My concern is OS support and possible FSX/addon compatibility issues going forward.

 

That is my main concern. I use XP, but support ends April 8, 2014. Most of the FSX compatibility problems I see posted on various FSX forums are from Windows 7 and Window 8 users.

At the end of the day you can always just use an older OS if it ever becomes an issue.

 

This may mean no more hardware upgrades sometime in the future of driver support stops. But current hardware runs FSX just fine these days

 

I'd have to think by that point XP would have become viable but I've been thinking that for years so who knows.

Future of FSX?

 

I haven't read any of the responses in this thread. Sorry!

 

FSX is sure enough live and kickin'. So is our solar system, galaxy and universe. But time flies... New hardware will come and go... New OS will come and go... Soon all the galaxies in the FSX universe will be very fare from each other. The brigt stars in the FSX galaxy have burnt out a long time ago. The sky will be all black - no visible stars to be seen. No You, no me, no FSX. No nothing, but dark matter.

I was about to retire from FSX and flight simming until ORBX announced FTX Global, so I'll give it another winter. I don't see Prepar3D being the next big thing, but proof will be in the pudding. One can always hope that Aerofly, Outerra or X-Plane suddenly turns into something usable. Realistically though, I think FSX is the last great flight sim.

I would love to find out among all users who have ever owned a computer and loaded software into them what percentage of these users could tell you what a EULA is.And the number who have ever read one. I think we would be better off flying our sims than wasting time reading a EULA. I haven' read one in 30 years and I'm not gonna start reading them now.

Edited August 29, 201312 yr by tkellogg

 

 

I would love to find out among all users who have ever owned a computer and loaded software into them what percentage of these users could tell you what a EULA.

 

As a FSX user the EULA isn't nearly as important as it is for a FSX developer. As a developer of addon scenery for Orbx PNW; I can tell you it is crucial that you read the Orbx EULA before you upload an addon designed to run with a FTX regional scenery!

As to this post only about the future of fsx. I believe the intent was does it have a future and if not what then? I too share that concern. In that light I think any options other than fsx, whether XP 10 or P3D are relevant and appropriate to discus here

He meant the competition between P3D and a (unlikely) new MS Flight Sim, in case MS should ever get back into the FS business.

 

My question remain, what competition, if P3D is not for entertainment why will MS be involved in challenging P3D's EULA, are you telling me that he is suggesting that some P3D users are using it without the right intent or false pretenses in regard to the license?

I should have been clearer. I am talkimg about the average Joe who just uses the software for personal use. I totally agree with you as a developer it is necessay.

My question remain, what competition, if P3D is not for entertainment why will MS be involved in challenging P3D's EULA, are you telling me that he is suggesting that some P3D users are using it without the right intent or false pretenses in regard to the license?

Stop trolling already lol.

glad to see you again JSkorna, would love to see your 'Tesla beats Edison' back

My question remain, what competition, if P3D is not for entertainment why will MS be involved in challenging P3D's EULA, are you telling me that he is suggesting that some P3D users are using it without the right intent or false pretenses in regard to the license?

I apologize, I have misunderstood the question. I do not know, nor am I in the position to judge, whether someone uses a product in violation of the EULA or not.

Obviously LM has a license agreement that prohibits the use of their simulator for entertainment purposes, but they obviously do not care too much about it. However, I have my second thoughts about it, hence I will stick to FSX for the time being.

I had an interesting thought! - yes, I know it's rare but - consider this:

 

Developer purchases Pro version of P3D

 

Developer creates an arcade kiosk with P3D to put in malls

 

Developer charges for each flight.

 

End user is using it for entertainment and developer is using it for commercial gain.

 

What say the EULAgists to this?

 

 

Vic

Vic, thanks so much for that thread from NickN. It is fantastic. I may just have to install FSX also on my Haswell system! I had to bookmark that thread, great read.

Thought you'd like it! You are welcome - enjoy.

 

Vic

Might be a little higher Rob. Its stated on the Orbx forum from FTX themselves that P3DV2 is backwards compatible and that LM is using orbx stuff in the dev studio for testing.

 

Could be, but working with DX10/11 and textures for that API path, they most likely need adjustments to look good (using some of the benefits only available in DX11).  Existing textures might work (be compatible) but will not really look any better and I think the purpose of P3D V2 DX11 support is to improve visuals and performance. 

 

Specific technical details here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/hh308955(v=vs.85).aspx

 

as you can see, BC6H and BC7 format support in the DDS file format.  These are KEY improvements to visual quality, FSX and all Add-ons that use Textures will not be using these two formats, even 3rd party that uses the DDS file format will NOT be using BC6H and BC7 block compression.  IMHO, use of BC6H and BC7 is paramount to improving visual quality.  So P3D V2 may still be "compatible" but for HDR quality textures all the files will need to be formatted (read converted and hence NOT backwards compatible) DDS with BC6H (DX11 only).

 

Here is an example of regular vs HDR texture:

Developer purchases Pro version of P3D

Developer creates an arcade kiosk with P3D to put in malls

Developer charges for each flight.

End user is using it for entertainment and developer is using it for commercial gain.

What say the EULAgists to this?

That exact situation came up on the P3D forums. The developer was told it wasn't allowed.

 

Hook

I don’t think the eventual demise of FSX (if it happens, and I’m not sure it will) will be technology-related, although that does play a part.  Eventually, developers are going to create the very best products for FSX (as in the recent discussions regarding the PMDG 777 and A2A/RealAir C172), and eventually we will become to a point where no new aircraft /sceneries are left to be created that would have any demand and meet these high standards.  At that point,  users are going to have to do what real pilots do-  fly a limited variations of type along routes they have already done, where the only change is weather.  The catch here is that real pilots get to actually go somewhere, and some even get paid to do so.

 

I think eventually there will be a core of folks that like “flight” and are content to do this, but many who may be more motivated by “new products” and may even get bored if there are no new products, may move on. 

 

Over time we have seen new versions of FS, and every time a new version is released it has reset the “newness” clock, but that doesn’t appear to be happening anymore.  Having said all of this,  I fr one will be one of those that will still be around, but I fear the majority might not.

 

Thanks,  Bruce.