If it was a German troll, he did a great job.

 

And he is probably hiding under an excellently engineered bridge... wearing lederhosen 

The list includes several features that were hinted at by developers in months past.

 

The list is way to full of technical details to be fake as well.

 

I wonder if implementing DX11 in v2 would help get rid of the blurries and autogen pop-ups once and for all, this is really something I can't stand.

The rendering engine is totally redone and they are drawing massive areas (maybe even the whole world they said) in single draw calls on the GPU.

 

This was mentioned months ago on their forums.

 

I don't expect blurries to be an issue.

 

They are also drawing autogen in one call now, which is just nuts. The kicker will be if they broadened the limit to which autogen will display. That would get rid of noticeable popup.

 

 

I don't expect blurries to be an issue.

 

That, plus autogen pop-ups and the performance issues of FSX would make P3D very tempting.

That, plus autogen pop-ups and the performance issues of FSX would make P3D very tempting.

Yep. I hope they fix popup and increase the range autogen displays.

 

That's the single biggest FSX eyesore to me.

And he is probably hiding under an excellently engineered bridge... wearing lederhosen 

Reading Mein Kampf 

 

I hope LM can just come out with something. According to the beta page, 11/1/13 is the cutoff date.

Wow, I wonder what the LM devs think when they read this thread?

 

Bob

They would probably wish we stop. Guys, the list of features was probably never meant to see the light of day yet because it is not finalized.

 

At Avsim we try to connect developers to our members and as such, we put together the first interview from Lockheed Martin to a Flight Sinulation site.

 

Really wish that instead of publishing things that may breach an NDA or were wild speculation, just send the staff at Avsim a request to get more information on a developers product and we would be more than happy to follow it up.

 

I have gone back to LM regarding V2.0 and they stated they are not ready for release details yet, but expect to be able to talk to us about it in a couple of months.

 

Rest assured we will have the information for you.

 

 

 

Sent from my Mobile thing

 

 

It's interesting that John V. recently made a comment that they do not have a copy of the P3d 2.0, but maybe he was just adhering to the NDA. I had a feeling that once the price of the DX10 Fixer was announced at $32, that P3D 2.0 would be just around the corner. Isn't that always the way things happen? :fool:

this is not entirely correct.

he claims the do actually have the beta in house for testing.

http://www.orbxsystems.com/forum/topic/65210-prepar3d-v-20-in-beta/?p=595920

 

32bit app will be bound to the 3gb limit. Its only 3gb that is available for VAS and not 4gb.

that is incorrect.

32bit is 4GB (2³²  = 4,294,967,295), Hence, a processor with 32-bit memory addresses can directly access 4 GiB of byte-addressable memory. it is pure math.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_address_space

you are mixing with 32bit OS which by default allocates 2GB to kernel mode and 2gb for User mode (=4GB total).

when adding the /3GB switch, you reduce kernel mode to 1GB and increase User mode to 3GB (=4GB in total).

 

 

I was a little disappointed until I heard that LM purchased PMDG as well as Carenado.

 

Bob

Do you have a source for this? (Post, URL, etc.)

redundant posting *DELETE*

P3D 1.4 runs better on Win8 now so I guess 2.0 will also run great

I agree that P3D 1.4 runs fine on Win 8 (other than the MS-induced joystick bug). It looks almost as good with only DX9 as FSX looks with DX10.

 

I'm still surprised that certain people here are so transfixed with why P3d won't initially be a 64 bit app (which it eventually will be). The vast majority of mass market video games that run on the PC aren't 32 bit apps. Most are still DX9c and only a few are DX11. Even Skyrim is only DX10. DX11 is so advanced, that the GPU takes over a lot of what the CPU used to do. I've got 12 recent  video games (via Steam) on my PC (all best sellers) and not one is 64 bit. My guess is that is because DirectX 9c and 32 bit code is still the norm for consoles. The new consoles may eventually all go 64 bit and DX12, but that's down the road a bit.

 

FSX is a legacy codebase. It was written to take advantage of your CPU not a high end GPU. And not today's CPU, but rather those from roughly 5 years ago. With FSX,  I've got 12 cores and 8 of them sit around running the infamous System Idle Process.

 

 

 

Do you have a source for this? (Post, URL, etc.)

 

LOL

I am so excited for P3D 2.0 if that list is even half true.

 

My main concern (like many others I'm sure) is, will the buttload of money we have spent on products built for FSX transfer to P3D, or at least: will the developers update their products to work with P3D 2.0?

There are already more than enough developers involved with P3D V2 that I could actually care less if some hold out.

 

PMDG and Flight 1 are not the be all and end all of Flight Simulator.

 

I certainly wont be paying the inflated 'commercial training' fees that PMDG and F1 will be charging for their products to work in P3D.

 

Lets be clear, I think we can all see which companies are in it for the training $$ and which companies are more interested in moving to a better Flight Simulator platform which benefits the community as a whole.

 

I say bravo to Orbx, Carenado and all other companies which are embracing P3D without trying to stick it to the non commercial user.

 

 

I agree...just because it would be used for an educational purpose does not always mean that it is backed by a commercial company that's able to spend thousands for one addon that provides little more value than the one used for entertainment. Educational could be one person studying for a PPL at home as well. I think sometimes  the line is intentionally blurred between a company using said software to do training for profit compared to a small nonprofit training or individual. Obviously they are miles apart but to some developers it's black and white, if you use P3D you must have a pile of cash to do so.

 

Even greedy Microsoft cuts students a break on their office products and OS....

My main concern (like many others I'm sure) is, will the buttload of money we have spent on products built for FSX transfer to P3D, or at least: will the developers update their products to work with P3D 2.0?

 

I can't imagine there won't be a fair number of compatibility issues.  One of the reasons that I'm not on the platform now is that some of my critical add-ons won't run there.  I'm guessing that the players who are openly on-board with P3D compatibility today (Orbx, REX, Carenado, ...) will work, patch or provide upgrade paths at or soon after release, while many of the "it seems to work OK" products will fall by the compatibility wayside.

 

To get a better sim I think we'll have to be willing to put up with some pain, but yes, I share your concerns completely.  I'm hoping there are at LEAST good upgrade paths.  Of course, the better the final product is, the higher the level of pain most of us will be willing to put up with.

 

 

Even greedy Microsoft cuts students a break on their office products and OS....

 

"Greedy Microsoft" has good business reasons for doing so.  Whether we like it or not, the reality is some developers feel they have good business reasons for NOT doing so when it comes to P3D.

 

Scott

LOL

Did I miss something?