It seems to me those two goals are contradictory. In order to "break out of the FSX mold" will require -among other things- massive recoding to a full 64bit engine...

 

...which alone would result in completely gutting any "legacy FSX assets."

 

I see this argument being repeated on several forums, it's simply not true. An update to 64-bit architecture will not make the textures, polygon and vertices incompatible. There might be some work needing to be done, especially on how custom code interacts with the base program, but it won't become a entirely alien platform. Further, I would guess that a long over-due implementation of modern realtime shaders and high-res textures in the entire FS-world (normal, bump and specular mapped landscape textures for instance) will make it necessary to re-do sceneries and redraw textures completely, a process that will take  scenery-developers years. 

Further, I would guess that a long over-due implementation of modern realtime shaders and high-res textures in the entire FS-world (normal, bump and specular mapped landscape textures for instance) will make it necessary to re-do sceneries and redraw textures completely, a process that will take  scenery-developers years. 

You have raised some valid points, and I may well have somewhat over simplified the case. All .gau, .dll and .exe files would need to be recompiled to support a change to 64bits.

 

However, I would like to point out that by simply fixing a flag in airport facility files that has been "broken" since FS2002, nearly all add-on airports will need to be reworked, since that flag (which allows taxiways for example to override the terrain tile) now causes those items to be invisible. :wacko:

 

 

What I see is are several opportunities for some clever programmers to develop bolt-ons for the Prepar3D platform:
AI engine
Weather engine
Flight Dynamics engine
ATC engine

 

Someone (or a few) really clever developers could leverage CUDA in nVidia cards which would introduce only a very minor VAS hit while leverage lots of very high speed VRAM ... again, making the need for 64bit less urgent.  In other words, invest in GPU's with LOTS of VRAM ... like a Titan for example

 

LM hinted at this in one of their posts which eludes me.

 

I still hope that eventually there will be a 64bit P3D, but LM have done a great job at reducing the need for such a massive conversion (that would indeed break a lot of 3rd party content).

 

 

FPS with P3D and a good GPU is greater and much smoother than equivalent settings in FSX.

 

I think this might be over simplistic and here's why:  what appears to be most impacted w/ a strong GPU is DX10/11 effects as it were.  What I have really no idea about is how much of the basic simulation, for example autogen & cloud depiction, is affected by the strong GPU.   With the strong GPU I have I see hardly any differences in frame rate w/ very high DX10/11 effects fully enabled very not fully enabled, which is a testament to the strong GPU, but what I don't see is mitigation of basic scenery sliders.  Still, very high vegetation & autogen density takes a big toll on performance.

For me all of this is moot until PMDG get on board with P3D.

For me all of this is moot until PMDG get on board with P3D.

 

Well, I have to admit that a lot of people think that way.

 

Personally, after 10 years of pushing buttons, I have gone back to and am finding a forgotten satisfaction with low and slow hand flying, VOR to VOR, especially to those hard to get into places. That's the great thing with this hobby. Two different sims on this computer, both tuned in different ways for two very different uses. Flight simulation life really does not get any better than this.

The lessons learned are that development of flight simulation needs to be ongoing as was done in previous years to FSX. Now we are playing catchup, no matter who the core developer is. LM has/had a monumental task to overcome alot of foundational issues, that shouldve been addressed years ago, therefore all these addons have now compensated for those bugs. Now we have corrections to the core, yet addons are lagging behind the new technologies. 

 

In hindsight it mighteve been better to just rebuild from scratch but the cost is prohibitive vs than "renovating" key issues. P3DV2 has made big strides, but we will not visually see the big differences until all the addons were used to catch up and take advantage of these improvements. Im guessing this means brand new addons and not portovers from what worked in FSX.

For me all of this is moot until PMDG get on board with P3D.

But surely irrelevant to this thread?

Tubeliners on autopilot for so long that you have to load up a shooter game to play, or watch a movie, or simply go to sleep for the night? I'll never understand why so many simmers gravitate towards the most boring form of flying that exists.  I could not change my career plans fast enough once I began to experience what that was going to be like.

 

But, to each their own!   :unsure:

Tubeliners on autopilot for so long that you have to load up a shooter game to play, or watch a movie, simply go to sleep for the night? I'll never understand why so many simmers gravitate towards the most boring form of flying that exists.

 

Maybe because tubeliner pilots love the learning curve and the "responsibility", simulated obviously, of flying such an airplane.  Besides, nothing says that one has to fly the airplane on some real world flight plan for 3 hours.  You can take it up and practice landings all day long without ever touching the autopilot.  But as mgh said above, it's a side discussion not particularly relevant to this topic.

Tubeliners on autopilot for so long that you have to load up a shooter game to play, or watch a movie, or simply go to sleep for the night? I'll never understand why so many simmers gravitate towards the most boring form of flying that exists.  I could not change my career plans fast enough once I began to experience what that was going to be like.

 

But, to each their own!   :unsure:

 

 

We can go fly low and slow at our local airports but the allure of airline aviation is most of us will never have the chance to fly a 737-800 in real life but we can simulate the experience virtually.

Now we have corrections to the core,...

I don't believe that is the case. the graphics in Prepar3d are vastly improved compared with FSX but Lockheed martin has said there are practically no changes to the other core aspects - flight dynamics, AI, ATC, weather etc.

 

It has provided additional "hooks" to let individual developers add their own improvements to meet their customers' requirements. As I've said before, I believe this will of more value to those developing for commercial training projects rather than for flight simulation enthusiasts.

 

There are also practical problems. For example, coding improved flight dynamics shouldn't be a major problems. However getting better, more realistic, aerodynamic and engine data for individual aircraft could be. I doubt that aircraft and engine manufacturers, who are the only organisations with that information, are going spend resources on making it available to developers serving the enthusiasts market.

It seems to me those two goals are contradictory. In order to "break out of the FSX mold" will require -among other things- massive recoding to a full 64bit engine...

 

...which alone would result in completely gutting any "legacy FSX assets."

 

What I see is are several opportunities for some clever programmers to develop bolt-ons for the Prepar3D platform:

• AI engine
• Weather engine
• Flight Dynamics engine
• ATC engine

Any or all of the above could be offered with an SDK/API for freeware developers, and a licensed "professional" SDK/API for payware developers.

And just to remind myself of the future ^ thanks Bill

 

At the moment I'm taking a long earned rest from flying my full to the brim FSX and hauling passengers in my 737. I got bored with FSX after spending a hugely enjoyable time flying GA in FLIGHT. But... I needed to learn how to fly the 737 as it holds so many memories for me. So far I've flown thousands of miles and hundreds of hours. Flying with a VA has helped to make it feel just that little bit more real.

 

This holiday I'm having though is so enjoyable. I've enjoyed it so much I've become inactive with my VA and need to fly before January otherwise I'll be deleted.

 

Plenty of time for that, I'm having a ball re-learning to navigate and don't miss the pink line one little bit. I refuse to use the GPS as its so much fun without it. Planning a flight is now more intense because if you do it wrong your lost. Unless you call ATC of course.

 

I've gone right back to basics and decided to start over. I've loaded the default C172 and it performs like magic in P3D so much so, I can even turn on shadows. This is going to be one of those holidays that sticks with you. PLUS - if the 737 starts calling me, I can use it.

 

What is there about flight simulation that's not good right now???

We can go fly low and slow at our local airports but the allure of airline aviation is most of us will never have the chance to fly a 737-800 in real life but we can simulate the experience virtually.

 

True.

 

In any case, I am certain that either PMDG will follow their customers, or someone else will take them.

 

 

 

I'm having a ball re-learning to navigate and don't miss the pink line one little bit. I refuse to use the GPS as its so much fun without it. Planning a flight is now more intense because if you do it wrong your lost.

 

In that case, I highly recommend actual paper charts.  I normally use WACs for flight sims, so I don't need as many as I would with Sectionals.  The detail-level shown is still more than good enough for visual navigation (when your life doesn't depend on it.)   :good:

 

 

What is there about flight simulation that's not good right now???

 

Too much negativity and not enough faith ???  :unsure:  :lol:  :unsure: