Fs 2004 Transition? Prepare to Use Gmax

[Chris Willis 8]

Hi, Aircraft from previous cfs and Msfs are not compatible with CFS3, (maybe only the Gmax aircraft created for fs2k2.CFS3 Does not contains *.bgl anymoreSome Sign for Fs 2004 preperation and transition right now since thats cfs series is the engine of futur Msfs.Q: Can planes from previous versions of Combat Flight Simulator or Flight Simulator be imported into this game?A: Unfortunately not. The new graphics engine prevents the use of imported planes from previous versions of Combat Flight Simulator. To better support our add-on aircraft developers, Combat Flight Simulator 3 will ship with a version of the discreet

[Guest cwright]

Chris, as FS2004 scenery will presumably also not use bgl's then Microsoft are going to have to get their act together regarding the scenery SDK. It took them a year to bring out the FS2002 SDK. If they do this for FS2004 it will be impossible to do any scenery design until August, 2004. That's simply not acceptable for what is supposed to be an open architecture flight simulator. I think Microsoft should aim at shipping the scenery SDK with the FS2004 CD's. Even better, why not a scenery SDK for CFS3 so that designers could prepare for these enormous changes? There is hope. Tucker Hadfield stated that the CFS3 aircraft SDK will ship on the CFS3 CD's. Wake up, Microsoft. How on Earth did it take a year to write a Word document? Authors have written complete novels in less time.... Best regards, Chris Wright

[B777ER 2,486]

Well well. As Chris Willis seems to be in the know when it comes to these topics, I tend to take his word as being true. That being the case, I can say for sure that I will not be upgrading to FS2004 for a while after it comes out. If bgl files will no longer be able to be used, that means that every dang commercial scenery bought whether it be Simflyers, GAP, Gary Summons UK stuff, etc... will all be useless unless they patch them and I don't see how unless they re-do the whole thing over in GMAX. Makes for a lot of wasted money buying all these sceneries to just have them become obsolete in a year from now. What do you all bet that our favorite jetliners like the PIC767, DF737, etc.. will also be useless. Man, to think of the money I have spent on all these sceneries which all have bgl files. I think FS2002 with a few blurries will do just fine thank you.

[Guest waltch]

HiIf the *.blg do not work anymore.... does that mean that also the traffic.blg (AI traffic in FS2002) will be useless?Will they come up with a whole new system for the AI Traffic in FS2004 and will it mean that all work has been done and is being done by:- Lee Swordy (Ttools, AFCAD)- Project AI- AI Traffic Moverand many more will be worthless for FS2004?If that is true, I think many simmers will not move to FS2004 very quickly.Walter

[Guest]

Guess we people will have to stick up with several default aircraft & scenery for a long time. I am very disappointed at Microsoft for not making non-gmax aircraft & .bgl type sceneries compalible. :-roll

http://www.jet-precision.com/JPLOGO.jpgZhe Xu Leewww.jet-precision.com

[Guest]

It is called progress!!! If you want all the new eye candy and features and fast frame rates, as you see with any new scenery that is done in G-MAX than it has to go in that direction! Why go backwards??? Wayne

[Guest Joshieca]

I thought that PAI planes were Gmax aircraft? Would'nt you be able to use them and other Gmax aircraft? Losing the AI traffic flight plans will suk, but I am sure that, that code will be "cracked" shortly after FS2K4 comes out.

[Chris Willis 8]

Hi, They can change their mine also and I am sure they will do something good thats we will not be dissapointed for compatibility, also maybe they will be a converter. As for Ai and ATC, those can be improved also. Adding out of the box the Scenery sdk, Aircraft SDK will be a major step etc..ThanksChris Willis[link:fsw.simflight.com/FSWMenuFsSim.html]Clouds And Addons For MsFshttp://fsw.simflight.com/fsw.jpg

[Datalink 26]

OK, so it will be a pain, but to be honest, I'm looking forward to the change. Everyone goes on at how MS don't upgrade much between each version, and now they are really offering something that could possibly be the best change/upgrade in years, and everyones against it. I find that a little odd?Better performancePossibility of more systemsPurhaps a new environment systemMore releastic ATC and trafficBetter texturesIf .bgl's can't do these things, WHY keep themJust my $0.02

[barryward12345 0]

>OK, so it will be a pain, but to be honest, I'm looking >forward to the change. Everyone goes on at how MS don't >upgrade much between each version, and now they are really >offering something that could possibly be the best >change/upgrade in years, and everyones against it. I find >that a little odd? >>Better performance >Possibility of more systems >Purhaps a new environment system >More releastic ATC and traffic >Better textures >>If .bgl's can't do these things, WHY keep them >I'm with you!!! -- PROVIDED new Fsims do actually improve the hobby, I will be only too happy to throw away everything I have including the computer . However -- there is a big emphasis on the word "provided" and will also be an unwritten , quiet consideration of just how big any improvement is. It could be that FS2004 needs to be overlooked if it does not offer much advancement.Barry

[Dewey 0]

You know, folks, you can always have both versions on your computer. You can fly FS2K2 and keep adding to FS2K4 as third party additions come along for it until you get it provisioned well enough to switch over to it completely.Dewey

[Guest christian]

Is this REALLY true? I just can't believe that the whole lot of BGL commands gets dropped. There are quite a few bgl commands that are still needed. The scenery SDK states that all polygon / rendering BGL commands will get dropped, and only the gmax BGL commands will work, but there is no suggestion that the other bgl commands will also be discontinued...I just want to confirm that *.bgl is really dead or just part of it. After reading the scenery SDK the switch doesn't sound as dramatic.Personally, I think M$ is taking a big risk. If they don't provide conversion tools for older aircraft / scenery and also no SDKs, I suspect that FS2004 will have a tough stand. On the other hand with the appropiate converters this is a move into the right direction. Why keep supporting all those old rendering commands? It shouldn't be too hard to produce converters, but I really hope M$ does the job instead of relying on us once again.On the other hand, I really suspect that FS2004 will have it's share of problems and it will take until FS2006 until the problems due to the switch are resolved. Time will tell...In regards to AFD, TDF/TMF, and AI files, those parts are only wrapped into bgl files, without actually being part of the classic object code. I suspect those files will keep working with FS2004...But I have no inside info, so this is just speculation...Cheers, Christian

[Guest]

PAI planes ARE made with GMAX, and since we don't bother with panels in our aircraft we probably won't have to do much updating to them when FS2004 comes out.As far as the traffic.bgl goes, I've heard that MS will be releasing the SDK with FS2004, so nobody should have to crack anything. I suppose a convertor of some sort might be useful to convert the current flight plan format to whatever FS2004 will use, but if MS is going to beef-up ATC for the next version then I'm pretty sure that the flightplans data will probably have new features that will require updating.Here's a word of advice to the aircraft modellers out there: Stop waiting for FSDS 2 to be released. Start learning GMAX because we're only a year away from the release of FS2004 and when it comes out the FSDS designers are going to be left behind again while the developers try to implement the new features of FS2004 for FSDS 3.

[PeterR 9]

Well, if it takes a while for FS2004 to be supported by third-parties, then that means that most of us can wait and buy FS2004 at a substantial discount in 2005.Peter http://bfu.avsim.net/sigpics/PeterR.gifBFU Forums Moderator[table border=2 cellpadding=0 cellspacing=1][tr][td][table border=0 cellpadding=8 cellspacing=0][tr][td bgcolor=#540000]http://bfu.avsim.net/sigpics/logo75.gif[/td][td align="center" bgcolor=#FFFFF6]Bush Flying Unlimited"At home in the wild"Looking for adventure? Come join us! * [link:bfu.avsim.net|Web Site] * [link:www.cafepress.com/bfu,bfu2,bfu3,bfu4|BFU Store] * [link:bfu.avsim.net/join.htm]Join!][/td][/tr][/table][/td][/tr][/table

[Guest GerrishGray]

Hi everyone :-waveI think we're worrying unduly about the speed that add-ons will be available for FS2004. We already know that FS2002 is officially a transition version and quite a lot of FS2004 is included already. There is good reason to believe that existing aircraft created with gMax will be fully compatible, and we are also close to knowing how to build compatible scenery. CFS3 will be released in two months time and we are promised SDKs that will start arriving next February which should help us in the preparation for FS2004. CFS3 add-ons might not start appearing until Spring 2003, but I suspect we will find that FS2004 add-ons will be available almost immediately after its release date later in the year. We will probably also find that our favourite add-on tools are updated pretty quickly so that we won't have to rely on gMax alone - in fact some authors have started this process already.We all tend to criticise Microsoft a bit too easily here - yeah, yeah, I do it too sometimes ;-). But the truth is that they do a great job for us to encourage our hobby - makes sense, doesn't it, because it means more bucks for them! We get gMax to make sure that every purchaser of the Professional versions is able to participate in modelling scenery objects and aircraft. And they go on giving us information to allow us to create our own tools and add-ons. When we have to indulge in a bit of reverse-engineering as well to complete the picture, they don't seem to get unduly worried but just let us enjoy it as part of the hobby.Cheer up everyone, all these silly rumours are just idle, negative, speculation and, in truth, our hobby gets better and better, and better-supported, with each new release. MS are hardly going to go and shoot themselves in the foot over a product that has been part of their range, and a nice little earner, almost since their inception, now are they? Of course, this also means that we probably won't be able to resist buying FS2004 for Xmas 2003 rather than steel ourselves waiting for the 2005 discounts, eh! Must be great to be Bill Gates and not have to worry where the next billion bucks are coming from ...CheersGerrish :-beerchug