Umm, yes he in fact did say Yes.  http://www.prepar3d.com/forum-5/?mingleforumaction=viewtopic&t=5094

 

"Yes.

It's not as simple as pressing the compile in 64-bit button, or else it would have been done already The baseline has multiple languages, and while you all have mentioned most of the benefits of 64-bit, there are drawbacks, one of the biggest is certain things like BGL (most of the addon scenery you likely use use BGL) won't be 64-bit compatible. So developers will really have to redevelop a lot of their content for a 64-bit P3D.

Wes Bard

Software Manager - Prepar3D® Team"

 

Lyn

 

Er.. where does Wes Bard use  the word "yes" in his reply?

Er.. where does Wes Bard use  the word "yes" in his reply?

 

Are you serious or kidding…?

In fact Wes Bard never used the  word "yes"  in his answer.

 

Until 64-bit is confirmed in the same as DirectX 11 was confirmed, then it's still an aspiration. 

 

The question being asked was:

 

are you planning to create a 64 bit version of P3D (v2?) yes, maybe or no?

 

His direct answer, first line, was yes. 

 

 

Er.. where does Wes Bard use  the word "yes" in his reply?

 

You cannot be serious!! Did you not look at the quote and follow the source link? Please look again and then admit that perhaps you have misspoken.

 

Lyn

Lockheed Martin for a long time actually stated that Prepar3d v2.0 would be for DirectX 11.

 

Lockheed Martin has not yet stated that Prepar3D vx.x will be for 64-bit and is still an aspiration until it becomes a confirmation.

 

 

The baseline has multiple languages, and while you all have mentioned most of the benefits of 64-bit, there are drawbacks, one of the biggest is certain things like BGL (most of the addon scenery you likely use use BGL) won't be 64-bit compatible. So developers will really have to redevelop a lot of their content for a 64-bit P3D.

 

So we will have a 64bit Simulator with little in the way of airports.

We already have one like that, it's called Xplane 10

Lockheed Martin for a long time actually stated that Prepar3d v2.0 would be for DirectX 11.

 

Lockheed Martin has not yet stated that Prepar3D vx.x will be for 64-bit and is still an aspiration until it becomes a confirmation.

 

Read the first word of the statement by Wes.  It's on a line all by itself, which says a lot.

 

 

 

"Yes.

 

It's not as simple as pressing the compile in 64-bit button, or else it would have been done already http://www.prepar3d.com/wp-includes/imag... The baseline has multiple languages, and while you all have mentioned most of the benefits of 64-bit, there are drawbacks, one of the biggest is certain things like BGL (most of the addon scenery you likely use use BGL) won't be 64-bit compatible. So developers will really have to redevelop a lot of their content for a 64-bit P3D.

 

Wes Bard

Software Manager - Prepar3D® Team"

 

I'll add some emphasis if you're still not seeing it...

 

 

"Yes.

 

It's not as simple as pressing the compile in 64-bit button, or else it would have been done already...

 

Come on, man...  There's no way for them to make a more clear, concise and direct confirmation than that.

There's none so blind as those who will not see.

 

  

I never really understood why people think a 64bit version of P3DVx.xx excludes there being a 32bit version?  There is a 32bit and 64bit version of XPlane, and many other numerous examples of 32bit and 64bit versions of software.  There is NO exclusion.  

 

I'm not going to 2nd guess LM's funding or commitment to a 64bit product.  Wes has stated "Yes", that's not enough of a commitment for some ... either way, it's better than a "No".

 

As far as the need for a 64bit platform, LR were well aware of the limits in trying to fit the globe in a 32bit address space and make it look good and operate well.  Since software engineers are usually fairly logic minded, they are almost certainly similar in their belief that 64bit is required for a globe based flight simulator ... that includes LM.

 

I'm pretty sure Phil Taylor knew the need for a 64bit version of FSX 7 years ago (people were getting OOMs right out of the gate -- deja-vous) ... I don't know if Phil pitched it to the funders (maybe he'll chime in here), but either way, it didn't happen and was never promised or even hinted at a "Yes".

 

In the meantime, while we all wait and hope (I'm going to stay optimistic) there is still MUCH that can be done with a 32bit version of P3DV2.x.

 

I said this elsewhere, but wouldn't it be interesting to see LR and LM join forces ... I believe P3DV2 has enough flexibility to allow LR's "blade element theory" to work ... pick your flight model preference.  And maybe LR could help LM do the 64bit conversion since LR has already done this process so they will most likely know the "gotcha" at a coding/design level.

 

I know just a crazy thought ... people working together 

As far as the need for a 64bit platform, LR were well aware of the limits in trying to fit the globe in a 32bit address space and make it look good and operate well.  Since software engineers are usually fairly logic minded, they are almost certainly similar in their belief that 64bit is required for a globe based flight simulator ... that includes LM.

 

Rob, you have followed Outerra?  My understanding is that it is 32-bit coded--they have apparently utilized an elegant programming approach which leverages resources magnitudes better than the basic architecture of a P3D or XPlane.   If they haven't converted it to 64-bit already, I did read they did the initial design so that migration to 64-bit would be essentially be accomplished just by recompiling. 

 

What shocks me is that a flight sim developer hasn't grabbed this quantum jump in coding approaches and ran with it to a fully developed core engine, game over!   I can't imagine what that engine in 64-bit glory would do to flight simulation.

 

I see you were up in Willows, CA--I work there every Thursday.

Rob, you have followed Outerra?  

 

Maybe not followed, but have glanced occassionally as new videos are posted, love their Dynamically deformable terrain, procedural grass, and oceans.

 

The fractal/voxel approach isn't new (few voxel engines out there), it was used in a few games in the mid 1990's for terrain ... the results were not so good - poor resolution because of memory limitations (it was a fast engine, just not a pretty one).  However, it does appear the process is making a come back ... however, GPU requirements are pretty steep and the process is very memory intensive.

 

But if they can perfect this engine and VRAM keeps increasing, it has many benefits.  Real snow for example that sticks and melts ... or even better, you leave the world "running" 24/7 and trees change with the season gradually or you jump to a location and the weather is already there, rendering and waiting.  You have a deformed and savable world specific to you and only you. The possibilities are pretty staggering but we're talking huge amount of VRAM as the Voxel structure will need to be housed there for performance.

 

It would be a truly dynamic world where we could have our cake and eat it too ... but we'll just have to see ... Voxel was going to be "the future" about 20 years ago, but sorta faded out.

 

Rob

 

 

I see you were up in Willows, CA--I work there every Thursday.

 

Wow, really?  Where?  At the track?

Nope not at the track just noticed your video.  Pretty cool rig you have there!

 

I think on some of the Outerra videos the graphics cards weren't anywhere near Titan so I don't know.  

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/431728-time-to-develop-for-a-new-sim-me-thinks/page-12#entry2920894

 

HiFlyer's video postings he says "Note: These videos were from 4 years ago on an Nvidia  470 card!!! (A card with only just over a Gigabyte of memory)"

 

As for cake and eat it too:  I took off out of FB's KSFO to KLAS this evening in realtime at about 8pm in the Super MD80 Pro and it was just remarkable.  The night lighting, sky colors, road traffic and amazing atmospherics were...just remarkable!   That plane has a super high performance:processing overhead ratio so easily handles the bigger airports and scenery, all the while modeling systems to a decent level of depth.    

I'm waiting patiently for "Real Dynamic Trees" (as well as bushes, grass, other vegetation). Over time they should grow!

Imagine having to break out the riding lawnmower to mow the grass and weeds around your home airport! :LMAO:

 

 

As for cake and eat it too:  I took off out of FB's KSFO to KLAS this evening in realtime at about 8pm in the Super MD80 Pro and it was just remarkable.  The night lighting, sky colors, road traffic and amazing atmospherics were...just remarkable!

 

Are you recording any of these flight Noel?

 

I've been trying out the MJC Q-400 recently, specifically in the Norway area (ENSG - Haukasen) and landing/taking off on some short runways at night and/or early morning ... I'm a manual landing crosswind kinda guy I guess -- I like the ride to be a little rough on the passengers

 

 

Nope not at the track just noticed your video.  Pretty cool rig you have there!

 

Here is a funny pic of my wife helping me fix a clutch pedal (last weekend in sunny and cold Willows CA) issue just before grid line-up ... try not to laugh too hard:  http://www.robainscough.com/images/624b3442bd37806c8a54b32a16068e3c.jpg

 

-- using a link rather than image link, don't want to ###### off Tom