating real life! As a scratch golfer, you understand the need for accurate replication, but I'm not sure that's most people. Hanging out with your buddies and hacking balls out of the deep rough a few feet at a time (or a shank here or there) would kill that vibe!
Thanks for the video. Just got a BLP last week and started with FSXPlay. Even coming from TGC2019 and SkyTrak, I didn't care for the graphics or gameplay of FSXPlay. Felt the same way with GSPro versus FSXPlay. GSPro has better graphics, is priced right, more courses without having to put out a bunch of $$$ like FSXPlay charges, etc... So GSPro for me.
Liked your video man. I did GSpro for roughly 3 years and switched to fsx play earlier this year so ive plsyed both quite a lot. My take is that fsx play is a ton more realistic when considering POV of ball flight. In GSpro you're seeing the ball it's like 10 feet in front of you all the time and the ball flight takes off from that stationary ball on the screen. So the virtual ball flight takes off from that ball on screen not your real ball and where it hits on the screen. That diminishes a bunch of realism. It's especially evident when you hit to the right or to the left of the on screen ball. Then the virtual ball flight isn't even remotely close to the real ball flight. In fsx play you're not seeing a stationary ball on the screen you feel as though the digital ball is at your feet. In play The digital ball flight literally takes off from where your real ball hits the screen (if you have your room config set properly which is easy). So in fsx play if I'm punching out around a tree or something I'm just hitting my bell to the left of the tree and the ball goes left or right of it. If im wanting to cut a corner off a fairway I'm just hitting the real ball over the trees on the screen. I'm not having to go to the computer and using my arrow keys to aim to the left of the right of the tree like in GSpro. This adds a level of realism that GSpro doesn't come close to. In fsx play the real ball flight perfectly transforms into the digital ball flight. My 2 cents. If you still have access to both software you should do a video on this.
Thanks for the suggestion. I will fire up FSX play and check it out (I haven’t played it in a while). I think I agree with your main point though! Stay tuned!!
Was gameplay in 4K for the graphics quality? Wasn't sure if the RUclips video title for HD 1080p is related to the RUclips quality or the gameplay quality.
4k for gameplay, but not for the RUclips video. I would like to get all the videos to 4k just a challenge managing the data and upload times. Both softwares are 4k capable.
GS Pro is much better. I still think Foresight is missing a market by not simply offering a virtual range for free or $100/yr. I often dont have time to play and just want to hit some balls and work on my game
The grass looks absolutely terrible on FSXPlay. I don’t understand why it’s so hard to create good graphics. They could have just used Unreal engine. It’s has amazing grass texture and looks real.
People honestly complaining about graphics now on simulators lmao Go outside and play then🤣 I’m playing the software that identifies my yardage and overall gameplay then worrying about graphics tbh
I honestly hardly see a difference between the two anyway. FSX Play looks better, not even sure what other people are seeing here. Its all the same shit.
I've been looking for a no-nonsense comparison video between FSX Play and GSPro since I got my GC3, but almost every video stops short of what I *really* want to know. The graphics on both are amazing, and I agree with Jake that I'll go outside if I need better than either system! What I want to know is how do the "ball dynamics" compare. I mean to say that both systems take the same data output from the launch monitor and simulate what might/should/will happen in the real world. I just can't believe all these platforms perform equally well (or poor). Consider your 3rd shot on the 8th or your 2nd shot on the 9th at PB as extreme examples. IRL you're hitting on a flat mat with a perfect surface, but in the game you're hitting from awfully thick rough on a terrible sidehill lie. The 3rd on 8 is downhill, without a lot of spin, to a slick green running away. The 2nd on 9 is a 250-yard shot to a small target with water all along the right. These shots are nowhere near as easy as the video makes it look. Does either FSX Play or GSPro handle such a shot differently? Do they use variables or even random chance to make the resulting shot more realistic? Otherwise, why should I care how great the graphics are if every shot I hit on either is a flat shot from a perfect lie? My hope is that better software (like FSX Play or GSPro) will address this difficulty better than, say, Awesome Golf or E6 iPad version. Any thoughts? I'll probably use GSPro regardless (for the sheer variety of courses not available on the FSX platform), I'm interested to know what you think, as someone who has compared them.
FWIW I heard your comment about "ball physics" at the end and your feeling like GSPro handled that a little better. That's a start. However, I'm looking further. I take your comment to mean how the ball traveled in the simulator compared to how you felt it at the strike. That's not really what I'm referring to. I'm focusing on how the ball reacts to the conditions in the game (rough, lie, slope, firmness) and not how the ball reacts to your impact on the launch monitor. Put differently, I can't most people (including many professionals) making a bogey from the left and short of 8 and a par from the right and long on 9. Would those two shots have played differently on GSPro? More realistically?
Great question. This is my answer: the only software I play is GSPro, the ball physics are excellent and replicate the real world the best I have seen. The lie is adjusted based off where your ball is. On the map of the hole on the lower right it tells you what you lie is and even though you are hitting off of a flat surface, the ball reacts like it is coming out of that lie. I’m am a massive fan of GSPro. I am also a scratch golfer. It wouldn’t be fun if it didn’t replicate reality well.
@@HFHGolf I think this less talked-about aspect of simulator golf is where GSPro software shines. The community-driven, open-source development world brings more input and refinement to the final product. Not to mention the fact that lots of simulator play is about creating fun - not replicating real life! As a scratch golfer, you understand the need for accurate replication, but I'm not sure that's most people. Hanging out with your buddies and hacking balls out of the deep rough a few feet at a time (or a shank here or there) would kill that vibe!
@@ppierpontagreed. I love it because it allows me to feel like I’m actually playing. It’s not perfect, but it is very close to reality.
Thanks for the video. Just got a BLP last week and started with FSXPlay. Even coming from TGC2019 and SkyTrak, I didn't care for the graphics or gameplay of FSXPlay.
Felt the same way with GSPro versus FSXPlay. GSPro has better graphics, is priced right, more courses without having to put out a bunch of $$$ like FSXPlay charges, etc...
So GSPro for me.
Totally agree, there isn’t anything else close to it in my opinion!
Liked your video man. I did GSpro for roughly 3 years and switched to fsx play earlier this year so ive plsyed both quite a lot. My take is that fsx play is a ton more realistic when considering POV of ball flight. In GSpro you're seeing the ball it's like 10 feet in front of you all the time and the ball flight takes off from that stationary ball on the screen. So the virtual ball flight takes off from that ball on screen not your real ball and where it hits on the screen. That diminishes a bunch of realism. It's especially evident when you hit to the right or to the left of the on screen ball. Then the virtual ball flight isn't even remotely close to the real ball flight. In fsx play you're not seeing a stationary ball on the screen you feel as though the digital ball is at your feet. In play The digital ball flight literally takes off from where your real ball hits the screen (if you have your room config set properly which is easy). So in fsx play if I'm punching out around a tree or something I'm just hitting my bell to the left of the tree and the ball goes left or right of it. If im wanting to cut a corner off a fairway I'm just hitting the real ball over the trees on the screen. I'm not having to go to the computer and using my arrow keys to aim to the left of the right of the tree like in GSpro. This adds a level of realism that GSpro doesn't come close to. In fsx play the real ball flight perfectly transforms into the digital ball flight. My 2 cents. If you still have access to both software you should do a video on this.
Thanks for the suggestion. I will fire up FSX play and check it out (I haven’t played it in a while). I think I agree with your main point though! Stay tuned!!
Was gameplay in 4K for the graphics quality? Wasn't sure if the RUclips video title for HD 1080p is related to the RUclips quality or the gameplay quality.
4k for gameplay, but not for the RUclips video. I would like to get all the videos to 4k just a challenge managing the data and upload times. Both softwares are 4k capable.
On putting how hard is it to “aim” 1st on the software/pc so you can just put straight every time?
I recommend changing the aim on the computer so you can putt straight when there is a lot of break, otherwise I aim like a normal put.
GS Pro is much better. I still think Foresight is missing a market by not simply offering a virtual range for free or $100/yr. I often dont have time to play and just want to hit some balls and work on my game
There is definitely a bigger financial commitment to use FSX
The grass looks absolutely terrible on FSXPlay. I don’t understand why it’s so hard to create good graphics. They could have just used Unreal engine. It’s has amazing grass texture and looks real.
Agreed, I play on GSPro, just feels real!
People honestly complaining about graphics now on simulators lmao
Go outside and play then🤣
I’m playing the software that identifies my yardage and overall gameplay then worrying about graphics tbh
Practice and recreation are two different things. Why not optimize?
I honestly hardly see a difference between the two anyway. FSX Play looks better, not even sure what other people are seeing here. Its all the same shit.