Prepar3D v3.0?

[G-YMML1 582]

rFactor-2 (auto-racing sim with huge 3rd party community) recently just released their 64-bit platform as they ran into the same problems P3D users are experiencing now. It didn't kill the community and products, they just run both platforms (32 and 64 bit) simultaneously in anticipations that developers would slowly migrate to 64bit. So, simply speaking, the introduction of 64bit wouldn't mean immediate closing of 32bit version. They both would exist for some time.

[Lorby_SI 2,042]

Hi Rob,

 

congratulations that you managed to get out of it! And I really mean it! The corporate gig is still getting worse, you know. I'm contemplating jumping the ship too, but unfortunately I would lose my old days pension. At my age basically a no go.

 

Something technical for a change: do you happen to know why they need to dump the legacy/compatibility stuff? Can't it be improved, rewritten? Law of diminishing returns? I know that in legacy applications there always is the lure of the total fresh start, the shiny and the new. I'm just not convinced that it always is the best solution.

 

Best

nuit

Hi G-YMML,

 

what I am afraid of is, that those premium P3D 64bit addons if bad gets worse can only be developed with an insane amount of work. If the top developers have to start from scratch, and if the P3D customer base is rather small-ish (eg not counting in the millions) a profit orientated company may decide to produce those goats for the goatsim instead. That would leave us with the philantropists.

 

Sure, I will buy into 64bit P3D too, as I always do. That doesn't mean I have to like the idea of going through the vicious sim-cycle yet again. Yes, I know, I don't have to. Call me stupid if you like.

[DylanM 1,069]

+

• 64 bit

• New rendering engine with an innovative, global lighting system

• Detailed terrain for the entire world with very precise elevation data

• Plausible world ' through auto-generated (AutoGen) with almost all roads, waters

 

Now we're talking! A completely new terrain / autogen system that gets rid of real roads superimposed upon baked in textures would be incredible...and would give years of new work for the ORBX team. :wink:

[Sam 68]

Most of the stuff has already been said in this thread..

 

My contribution:

I would guess an increased amount of memory management would make the situation better.

 

So I do hope we would at least get an version of p3d with this ability.

however I think the comments from RSR proves that LM is looking in to converting it to 64 bit, if they haven't started already.. Otherwise they would not spend time on making it possible to support an 64 bit platform eventually..

But as already commented, even with 64 bit you would eventually run out of memory without proper memory management.

Funny story, I saw some user comment on the LM forums, which said that computers weren't developing at the same speed as previously

 

However, he should maybe do some research on Moores law

[Sam 68]

LM is indeed working on 64bit

[Guest]

 

 

Something technical for a change: do you happen to know why they need to dump the legacy/compatibility stuff?

 

LM haven't obviously dumped the entire legacy/compatibility chains, but the ASM based BGLs were causing performance issues.  Here is a direct quote from Beau Hollis 3D lead developer:

 

 

After having spent a tremendous amount of time fixing backwards-compatibility issues with add-ons built using legacy features, we have reached a point where certain very old SDK features cannot be supported without negative impacts on other features. Specifically, ASM based scenery will no longer be supported. As I understand it, ASM has not been an official part of the FS SDK since FS 2002. The paradigms that the ASM based scenery system were based on do not translate well to modern hardware.

 

ASM based scenery was designed as a series of rendering instructions to be completed in the precise order that they were submitted, a design which prevents the renderer from effectively utilizing the GPU by serializing the submission of rendering commands. This architecture degrades performance and is very difficult to support in a modern renderer. In addition, correctly handling transparent objects and lights becomes almost impossible, because the ASM based system contains very little information for the rendering system to correctly determine draw order.

 

We will not be removing the rendering code for ASM based scenery until the next major version, but we will not spend any more time fixing backwards compatibility issues for ASM based scenery in 2.x releases.

 

This will allow us to focus our efforts on expanding the SDK and platform feature set for all our active developers and users. We understand that the deprecated ASM feature set is still used by some developers to enables certain features and the use of certain 3rd party tools. To that end, we would like to know how and why developers are using ASM and what features or tools we might be able to add to the platform to empower our development community to make even better content moving forward.

 

ASM is still being used today, even with brand new P3D v2.x releases.

 

Cheers, Rob.

[Guest]

what I am afraid of is, that those premium P3D 64bit addons if bad gets worse can only be developed with an insane amount of work. If the top developers have to start from scratch, and if the P3D customer base is rather small-ish (eg not counting in the millions)

 

I would venture the most profitable and highest selling products are the ones that were developed with an insane amount of work (i.e. PMDG, Majestic, etc.) -- hence why those 3rd parties are still with us today.  It is natural for 3rd party content providers to raise the bar ... so long as the product delivers it will sell.

 

Moving from 32bit to 64bit will NOT require any 3rd party developer to start from scratch.  The 3D models (source files) will be the same, the textures will not change, I even venture that "most" (not all) of the existing code base (so long as it was built with VS 2010 or higher) will be relatively easy to just change the Target platform to x64 recompile and see what doesn't work ... probably very little will not work "as is".

 

Where 3rd party devs may run into issues is around their own 3rd party reliance they have ... for example if you use an older "MS Access database" (pre-2010) in your product.  But even with that situation, MS Access has a 64bit database engine drivers you can include in a project/solution.  Or they use some older 3rd party libraries that have never been updated to 64bit and the company has since moved on or gone out of business.

 

I know LM use some SlimDX ... but even SlimDX has a x64 download.

 

Even products like Virtuali which as I understand it is Python based? (correct me if I'm wrong) ... but there is a 64bit version of Python for windows also.

 

As far as making BGLs -- I don't know ... I would think all BGL's will need to be re-generated for a 64bit path, but I really don't know ... there maybe ways to retain the format/definition and just extend it for 64bit.

 

If you are a 3rd party and still want to sell the same product on both platforms 32bit and 64bit -- their will be some design prep to make sure one can build for both, but not really major differences especially if coded with the understanding of two paths.

 

I'm certainly not going to trivialize converting a 3rd party product to 64bit, but it certainly IS NOT REQUIRED TO START FROM SCRATCH.  In some cases it will be very simple ... especially those that have planned for an eventual 64bit path.  I would be so bold as to suggest that 90% of their existing 32bit work would migrate over without any need to change.

 

Cheers, Rob.

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

Moving from 32bit to 64bit will NOT require any 3rd party developer to start from scratch.  The 3D models (source files) will be the same, the textures will not change, I even venture that "most" (not all) of the existing code base (so long as it was built with VS 2010 or higher) will be relatively easy to just change the Target platform to x64 recompile and see what doesn't work ... probably very little will not work "as is".

 

 

 

I  know that you wrote something like this before, but it's good that you restated it. There's nothing magical about the conversion. The real question is will the existing file formats (such as BGL for example) still be suitable for 64 bit or will they require extensions. Also, I thought that you might get a chuckle from reading this, considering the choice of the acronym:

 

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/news/features/2014/140915-mst-aces-applying-next-generation-simulation-for-pilot-training.html

Also, there is very little written here about LM's commercial simulators:

 

http://sim-industries.com/new-ceo/

[Guest]

Advanced Combat Enhancement System  - love it!

 

Here is some trivia from where some of MS ACES went: http://www.cascadegamefoundry.com/our-team/ several talented folks from the FSX, ESP, and Combat FS series (just in case you didn't already know) ... I personally think it's good to put a face to these engineers, artists, etc. so that people see they're human, family, kids, partner, etc. etc. ... who knows, maybe the next time someone tosses out sloppy or lazy programmers they'll put a face to it.

 

Agree, 64bit conversion certainly isn't something to be feared ... yes the BGL will be interesting to see how this evolves ... "I think" it's going to be ok ...

 

Cheers, Rob.

[denali 74]

About that Sim-Industries link:  "The company was acquired by Lockheed Martin in 2011 ... "  

Wasn't aware of this fact. 

 

So on their about page http://sim-industries.com/about-us/ :

"Trendsetter in flight simulation

 

Sim-Industries nurtures its talent for innovation. Sim-Industries translates this talent into the new standard for commercial airline Full Flight Simulator design. The smart integration of the most advanced, specialized quality components from worlds leading manufacturers and its no-nonsense approach to engineering has made Sim-Industries the trendsetter in every area crucial to the highest standard in airline Flight Simulator pilot training. Sim-Industries commercial airline Full Flight Simulators deliver unsurpassed high fidelity, realism, user friendliness, safety, cost effectiveness, reliability and performance at a competitive price.

 

Sim-Industries understands and serves the needs of all airlines, aircraft manufacturers and independent training centres worldwide. Sim-Industries offers Flight Simulators for a wide range of commercial aircraft. Sim-Industries Flight Simulators meet or exceed international standards of certification and are delivered standard with Level D Certification. No matter how unique the customer’s requirements are, Sim-Industries will deliver tailor-made, Full Flight Simulators to fulfilll the most demanding training needs."

 

If that doesn't tell you that P3D is in for the long haul, that LM is serious about this endeavor, that all their efforts to please us, the core enthusiasts of Flight Simulation, aren't a heartfelt invitation to being part of the primary path of the future of Virtual Aviation, even though they've got the Biggest Toys of All to play with ... well, you're deaf.  And this has "we got that 64bit and that SLI and that Oculus thing covered" all over it.  Read yer sign.

 

Thats fracking awesome.  All I wanna do is fly, and I can't right now; but I CAN sim.

And considering THIS IS LOCKHEED MARTIN carrying that flag, we are being nearsighted by a great deal if we think they can't hack this project correctly.  I just have real issues questioning the ability of a company that does things like mustangs, lightnings, constellations, and blackbirds before most of us were born deciding they want to do what is currently over the horizon for us earthbound types but on the horizon for them, and that is the reality that Virtual Worlds will become where it's at very very soon.  As if Bard and his crew are some small business developers just fumbling along in the dark.  He/they work for Lockheed Martin.  I mean, how can we seriously even talk as if they are fly by night, a troubled group, lost in the stringy soup that is project management.

[mgh 89]

Sim-Industries shows full-motion simulations which are totally removed from Prepar3d as it's just about possible - they cost many times more to start with.

 

More whistling-in-the-wind!

[denali 74]

What software do they use on those simulators?  More specifically, what features do they taut for the software in those simulators.   We know it's not P3D, but would anyone else?   The description is the same pretty much.  P3D has become completely photo accurate to me the way I run it with photoscenery.   It just seems to me that LM is committed to flight training from trainer to heavy.   Thats a nice way to brand.  Happy Meals to Filet Mignon.

[mgh 89]

Full-motion flight simulators use custom software developed each manufacturer. Manufacturers generally begin with a core system that offers the basic functionally - which is still much more detailled than FSX/ESP/Prepar3D etc. The manufacturers will develop it further to match the characteristic of each aircraft simulated.