"We've put a lot of thought and research into a 64-bit version of Prepar3D.  It is in the roadmap, but I can’t promise you when it will be released." Straight from LM. To me, it looks like a 64 bit version will happen.

 

 

Ok I was wrong then, we will see what the future holds.

"We've put a lot of thought and research into a 64-bit version of Prepar3D.  It is in the roadmap, but I can’t promise you when it will be released." Straight from LM. To me, it looks like a 64 bit version will happen.

P3D not having 64bit may not turn out to be a big issue afterall for P3D. They developed an interface called ISimconnect. With it aircraft developers, can build their flight models and systems external to the sim using this interface to connect directly to the core of the sim. Since these would be external apps running in their own  4GB VAS similar to the way GSX, or ASE does today, there would be minimal impact if any of VAS on the core sim app. Thereby greatly reducing the chance f running out of VAS, since much of it comes from the system detail of these complex aircraft models, which could now be offloaded into their own VAS space.   

I just wish they get away from this 'Entertainment' word. We are so far away from that. We dont use FSX as a game. Its purely simulation and pretty good one at that using real world factors in real time. 

64bit is a must. simulation is getting alot more complicated and involved and the pressure continues to rise against the VAS limit. It will have to be sooner than later. A priority , and hopefully the weight of PMDG can put pressure on them to make it a priority. 

I just wish they get away from this 'Entertainment' word. We are so far away from that. We dont use FSX as a game. Its purely simulation and pretty good one at that using real world factors in real time. 

64bit is a must. simulation is getting alot more complicated and involved and the pressure continues to rise against the VAS limit. It will have to be sooner than later. A priority , and hopefully the weight of PMDG can put pressure on them to make it a priority. 

That's the point I'm trying to make! If developers use this Isimconnect  module to build their flight models, systems external to the sim, all the things that eat up VAS in FSX, then 64bit becomes less of a necessity, as it will be less likely the core sim app will ever hit the 4GB wall.

I just wish they get away from this 'Entertainment' word. We are so far away from that. We dont use FSX as a game.

 

I'm not sure if this really applies for the majority of users of desktop flight sims.

I doubt LM would consider 64bit in the future, for the sole reason that it is not intended for entertainment purposes. Why should they, 32bit suites their training needs just fine. They don't need Orbx, PMDG, FTX Global, etc, etc.

 

Incorrect. LM has gone on record as saying 64 bit is something they will likely end up doing.  At the very least they are considering it, and in all liklihood it will happen.

 

FSX, Prepar3d and Xplane are all great sims.  Xplane is fundamentally different in its approach... let's just enjoy the sims and stop with the fruitless comparisons.  If anything innovation on ALL flight sim fronts should be encouraged.

I'm not sure if this really applies for the majority of users of desktop flight sims.

You believe in entertainment!!? *hisses* Non-believer! Shun him!!!  :lol:

 

 

 

fruitless comparisons

 

Hmmm, where did you get that from? Not in any of my posts I bet!

 

I agree thought!

edited
 

I'm not sure if this really applies for the majority of users of desktop flight sims.

Please don't take that as a personel attack but I don't like that statement too much. We are all simming. Some use the sim for training procedures while they are grounded for whatever reasons in the real world. Some simulate the whole thing, from flight planing to real world routes and procedures.
Some like cruising VFR without an idea where to go, some doing carrier landings in a C172. It's all flightsimming. Gaming is a different animal.
It's a sim. Whatever you do to it. And the fun comes first. Even in a sim.
 

I'm somewhat cautious of PMDG's recent announcement. It almost seemed to me that they were throwing their loyal "consumer" base a bone while at the same time speaking in very guarded words.  He said something like "don't worry it's not going to cost $25,000!", but what does that mean?   Though the average person is clearly able to buy and use P3D for simulation, I am still not convinced that there still won't be some unexpected catch for the vast majority of current flight simmers to obtaining PMDG products for it, be it because it is too pricey, or some other restriction that hasn't been mentioned yet.   There is much I don't understand about the term "Enterprise" customer, only that it is not a Star Trek reference. 

I'm not sure if this really applies for the majority of users of desktop flight sims.

PMDG sells alot of aircraft because they are highly realistic and close as possible within limitations of the platform. That goes beyond some fun game or else we wouldnt bother with all the FCOMS and proper procedures it demands. Fact is if it was just entertainment fun, we would then just press the E key to start and be on our way disregarding anything else or not paying much attention to it. But thats not how PMDG aircraft work. Try starting the NGX without packs off and without the APU bleed on, and its just not going to start. 

So im just saying there is alot more involved than some fun xbox game. Thats why we use Navdata and charts, and real weather. 

We are all simming. Some use the sim for training procedures while they are grounded for whatever reasons in the real world. Some simulate the whole thing, from flight planing to real world routes and procedures.

Some like cruising VFR without an idea where to go, some doing carrier landings in a C172. It's all flightsimming. Gaming is a different animal.

It's a sim. Whatever you do to it. And the fun comes first. Even in a sim.

 

Oh my, I did not want to start a debate about the meaning of the words gaming and simming, and the concepts of "game" and "simulation". This is not as easy as it seems.

 

I just don't like statements like "we all are". This works only if the definition of "simming" is restricted to "using a flightsim software", without any reference to user's intentions.

PMDG sells alot of aircraft because they are highly realistic and close as possible within limitations of the platform. That goes beyond some fun game or else we wouldnt bother with all the FCOMS and proper procedures it demands. Fact is if it was just entertainment fun, we would then just press the E key to start and be on our way disregarding anything else or not paying much attention to it.

 

My problem with your first statement was that you talk about some undefined "us". All of us. All of us -- flight sim users? PMDG users? "We wouldn't bother" -- who is "we"? Are you only referring to PMDG users here (because that's a PMDG related thread), or do you include ALL FSX/XP users in this "we"?

In the simming world of my dreams "we" would have the meaning of "we". Our community of flightsimmers, PMDG users, non-PMDG users, XP and FSX users. "Regular" and "Advanved" simmers, low and high budget simmers, with much and little input devices. " I have a dream...".

 

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9100 mit Tapatalk 2

 

 

 

 

My problem with your first statement was that you talk about some undefined "us". All of us. All of us -- flight sim users? PMDG users? "We wouldn't bother" -- who is "we"? Are you only referring to PMDG users here (because that's a PMDG related thread), or do you include ALL FSX/XP users in this "we"?

 

I was referring to PMDG users by and large, after all the topic is about PMDG, but as a whole, I think it would include alot of XPX users as well. I dont have XPX. I tried the demo, and didnt catch on too much. Lots of potential in videos but not there but that is another story. The point is, that I took a look at addon aircraft for XPX, and alot of them are no slouch. They have the same kind of principle, of being quite system sophistication, and quality. Im guessing the demand is there for that, or else you would have very simple planes, whereby just using very simple key commands to just go and fly.  Ramzees 777 and I think I saw a CRJ 200 that look to be a more complete systems aircraft.  So as a whole, it seems that is what the majority of flight simmer hobbyists like, rather than just being a very casual simmer who will just start and go occasionally. 

 

I could be all wrong. Clearly its hitting a nerve. 

I was referring to PMDG users by and large, after all the topic is about PMDG, but as a whole, I think it would include alot of XPX users as well. I dont have XPX. I tried the demo, and didnt catch on too much. Lots of potential in videos but not there but that is another story. The point is, that I took a look at addon aircraft for XPX, and alot of them are no slouch. They have the same kind of principle, of being quite system sophistication, and quality. Im guessing the demand is there for that, or else you would have very simple planes, whereby just using very simple key commands to just go and fly.  Ramzees 777 and I think I saw a CRJ 200 that look to be a more complete systems aircraft.  So as a whole, it seems that is what the majority of flight simmer hobbyists like, rather than just being a very casual simmer who will just start and go occasionally. 

 

I could be all wrong. Clearly its hitting a nerve. 

 

Okay, I see. Thanks for clarification.

 

Still not sure if your assumption is true. While there certainly IS a demand for aircraft with high systems depth, there is, at least according to my observations over the last years, and discussions with fellow simmers and some developers, a bigger group of people who prefer aircraft you can get easily in the air without much worrying (it's no wonder that Carenado/Alabeo are among the most successful and the most popular developers: Their aircraft have great visuals and are very easy to fly even for novice users.)