Looks like Captain Sim now have their L-1011 compatble with P3D. Has anybody tried it? I have their FSX version and really love it.

And they're reselling the product just because it runs on a... 'different' environment. How predictable.

Do CS offer an educational licence, a professional licence, a developer's licence or a training licence of their L-1011?

 

Sorry, couldn't resist.  

Do CS offer an educational licence, a professional licence, a developer's licence or a training licence of their L-1011?

 

Sorry, couldn't resist.  

 

 

I'm just glad we have another developer officially supporting P3D...  :ph34r:

I'm just glad we have another developer officially supporting P3D...  :ph34r:

Yes me too!

 

And they're reselling the product just because it runs on a... 'different' environment. How predictable.

 

I assume that you will be criticising PMDG in the same way when they get around to releasing products for P3D?

The past two or three days have been good for P3D 3PD news.  Not only is the Captain Sim L-1011 available, but Orbx Northern Rocky Mountain, Central Rocky Mountain, and Pacific Fjords regions are as well.

 

 

I assume that you will be criticising PMDG in the same way when they get around to releasing products for P3D?

 

If PMDG just do a simple portover then yes, they too will be open to critisism.

However i would trust that they will take advantage of P3D's features such as the different DX11 texture compression formats leading to better FPS performance.

I very much doubt that Captain Sim have done any reworking at all, just pointed the installer at the Prepar3Dv2 folder.

Fair point, but I kinda think that the price point of PMDG products in the P3D market will be based on the fact that different licenses are required, rather than because they are being updated with any new features.

This is great news!  I am very happy that Captain Sim is now supporting P3DV2.

I assume that you will be criticising PMDG in the same way when they get around to releasing products for P3D?

 

Obviously. And selling extra downloads as well which is... I'm not even gonna start. I backup my stuff, but... wow.

I'm just glad we have another developer officially supporting P3D...  :ph34r:

 

This part is good, what's bad is HOW they support it. Reselling: If i had it for FSX, now i have to buy again for like 1 day's work maybe.

I purchased the CS L1011 p3d version.  Price is good, 39.99 Euros.  The install was quick and painless straight into the P3D folder.  When she fired up no issues.  Frame rate a little slow but for right now I still do not have the sweet spot dialed in for my P3D as of yet, still trying new settings.  But, I had no stutters and they did a very good job on the panels.  No 2D panel for those that like it.  It come with the INS built in and CS gives you the info on how to install a better 3rd party so that you can have a dual system. 

 

They did put a lot of effort into the panel details, right up to the point that its a pain when you want to change altitude on the panel you have to reach way across to the CP side to make that adjustment for the autopilot.

 

Not sure if they have the engine thrust performance dialed in corrrectly, seems that when I did my first flight I was GWT and she was climbing like a raped ape.  Once I get some RW performance charts I will be able bounce the data against what the sim is doing.

 

Overall, very happy with my purchase!

 

As long as CS keeps supporting us, I will support them!

This part is good, what's bad is HOW they support it. Reselling: If i had it for FSX, now i have to buy again for like 1 day's work maybe.

Assumptions are not always a good idea. Believe me when I say that getting any product into P3Dv2 is far more than just "1 day's work..."

 

...especially given that a lot of 'legacy' commands and token variables have been deprecated and often massive changes to code are required, as well as changes made to the Material parameters and the model compiler.

 

If you were around during the transition from FS9 to FSX, then surely you remember that while FS9 aircraft would "sort of work" in FSX, in order to fully exploit the new FSX features, developers had to rebuild and recode their entire product.

 

While the differences between FSX/A and Prepar3D v1.x were pretty much non-existent, Prepar3D v2.x is a radically different kettle of fish altogether. As a result, FSX/A products only "sort of work" now, and require some radical changes... :Nerd:

As a result, FSX/A products only "sort of work" now, and require some radical changes... :Nerd:

 

I'm not a developer, but your last sentence got me wondering...

 

Are you saying that a plane designed for FSX might appear to be running perfectly fine in P3D, but still have issues going on behind the scenes?  Are you talking about frame rates or flight model or other things?  

 

I have absolutely no problem paying developers for their time and effort!

 

It would make the extra outlay of money easier if I understood the differences between a plane designed for FSX, and the same one from the same developer that was designed specifically for P3D.

 

   Gavin

Honestly, some of everything you mentioned, Gavin. Some of the more "non-SDK advanced techniques" that have worked well in FSX can no longer be used in P3Dv2, at least not without some creative thinking and redesign.

 

L-M has also tightened up the XML parsing engine to the point where minor syntax errors that FSX would allow (auto-fixed), P3Dv2 will not allow to pass unremarked, and of course those errors will not be "auto-fixed..."  For "gauges" this isn't too much of a problem as they can be fixed by the developer using simple tools. However, this is not true of the embedded XML scripts that are compiled into the actual model (.mdl) files.

 

Obviously, FSX models with such errors embedded will not function correctly in P3Dv2 without having those syntax errors fixed, and the models recompiled. This is the primary reason why simply installing an FSX release into P3Dv2 may -or may not- work correctly...

 

P3Dv2 also now support improved DXT texture compression algorithims* that are specifically for DX11. This means that the developer has to rework all of their product's artwork to take advantage of these new formats. This is not an automatic process, but needs to be done for every bitmap used by the product.

 

There is even more that is different, but the above should suffice to make the point clear. It is not a trivial process!

 

*For an interesting and illustrated treatise on BCn texture compression, see this terrific article:

http://www.reedbeta.com/blog/2012/02/12/understanding-bcn-texture-compression-formats/