Any news on P3D V2.5?

[Guest]

Has to be a good 3 years out at least I would think.

 

I doubt 3 years ... I've done 64bit conversions before, not trivial, but not 3 years to do.  Here's the basic approach:

 

1.  Get all necessary equivalent development 3rd party tools (this is NOT FS 3rd party - so don't confuse the two, these are licensed tools for development usage only) that support 64bit (i.e. referenced DLLs)

2.  Change the target to x64 in the VS

3.  Look for immediate errors (64bit DLL reference may have different methods and/or parameters need changing) and resolve (even with extensive source code this can be done pretty quickly with VS 2012+)

4.  Now compile and resolve any compile errors (should be none if 3 is done)

5.  run it and see what happens

6.  resolve any issues  (time consumer)

7.  resolve any file format issues (seems unlikely but more a design decision)

 

Now this just gets you a 64bit product, it does NOT mean it leverages ALL the benefits of a 64bit product but it would probably remove OOMs at a minimum.

 

Show stoppers are #1 ... if they can't get 64bit equivalents then they need to locate substitutes or build their own ... this could take time and introduce complexity in integration with the rest of the product.  Also licensing issues to resolve.

 

A.  Texture files are texture files ... no issues there

B.  BGL and world coordinates, could be an issue pending how they want to implement (meaning they would need to write some sort of BGL converter and/or maybe even go a different route all together will the file design)

C.  SDK that's probably a good chunk of time but not critical to initial release since 32bit product will be primary

D.  Any changes they may want to make to leverage 64bit address space, LOD limit (tessellation), etc. 

 

This is definitely NOT a 3 year process even if just one person doing the work, and that's not the case (I know of at least 8 people working on P3D, possibly more).

 

Cheers, Rob.

[NATK50 8]

If P3D 64bit is released I will add more memory! ^_^

Will a 64 Bit version increase fps?

[exodus1977 37]

I doubt 3 years ... I've done 64bit conversions before, not trivial, but not 3 years to do.  Here's the basic approach:

 

1.  Get all necessary equivalent development 3rd party tools (this is NOT FS 3rd party - so don't confuse the two, these are licensed tools for development usage only) that support 64bit (i.e. referenced DLLs)

2.  Change the target to x64 in the VS

3.  Look for immediate errors (64bit DLL reference may have different methods and/or parameters need changing) and resolve (even with extensive source code this can be done pretty quickly with VS 2012+)

4.  Now compile and resolve any compile errors (should be none if 3 is done)

5.  run it and see what happens

6.  resolve any issues  (time consumer)

7.  resolve any file format issues (seems unlikely but more a design decision)

 

Now this just gets you a 64bit product, it does NOT mean it leverages ALL the benefits of a 64bit product but it would probably remove OOMs at a minimum.

 

Show stoppers are #1 ... if they can't get 64bit equivalents then they need to locate substitutes or build their own ... this could take time and introduce complexity in integration with the rest of the product.  Also licensing issues to resolve.

 

A.  Texture files are texture files ... no issues there

B.  BGL and world coordinates, could be an issue pending how they want to implement (meaning they would need to write some sort of BGL converter and/or maybe even go a different route all together will the file design)

C.  SDK that's probably a good chunk of time but not critical to initial release since 32bit product will be primary

D.  Any changes they may want to make to leverage 64bit address space, LOD limit (tessellation), etc. 

 

This is definitely NOT a 3 year process even if just one person doing the work, and that's not the case (I know of at least 8 people working on P3D, possibly more).

 

Cheers, Rob.

Interesting perspective and insight into the process. Thanks.

[ziomalnik 7]

AMD Mantle, DirectX 12, 64Bit 

[Noel 4,487]

I doubt 3 years

 

Rob, I wasn't thinking the technical part of simply converting to 64-bit would take 3 years, I was thinking by the time all considerations, including polishing up other parts of the sim, settling on what to present to content developers as a durable platform to build for, this is what I will say will be 3 years at least.  It's a potentially huge change--breaking legacy compatibility for starters, DirectX integration.  I hope they do it right and consider the next 10 years in their mission plan for P3D.  All of this is just my hope.  

 

What do you think the time frame is for what I described above, if that indeed is how it moves forward.

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

That won't take that long either. I'd say that if LM is still developing P3d a year from now, the 64 bit version will have already been released and the bugs ironed out. Will all add-ons be upgraded to be compatible by then? That's another story.

[gfd 15]

I can't imagine LM abandoning P3D. My concern is that with the introduction of FSX steam edition; maybe LM tightens up the EULA viz a vie professional or educational use. If the steam edition is updated and upgraded, wouldn't it bite into P3D's market? If so, would it not force LM to reconsider its target market and therefore lines of distribution? I don't know this. I'm just curious...and a bit concerned, given the investment I have/will make in P3D.

 

Any comments appreciated.

[romney 0]

In My Humble Opinion and I am not an employee of LM,

 

LM is developing a COTS flight simulation application. The keyword here is the "C" in COTS. Commercial. LM P3D customers require a product that simulates an environment that is sterile and stable. Sterile? In a commercial training simulation, CTD or OOM are not acceptable. LM P3D 2.4 vanilla is stable. The clients don't change the config file, add scenery and/or aircraft to their sim. It's about simulating the mission from start to finish. It's not about the "eye candy".

 

When LM acquired the Microsoft ESP codebase, one side affect was the huge library base from FSX community. Some users have expected or demanded FSX files to work in P3D. This has been a point of contention. Adding FSX scenery, aircraft and tools can and will impact the performance of P3D, What about P3D compatible scenery, simobjects, and aircraft? It's all brilliant.

 

Why brilliance? There has been a noticeable resurgence in commercial and enthusiast flight simulation (P3D,FSX,FSX-SE,X-Plane). Vendors are upgrading FSX products to be P3D compatible. Sometimes this works, sometime is doesn't. Airport lighting for example. When FSX products have been re-compiled (correctly with the P3D SDK), LM can leverage an existing developer base to create a customized client sim requirement with negligible internal development costs while licensing third party developers. As stated before, LM's target market is not an enthusiast. 

 

Will FSX-SE edition impact P3D sales? No. P3D is for a completely different market segment. I am most impressed with FSX-SE for re-introducing a whole new generation to flight AGL. With this new interest, it's inspiring a whole new set of developers and PIC's.

 

As per the OP, yes, 64 bit, can and will break a lot of existing code. It's not as easy as a recompile. Developing AMD Crossfire and Nvidia SLI driver configurations will  greatly increase performance within in the sim.

 

When is the update going to be available? Politely, stop asking. Wheels up and enjoy your flight!

 

Viel Spaß!

[tonywob 4,768]

 

 

4.  Now compile and resolve any compile errors (should be none if 3 is done)

 

Unless of course it contains ASM, which I believe (I've heard) it does. This will need to be changed/updated or converted to C code. 

[carlito777 712]

 

 

Unless of course it contains ASM, which I believe (I've heard) it does. This will need to be changed/updated or converted to C code.

 

Rob had mentioned in another post that LM has already replaced the ASM code. But maybe he can shed some light on this...

[ricka47 611]

I can't imagine LM abandoning P3D. My concern is that with the introduction of FSX steam edition; maybe LM tightens up the EULA viz a vie professional or educational use. If the steam edition is updated and upgraded, wouldn't it bite into P3D's market? If so, would it not force LM to reconsider its target market and therefore lines of distribution? I don't know this. I'm just curious...and a bit concerned, given the investment I have/will make in P3D.

 

Any comments appreciated.

 I would doubt that they would abandon it either.  I read on a forum for an add on company that they expect their add ons for P3D to outsell those for FSX this year.  Now, the Steam edition may change that a bit.  But, it would make business sense that they at least keep the 32 bit version going.

[Noel 4,487]

LM can leverage an existing developer base to create a customized client sim requirement with negligible internal development costs while licensing third party developers. As stated before, LM's target market is not an enthusiast. 

 

Yeah but that existing developer base would not be there were it not for the enthusiast market.   Moreover, 3rd party developers need a market to stay afloat as well and surely vanilla P3D to commercial users won't create nearly enough demand to meet that need.  I did ask the question directly about the future of P3D and one of the LM folks on their support forum did directly say they would not leave early adopters in the dust as it were.  I guess we'll all see in due time...

 

Is there some assurance that FSX-SE is really heading out on a new direction in terms of further major change goes, DX-12, 64-bit, etc?   I thought LM's acquisition of ESP would have all but locked that op down, no?

[simmerhead 885]

The clients don't change the config file, add scenery and/or aircraft to their sim. It's about simulating the mission from start to finish. It's not about the "eye candy".

 

 

Really? I thought most of them would adapt the sim to their needs, meaning custom vehicles, missions and scenery.

[Guest]

Unless of course it contains ASM, which I believe (I've heard) it does. This will need to be changed/updated or converted to C code. 

 

This was already addressed some time ago, the LM crew are using C++ via VS 2012.  But the rumor of Assembler code does keep re-surfacing, not sure why, has been clarified several times.

 

And now the FSX:SE rumors begin ... too funny.  I do however wish dovetail the best of luck working over whatever code they're allowed to work over ... I say this with a chuckle, because I know some of the same challenges they have to face which have already been faced by LM ... there are only so many ways you can skin the same cat.

 

Cheers, Rob.

 

EDIT and retain any semblance of compatibility that is

[gfd 15]

This is an interesting topic. I am very much looking forward to the further development of P3D. I am concerned that, should FSX SE take off, it will impact LM's development direction. I realize this is reiterating an earler comment, but this is a business.

 

Romney made some good points. However I can't see how P3D will remain unaffected. I am using P3D because I wanted something more than a product (FSX) which had evolved into something it was never designed or intended to be. Now what if Dovetail actually fixes and enhances FSX. Fix is unfair...update is better. Why would any non commercial user move to P3D?

 

Romney also suggested that the commercial market wants stable and sterile. Well if that's true, and commercial is the target market, the logical thing would be to lock down the software so that addons that are either poorly written and/or resource hogs would not be allowed to run...in the name of stability.

 

OK enough doom and gloom. Bring on the 64 bit edition so I can buy a 34 inch ultrawide monitor, a $1600 (this week) Iris yoke, 2 x GTX 980, Skylake and DDR4. God I'm so happy I'm made of money.

 

Seriously, I would like to thank LM for creating P3D. The last 6 months have been interesting. I'm sure the next several years will be the reward. I'd also like to acknowledge those whose knowledge of FS and/or software construction, greatly exceeds my own. That they would take the time to help make my experience better is gratifying.