Zeus: thanks for that excellent summary. I was only guessing and my memory ain't what it used to be. It would however be a great improvement if complete threading was to be introduced to allow multicore addressing fully (there is some now of course).

 

The whole SimConnect approach is the way to go - new add-ons essentially sitting outside the sim, will encourage high detail add-on creation.

 

Incidentally I note that in X-Plane there are many enthusiastic addon builders, we don't seem to have many or any in the P3D community. We seem to be waiting on the payware folk to join in with P3D.

I can't preach, I have no skills at all in this direction, I am just a pilot!

Speaking for myself, since I am one of those FSX payware developers, the problem is lack of critical mass. We still develop for FSX and then port the product to Prepar3D. That is the way we will operate until there is enough users for us to start doing Prepar3D exclusive products. I think that the other developers are using the same strategy.

 

Don't get me wrong, We want to see P3D come out as the FSX successor, but until it does we will keep FSX as our mainstay.

Incidentally, I am prepared to pay for the v2.0 as I did when I moved from FSanything to the next FSanything.

 

And if there is some break in backwards comaptability I bet that it will only be a week or two before one of our gurus comes up with the necessary migration tool.

Zeus: thanks for that excellent summary. I was only guessing and my memory ain't what it used to be. It would however be a great improvement if complete threading was to be introduced to allow multicore addressing fully (there is some now of course).

I believe that is one of their goals.

"We need to work together, so no fears about that. We are certainly looking at and noting the feature requests from the community as well. Where possible we will communicate our intentions for any major changes as we are currently doing for the DX11 upgrade. (BTW, this specific update should not see any major changes to add-ons.) Our intention is to improve and extend SimConnect as we have done so already without breaking backwards compatibility. There will inevitably be changes as the product continues to grow and improve. That is part of the growth of any product and the forward momentum of technology. As a member of the flight simulation community for over 20 years, I get the requirement to maintain stability. At the same time, we all want to push the boundaries.... "

 

"We intend keeping backwards compatibility with existing add-ons."

 

From LM forum in regards to 2.0 DX11 Backwards compatability

"We need to work together, so no fears about that. We are certainly looking at and noting the feature requests from the community as well. Where possible we will communicate our intentions for any major changes as we are currently doing for the DX11 upgrade. (BTW, this specific update should not see any major changes to add-ons.) Our intention is to improve and extend SimConnect as we have done so already without breaking backwards compatibility. There will inevitably be changes as the product continues to grow and improve. That is part of the growth of any product and the forward momentum of technology. As a member of the flight simulation community for over 20 years, I get the requirement to maintain stability. At the same time, we all want to push the boundaries.... "

 

"We intend keeping backwards compatibility with existing add-ons."

 

From LM forum in regards to 2.0 DX11 Backwards compatability

 

All your addons will work with Prepar3D DX11 BUT to take advantage of the DX11 features your old addons will have to be patched to be DX11 compatible, if not you will see the same as you are seeing right now, DX9 or DX10.

 

Same as some of your addons right now, they will all work in DX9 but some of them don't play well in DX10 (white skin planes for example) because they were not made 100% DX10 compatible

All your addons will work with Prepar3D DX11 BUT to take advantage of the DX11 features your old addons will have to be patched to be DX11 compatible, if not you will see the same as you are seeing right now, DX9 or DX10.

 

Same as some of your addons right now, they will all work in DX9 but some of them don't play well in DX10 (white skin planes for example) because they were not made 100% DX10 compatible

 

I guess that falls outside LM's hands and into the developer's.

Indeed it does.

I guess that falls outside LM's hands and into the developer's.

 

Well... PMDG hasn't openly supported the platform yet. I doubt that they will be making any code/model modifications to their fleet to make them compatible with P3D v2. This will definitely be a major deterrent for many simmers alike.

 

Until they make a move on P3D, I won't move over. If they end up over at XP10, I will also follow.

Well... PMDG hasn't openly supported the platform yet. I doubt that they will be making any code/model modifications to their fleet to make them compatible with P3D v2. This will definitely be a major deterrent for many simmers alike.

 

Until they make a move on P3D, I won't move over. If they end up over at XP10, I will also follow.

 

Again, I believe this is a chicken and egg problem. They don't make the move because there are not too many users. There aren't too many users because the developers aren't making the move.

 

As for DX11 and backwards compatibility. LM says that they will address that, so I have faith that most of the current add-ons will work without problem on ver 2.0 regardless of DX11.

PMDG are clearly cool on P3, although I suspect they had some discussions that staggered. Let me say their excellent 737 works perfectly in P3, and I hope there 777 is equally as friendly.

X-plane has made huge improvements so there are other alternatives as well.

But if a dev could come up with a detailed and demanding CRJ P3D all will be right in heaven.

 

 

Warmest regards,

 

Ian McPhail

I recall Rob R from PMDG making a statement during a conference earlier in the year (or was it last year - it was a convention of some kind that PMDG presented at) that said going forward they were deliberately going to make their aircraft in such a way as to PREVENT them from working in P3D due to legal advice they had received regarding the use of their aircraft for professional training purposes. Basically the gist seemed to be that the more professional/academic audience that P3D seems to be aimed at could potentially cause some misuse of what is essentially a (realistic) consumer product and that this could lead to legal issues. That's just what I gathered from his statement anyhow so take it for what it's worth and feel free to research yourself. The videos of this presentation were on Avsim as I recall.

Im seriously considering the plunge to 1.4 as im sick and tired of FSX crashes and stutters. My question is being of limited funds, if I buy the academic 1.4 does anyone know if there will be a fairly substantial price upgrade to 2.0? Might be too prelimary to jump to those conclusions, but thought I would throw it out there.

 

Or is it better to wait and buy 2.0 when it comes out.

will be a fairly substantial price upgrade to 2.0? Might be too prelimary to jump to those conclusions

 

Yes, perhaps.

Or is it better to wait and buy 2.0 when it comes out.

This is something you have to decide. It is your money. V2.0 should come out somewhere during 2013, so it is definitely not knocking on the door during next few weeks. Also, another thing is where 2.0 backward compatibility lies. In the worst case scenario many of your precious addons won't work with the newly built graphic engine correctly and money invested in them is pretty much lost.

 

1.4 is one fine package and I've transferred to it from FSX completely. It is not without its problems though, as some FSX addons don't completely work with it, require some work and adjustment to get them to work or in the easiest case practically require the purchase and use of the migration tool with installation. Lack of start menu is also annoyance, although I hope Steve finishes Ideal Flight for Prepar3D soon, which pretty much overcomes this problem.