Not quite sure why it wouldn't be given they are the exact same engines... Prepar3d only has incremental steps that are obviously going to be in Flight minus the few things that were put in for the industry that the home user would have no use for.

No one has come up with any arguments to the contrary so I still believe that thare are no advantages in using Prepar3d to develop FSX products. Clearly, Prepa3d will be used to develop Prepar3d products, particular when it offers features that are not in FSX. But then such features will not then be usable in FSX. I think, however, there is a fundamental question still to be answered - what is the overall market for Prepar3d add-ons? I may be unimaginative, but because of the small likely installed base I can't see a significant demand even for free or $1, or $5...$100 whatever add-ons, and so no convincing reasons to develop them in the first place - specially not commercially. If freeware add-ons have no restrictions on commercial use there's no reason Prepare3d users shouldn't use them them freely - FSX users can do so now.

I don't think anyone was suggesting that P3D would provide an advantage to developing FSX products. So the answer is probably "no advantage". My impression is that most of the interest here is being generated by people who want a better FSX.As for the viability of an add-on marketplace, you have to remember that not everyone here is a professional developer. Some of us do it for fun, and give away our software for free. I think that those people will still develop for FSX, and may consider putting things in the P3D marketplace since they are already compatible, (for now, at least). Some people do this already, through TurboSquid. I think that these people would make up the bulk of the P3D marketplace, and will not be concerned if they never make a dollar at their hobby. The bigger, professional add-on makers may have second thoughts, especially since they use custom coding in many of their products. For the rest of us, the "convincing reason" to develop for P3D is that we already develop for FSX.- Martin

Not quite sure why it wouldn't be given they are the exact same engines... Prepar3d only has incremental steps that are obviously going to be in Flight minus the few things that were put in for the industry that the home user would have no use for.

Is that so?

I don't think anyone was suggesting that P3D would provide an advantage to developing FSX products. So the answer is probably "no advantage". My impression is that most of the interest here is being generated by people who want a better FSX.As for the viability of an add-on marketplace, you have to remember that not everyone here is a professional developer. Some of us do it for fun, and give away our software for free. I think that those people will still develop for FSX, and may consider putting things in the P3D marketplace since they are already compatible, (for now, at least). Some people do this already, through TurboSquid. I think that these people would make up the bulk of the P3D marketplace, and will not be concerned if they never make a dollar at their hobby. The bigger, professional add-on makers may have second thoughts, especially since they use custom coding in many of their products. For the rest of us, the "convincing reason" to develop for P3D is that we already develop for FSX.- Martin

I've no doubt that individuals will use Prepar3d out of interest as you suggest. However, no one has convinced yt of the commercial advantages of doing so, unless Prepar3d and Flight are compatible as a poster has implied.

Oh well. I've seen what one developer has done already with the SDK and it's simply amazing.... Stuff FSX could never do.. But oh well that's Lockheed stuffing Microsoft code in there essentially, I wonder why Microsoft would be so opposed to using their own DirectX libraries?