I have to hand it to PMDG There honest about it and not skurting the EULA thing issue and locking it out! Commercial/ Entertainment.

Does P3D have to move to the private sector? So far is has not, and there are many users and multiple more joining. Remember for some, FSX is not just a performance issue but a stability one.

No, it does not have to. We can still use it. Nevertheless, it's going to block addon companies, PMDG for starters, and I am sure many others are going to think twice.

No, it does not have to. We can still use it. Nevertheless, it's going to block addon companies, PMDG for starters, and I am sure many others are going to think twice.

That's what I'm concerned about. PMDG holds a big stick and knows it. (Not necessarily a good thing.)I fear it may be a case of the tail trying to wag the dog in regards to this case.I'm sure opponents to P3D will be glib with the news. Seeing evidence of it in the forums already. It is a rather interesting developement. I will still stand beside Prepar3D, it is still by far the best option for the future for the time being. I feel with each new update, it's going to have deniers paranoid. :( :lol:Then again, "I" may be in for the surprise. :(

"The sim made me do it", even though it clearly states it's not to be used for training purposes in any way what so ever, would be a very weak defense in my opinion.

First of all: the main reasong PMDG doesn't go for P3D is not (as far as I understand) that the are afraid someone will sue them because they've done something bad in real life due to something they learned in a sim. The reason simply is that P3D is not for consumer/simmers and PMDG only makes addons for consumers/simmers.Apart from that: PMDG may clearly state their products are not for training purposes, but P3D is ALL about training purposes! That is their main market! And they want third party developers to create stuff that CAN be used for OFFICIAL training. Anything else they aren't interested in. PMDG and LM have completely different target groups.So it's very logical that PMDG won't be creating stuff for P3D. I am rather surprised other developers don't take the same stand. Specially the ones that ask money for P3D-licenses. They are playing a dangerous game. Right now they only have dollar signs in their eyes (imho) but it may backfire on them hard.

Deep breath guys, there is a whole world of commercial negotiations going on to which we are not party, and will never know the full details.We can only guess and flame each other. So far there has been a considerable amount of development for P3D from which we benefit. Frankly its wait and see; because if FLIGHT and X-Plane are the future of flight simming I am glad that I won't be around to make do with second rate platforms..

Although PMDG lawyers have presented a "plausible" scenario, like X-Plane, it does not mean likely. First, Prepar3D's EULA does not overrule anyone else's. PMDG clearly states that you can not use any of their products for aircraft familiarization or procedural training, regardless of what platform they operate on. To do so would not only be breach of PMDG's EULA, it would also be stupid. Airlines do not depend on such products for such things. They all provide their own in-house training where required and use full motion simulators either in-house or through contract with companies such as FlightSafety. If the use of their products is concern to the liability issue of an individual causing an aviation incident through use of their products, then they had better get rid of all their beta tester who also fly some of these aircraft routinely with airlines for exactly the same reasons.The Prepar3D site also has two aircraft available for download the L-188 Electra and the L049 Constellation. Are those developers also subject to legal action if someone operating one of these aircraft turns the real thing into a tinfoil ball? If I train in a C.A.E. full motion simulator and make an error while flying the real thing can I sue them for my said error if I blame the simulator? I find it hard to believe even if remotely possible that if I caused a egregious error while flying I could blame PMDG or Prepar3D for that matter and have it stand up in court or an aviation tribunal. If this is the case, than the same could be held true about FSX or X-Plane. "The sim made me do it", even though it clearly states it's not to be used for training purposes in any way what so ever, would be a very weak defense in my opinion. Frankly as a licensed commercial pilot, I wouldn't even admit such a thing. In my opinion, the only issue the lawyers pointed out is the same possible slippery slope that exists in either FSX, FS9, or X-Plane. This whole argument was raised after 9/11 if most recall, a rather jittery moment for flight sim enthusiasts and developers about the future of the whole franchise.I find it also odd, that although they have concerns about liability issues with a commercial capable simulation platform, they have no concern about the same liability when it comes to their publications. The only difference between PMDG's training material for the NGX and Boeing approved documentation, is PMDG's states "Not For Real World Use". From what I have seen, it looks like Boeings material with a PMDG wrapper. I certainly can't distinguish it from the real thing. If that little statement at the bottom of every page protects PMDG from liability, which it does, how is it any different from the statements in the EULA that is part of their software?I am not a lawyer and perhaps their are other aspects of this issue that I have not considered, but at this juncture, I can honestly say I am confused.

If it's enough that scares a developer like PMDG off, to the point, they are going to lock out existing products from being used on P3D, I think other developers are going to get cold feet as well.

Hi,Individuals get type ratings for a reason, what type ratings are available to anyone using just the P3D computer program?.

Note the highlighting I added from the PMDG post linked in the OP. I don't know where this "yes there will be a consumer P3D release" rumor came from, but the below from a reputable informed source seems to contradict this quite clearly.

(snip)PMDG Development for Prepar3d:===========================Thanks to some spry folks here in the forum, we have been in dicsussion with Lockheed Martin, Corp. regarding the current state of, and future development plans for the Prepar3d platform. As I stated in a previous post on this topic, we are currently evaluating which "commercially available" platform we are going to be using for our Commercial Solutions Division.I have seen quite a bit of discussion in this forum and others about whether or not Prepar3d is the replacement platform for FSX, etc etc etc. After my discussion with John Nicol at Lockheed Martin, I feel that I have a very clear picture of what LMCorp has planned for Prepar3d, and equally importantly, *what they do NOT have planned.*From PMDG's perspective, Prepar3d is not going to be a platform into which we push our retail product line. There will never be a consumer version of P3D, and as such it is not reasonable or feasible for us to expect the major market to exist on P3D beyond a small set of folks who don't mind the niche nature and the price tag.(snip)

For those that use a P3D developer's subscription to get their FS fix, realize that add-on developers owe NOTHING to current owners of their products when it comes to porting their FSX addons to P3D. IMO whining about this is being rather immature or ignorant towards the reality of the market they are dealing with (sic).

Edited February 6, 201214 yr by TheFamilyMan

Hi,Individuals get type ratings for a reason, what type ratings are available to anyone using just the P3D computer program?.

Yeah, I'm pretty shure if I walk into any Chief Pilots office and claimed I got checked out on a PC based simulator to fly their "insert aircraft here", they are going to hire me on the spot. :He He:I recall when I was Operations Manager designate at my air carrier/FTU getting phone calls inquiring if their PC based flight time could go in any way towards their training or time building time. After a polite chuckle, I would inform them it could not. The only PC based approved training was for IFR training and familiarization, where one is learning the procedures of IFR navigation and approaches, not to teach how to fly or operate any particular aircraft. Even then it was only permitted when being conducted with an authorized instructor or training captain. I understand PMDG's position, I just believe the concerns are way out on the extreme possibilities of things, after all, in reality anything is plausible.

For those that use a P3D developer's subscription to get their FS fix, realize that add-on developers owe NOTHING to current owners of their products when it comes to porting their FSX addons to P3D. IMO whining about this is being rather immature or ignorant towards the reality of the market they are dealing with (sic).

Rod, my concern is not for what PMDG chooses to do or not do with it's property, it is the weight of it's opinions within the flight simming community. It has leverage. A position that I'm very sure they are pleased to have. Due to it's near cult following status of serious users, proven with the hours leading up to the NGX release, it holds mass appeal and sway on nearly every posting in forums it makes. I don't drink the blue Cool Aid, but there are thousands that do, and it will be a shame if a good product or opportunity is permitted to slide because of such sway. I'm concerned PMDG is in a good enough position to determine who does *good* or who does *better*, a point not even lost on Microsoft themselves, hence their early invitations when Flight was under development. I'm not sure what you were implying in your lead in to your quote from Mr. Randanzzo, but I believe it was that individuals have claimed there was going to be a *consumer version* of P3D released, I believe you have it backwards with the "commercial release" you stated. I have seen such postings as well, but in this thread I have seen no such claim being made. It is highly unlikely you will ever find the same software being used for government, military, and commercial users, sitting on a Best Buy shelf next to BF3. Robert's statement after talking with John Nicol of L.M. Prepar3D is true. There will never be a consumer version of P3D.

We, the entertainment community, are not considered consumers? Im not a PMDG ###### but what they have stated is REALITY!

Edited February 7, 201214 yr by Barnstormer1

I have never been of the view that there will be a full commercial version of P3D - it beggars belief that Microsoft would ever have sold their ESP without hedging it with strong conditions as to use. With FLIGHT near release it would have been one of the strangest commercial decisions ever to allow someone else to compete directly in the same market with an MS based rival.As to PMDG, Thad is probably right, but to avoid any dispute I haven't tried to transfer any PMDG aircraft over to P3D. I am only one light in my small corner, but I will exercise my right as a consumer not to purchase anymore PMDG products into the future.I mean a full entertainment version of P3D, sorry very inaccurate on my part.

As to PMDG, Thad is probably right, but to avoid any dispute I haven't tried to transfer any PMDG aircraft over to P3D. I am only one light in my small corner, but I will exercise my right as a consumer not to purchase anymore PMDG products into the future.

As if they monitor your computer.... :(

Yes but the threat seems to be that in v2 LM will have accepted the argument from PMDG to insert some lock-out code to prevent owners transferring their wares.Further PMDG seems to be threatening to re-write their EULA to make beheading, mandatory seizure of property, or worse if the poor bloody consumer who had paid full tote odds dares to transfer their property in the privacy of their own home.I cannot see the source of this righteousness on PMDG's part. After all we do a deal with LM when we buy a development licence not with anyone else.Why on earth would PMDG want to cut itself off from a source of income when the onus lies on the purchaser in the use of the platform.Last, what a persiflage, a waste of breath to claim that a professional pilot practicing on a home PC might then create a liability for PMDG. No hours on a home computer count for anything towards a pilot's re-qualification. Only properly certified full motion simulators and aircraft. After all this piece of logic should then be true for an ATP flying an NGX on FSX. Yes, I know, PMDG sells MSFS for entertainment, while LM is technically a commercial product. But no real world airline would treat a home PC as a genuine and loggable training tool.

But. in the end, let me just say this:It's our own fault. It's our own big mouth and yadda EULA this, yadda PMDG that, which brought them together in the first place and pushed them to make the lock. If everyone would have just shut it, we probably could have used it for quite a long time.Of course, could have happened nonetheless, but still, talking about it and asking PMDG to make decisive decision did not help.

Word Not Allowed: you make me feel good. I never believed my expressed views in forums could make anyone, let alone PMDG make up its mind. I was only reacting to their post.Sure there have been rants all over the place about this, but I go back to my original view, suck it and see. Don't sweat the details time will reveal all.