http://forum.avsim.n...ghts-on-flight/Well worth the read...They also address P3D in post #43...

Regarding Prepar3D - as far as we know (and I haven't seen anything to suggest otherwise) - P3D isn't a consumer product. The ESP license they're using allows for use in the professional/training markets. Unless they find a way to convert that license into a consumer one and produce a low cost version (relative to the professional one) I'm not sure I see how this is a viable platform for a developer like us just yet.

And in post number 56

With all of that said, we have been very well supported by Laminar Research. They have been gracious in providing us with copies of the release version of XPlane10 to work with- and as previously mentioned I am adding someone to the team who will be spearheading the process of porting one of our existing aircraft into Xplane10.What we learn and how well that process goes will, to a large degree, dictate whether we choose to support that platform in the long run.The folks at Lockheed Martin have been the polar opposite. Our Commercial Division has been reaching out to them for a year without any reply back. (Well- actually we gave up on them in September...so make that nine months) Perhaps I'm just getting cranky in my old age- but if we are going to sell a bunch of commercial licenses for them I'm really not inclined to start shelling out money to buy their over-priced, dressed up FSX for every member of the development team without knowing for certain where they plan on taking the platform.

Well there you have it, from Robert S. Randazzo PMDG himself...Lockheed Martin isn't answering any of their emails for a year...

Edited January 7, 201214 yr by Jacoba

And PMDG is completely correct,The Aces team was right on Q with creating the next gen simulation platform. When they booted Aces the greed took over and as PMDG described their greed into getting a piece of the secondary market took over. As far as I'm concerned MS burned bridges with this move. Someone or some company will come out with a better platform. I at the least want to thank PMDG for sticking to their guns and not caving into the the corporate BS. FSX is just fine for now and can only get better with the next gen hardware coming out. I spent $3000 dollars on a computer to run FSX about 4 years ago and now I run it nice and smooth off of a stock HP Laptop. Plain and simple PMDG is a great company and they have my support.

FSX is just fine for now and can only get better with the next gen hardware coming out

I've been reading into Intel's upcoming work, and I don't see a huge jump in number of cores (at least for desktops), because most people won't use more than 4-6 cores unless doing video encoding. In terms of FSX, if I compare my Q9550 Penrym system to my Sandy Bridge CPU, performance for FSX has basically doubled. Not sure if it's the clock speed or something in the newer chips.

MS has divorced the community... I vote we urge avsim to remove MS from their forum. I would even donate money for that!

did 3rd party developers have to pay any fees/royalities etc to Microsoft for FSX ?To be honest I don't see why the community wouldn't expect MS to make moneyoff 3rd party developments - it is their core product after allI wish MS luck - I'm a bit bored with FSX these days tbh - and spend more time in DCS A10so anything new - even if a bit different is goodits certainly better than what I'd assumed when ACES disappeared - ie I'd assumed they'd be no more FS products for a long long whileI don't see the reason for everyone being so negative

Most worrying what PMDG has to say about Prepar3D...

You should have named your topic "For those who who who haven't seen this yet, PMDG won't endorse Prepar3d"... because that is the message you are trying to purvey, aren't you ?

On the other hand the good folks at PMDG are indicating a willingness to explore potential within X-Plane and that is certainly welcome news.

Also PMDG have gone up a notch in respect from me. Instead of casually dismissing XPX as some have done they are taking a serious look at their options. Maybe it will not eventuate but at least they are prepared to have a look around.It makes sound business sense and for those of us who enjoy Xplane, very welcome news.

Lockheed Martin came calling us, quite persistently over a period of 12 months before we had spare cycles to install their code. We did not approach them.Perhaps Robert should be talking to John Nicol who is the P3D program manager? I suspect their commercial division folks may not have understood the history behind PMDG and their stellar reputation in the Microsoft FS world.We also have not discounted XPX completely, but we're just not cashed up enough for a complete retooling exercise to a completely new platform. It's not a port, it's a relearning, redevelopment, retraining, and ultimately, a very expensive exercise to move away from the FSX/P3D engine. We're too small and risk averse to begin throwing money around like that. We've invested about 8 years and countless man hours in the Microsoft platform; you just don't jump ship overnight, does not happen.

I have been unimpressed with XPlane 10. However, if PMDG were to release a product for Xplane, I think we would have a huge number of MSFS customers making the switch. Even more so now that Flight has shown its true colors. Although I feel even FLY II had better flight dynamics than Xplane 10, if they were to get a huge rise in users, there is no doubt they would be hiring more people for their team, and by Xplane 11/12, it would be a much more refined sim.

Most worrying what PMDG has to say about Prepar3D...

It's certainly an interesting perspective in light of recent (and recently closed) threads.

XPlane10 is visually unimpressive. Really odd housing autogen. Orbx would make a dramatic change. Given the maturity of XP10 the API interface should be well documented.I will try Flight but with very little anticipation of any satisfaction.

We also have not discounted XPX completely, but we're just not cashed up enough for a complete retooling exercise to a completely new platform. It's not a port, it's a relearning, redevelopment, retraining, and ultimately, a very expensive exercise to move away from the FSX/P3D engine. We're too small and risk averse to begin throwing money around like that. We've invested about 8 years and countless man hours in the Microsoft platform; you just don't jump ship overnight, does not happen.

This statement-despite your previous rather disparaging comments regarding X-Plane....is quite welcome news that you may yet contemplate doing future projects within XP. And you may find the market larger than you realize going forward.I enjoy both FSX and X-Plane and already own several of the ORBX packages (and your scenery coverage is one of the few things that keeps me flying within FSX on a regular basis). Speaking for myself if you were to develop similar quality products for X-Plane they would be purchased and I feel confident in saying I would not be the only one to do so.CheersTed

I enjoy both FSX and X-Plane and already own several of the ORBX packages (and your scenery coverage is one of the few things that keeps me flying within FSX on a regular basis). Speaking for myself if you were to develop similar quality products for X-Plane they would be purchased and I feel confident in saying I would not be the only one to do so.CheersTed

I would also stand in line for the purchase. Definitely.