Sign in to follow this  
shivers9

Prepar3D-ORBX warning that there are quite a few bugs to fix in Ver 2.5

Recommended Posts

Looks like it may be a while yet before V2.5 will be ready for release. It is good to know the Beta Testers are finding the problems and fixing before release. Many Thanks to all the guys @ LM and all the testers. As usual a special thanks to Rob for keeping us in the loop.

Share this post


Link to post
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Is it bugs with Prepar3D 2.5? Based on John Venema's post, I'd wager they are working on compatibility issues with Orbx's deep-dive systems and v2.5.

 

If Lockheed is making substantial adjustments to various files, locations, configurations and such, I would imagine that Prepar3D itself will work just fine, but lots of 3rd party developed items will need some updating as well.

Share this post


Link to post

What benefits does this massive re-organization of the P3D folder structure actually bring? The old mantra "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" seems fitting here.

Share this post


Link to post

Yet on the other hand, restructuring now makes it quite evident that LM's design for P3d is not in keeping with the current layout.  So, much to consider and I for one I'm interesting on details/plans for the path ahead...

Share this post


Link to post

 

 


What benefits does this massive re-organization of the P3D folder structure actually bring? The old mantra "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" seems fitting here.

 

To provide 3rd party with more flexibility in the future.  Key files have been moved to allow for more structured 3rd party interaction ... terrain.cfg (this impacts Orbx or anyone writing to the file), suneffect.cfg (this would impact REX), shadersHLSL.cfg (this is pretty cool, think of some great 3rd party possibilities here).  It's obviously going to cause some work with 3rd party but I'm glad John V. and his crew are already on top of it ... and Pete D. with FSUIPC is already on top of even with his of a pending vacation :)

 

3rd party obviously don't like to do additional work, but they have been very supportive.

 

LM have always been in this for the long haul ... it's only those few and regular members that keep suggesting the end is near ... but hopefully people realize by now that LM is going on v2.5 that those who spread such speculation are indeed not accurate.

 

We're in the Beta process right now, then we move into RC process, then final release.  However long that takes is however long that takes ;)

 

Cheers, Rob.

Share this post


Link to post

What benefits does this massive re-organization of the P3D folder structure actually bring? The old mantra "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" seems fitting here.

My guess is that LM is trying to get most of V2.* organized and stable. I think once that is done then it may be quite sometime before V3.0. Just seems like at some point things need to slow down a bit in order for Dev's to catch up......... LOL Users also!

 

Never mind me....What Rob said above!!!! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks Rob, very useful and clear.

This means that also the collaboration with Nvidia is postponed?

Share this post


Link to post

 

 


This means that also the collaboration with Nvidia is postponed?

 

No idea why you would say that?

 

Cheers, Rob.


 

 


Just seems like at some point things need to slow down a bit in order for Dev's to catch up

 

LM will also need to provide updated documentation for the SDK.  But also keep in mind the SDK isn't just for "official" 3rd party developers, it's really for anyone that wants to extend the platform ... so keeping it updated is important.

 

Cheers, Rob.

Share this post


Link to post

No idea why you would say that?

 

Cheers, Rob.

Maybe Nvidia expects the 2.5 for a dedicated driver to P3D?

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe Nvidia expects the 2.5 for a dedicated driver to P3D?

 

I'm sure LM have provided nVidia whatever they want/need and it would not postpone an ongoing communication and/or work efforts.

 

Back on course, these are some of the key files that have moved out of the root of P3D:

airlines.cfg

AirObjectVisuals.xml

cameras.cfg

DefaultRecordAndPlayback.xml

Display.cfg

OxyPlot.Wpf.xml

Scenery.cfg

SimDisplay.xml

SlimDX.xml

suneffect.cfg

terrain.cfg

ThermalDescriptions.xml

WatersConstants.xml

 

As you can see, these are all "configuration" type files so it makes sense to move them to ProgramData path.  It would also make it easier for LM to provide "updates" (rather than complete re-installs) when their application root contains only core product components and not configuration files.  It makes logical sense, but it of course has implications for anyone (3rd party or otherwise) that reads/writes to those files.

 

For testing, I have to manually copy the 3rd party adjusted files from P3D root over to ProgramData path.

 

Cheers, Rob.

Share this post


Link to post

You know Rob that they could avoid all of this by simply not having the program install in the stupid Program Files(x86) folder to begin with... :Whistle:

Share this post


Link to post

 

 


Back on course, these are some of the key files that have moved out of the root of P3D:

 

Rob,

 

Please convey to LM that in the interim, they could put symlinks to all those files in the main P3d folder. That would allow for an easier transition for 3rd party developers.

Share this post


Link to post

To provide 3rd party with more flexibility in the future.  Key files have been moved to allow for more structured 3rd party interaction ... terrain.cfg (this impacts Orbx or anyone writing to the file), suneffect.cfg (this would impact REX), shadersHLSL.cfg (this is pretty cool, think of some great 3rd party possibilities here).  It's obviously going to cause some work with 3rd party but I'm glad John V. and his crew are already on top of it ... and Pete D. with FSUIPC is already on top of even with his of a pending vacation :)

 

3rd party obviously don't like to do additional work, but they have been very supportive.

 

LM have always been in this for the long haul ... it's only those few and regular members that keep suggesting the end is near ... but hopefully people realize by now that LM is going on v2.5 that those who spread such speculation are indeed not accurate.

 

We're in the Beta process right now, then we move into RC process, then final release.  However long that takes is however long that takes ;)

 

Cheers, Rob.

 

I'm just curious, and I stress I have no information to suggest there is an issue, but if Pete was to decide he wasn't going to bother anymore, what impact would this have on the flight-sim world with regard to developments and updates?

Share this post


Link to post

3rd party obviously don't like to do additional work, but they have been very supportive

Well thanks for that Rob. Understand there are things you can't discuss, but with the relocation of files, will some addons be broken? If so, will there be a temporary workaround? Thanks.

I'm just curious, and I stress I have no information to suggest there is an issue, but if Pete was to decide he wasn't going to bother anymore, what impact would this have on the flight-sim world with regard to developments and updates?

Ian,

 

I have no information either, but I can't imagine Peter Dowson allowing development of FSUIPC to lapse while there is still a need for the product. It is a commercial project, but owned by an individual who has genuine concerns for those swimming through the interesting waters of flight sim.

 

As for impact if the product lapsed: FSUIPC was the second purchase I made after FSX. Had it not been for that, I'm sure I would've given up in disgust.

 

I would hazard a guess that if he decided to disappear onto some small island somewhere; either he or a successor would keep the wrenches turned. That's my take...all speculation.

Share this post


Link to post

Personally I feel that at one point P3Dv2 will become really stable and restructured for the next level.

 

No more moving around of config files (like with the ORBX Config tool) etc. should be neccessary just to fly from one region to another. I do realize that these are limitation work-arounds since the old FSX days, but now that the code is being further developed, it would be nice if it would be made so flexible, that these work-arounds are not neccessary anymore. 

 

It would also be nice if Addons like ORBX Global, REX or ActiveSky would not need to overwrite original texture files in order to do their magic but rather the sim be so flexibly configurable to use these textures instead. So if one needs/wants to go back to vanilla, this should be easyly possible by deactivating addons, and not through reinstallations of P3D.

 

Hopefully this restructuring is part of this broader effort.

 

kind regards

Share this post


Link to post

 

 


Understand there are things you can't discuss, but with the relocation of files, will some addons be broken? If so, will there be a temporary workaround?

 

V2.5 will not have a patch, so a new install will be required.  So the process will be:

 

1.  Uninstall  your existing v2.4

2.  Make sure the 5 key directories are completely gone 

3.  Install v2.5

4.  Wait for those 3rd party products that are bound to versions to provide updates - my hunch is most will have updates ready to roll on release day or close to release day (with my testing so far this will be Orbx, FSDT/Virtuali, FSUIPC, ASN, FSGRW) ... OpusFSI works "as is" but I'm experiencing huge FPS drops using it so my assumption is some work from OpusFSI there.

 

There are of course other ways to do this, but they will be very involved and given the issues from my last patch procedures I'm going to avoid providing that information ... too much to ask of end users.

 

In the past 3rd party have been very responsive ... hopefully that continues.

 

Cheers, Rob.

Share this post


Link to post

V2.5 will not have a patch, so a new install will be required.  So the process will be:

 

1.  Uninstall  your existing v2.4

2.  Make sure the 5 key directories are completely gone 

3.  Install v2.5

4.  Wait for those 3rd party products that are bound to versions to provide updates - my hunch is most will have updates ready to roll on release day or close to release day (with my testing so far this will be Orbx, FSDT/Virtuali, FSUIPC, ASN, FSGRW) ... OpusFSI works "as is" but I'm experiencing huge FPS drops using it so my assumption is some work from OpusFSI there.

 

There are of course other ways to do this, but they will be very involved and given the issues from my last patch procedures I'm going to avoid providing that information ... too much to ask of end users.

 

In the past 3rd party have been very responsive ... hopefully that continues.

 

Cheers, Rob.

 

 

Thanks for this. I reinstalled my operating system and P3D so that when 2.5 arrives, I can roll my system back to a time where it is ready for the sim, but nothing is installed except controller drivers. Will still be a bit of work, but will be predictable.

Share this post


Link to post

IF V2.5 would NOT have a patch..its a no go for me.. There is no way I am going to spend so much time and effort to reinstall everything...

 

Hmmm.... unless its 64 bit then I' am prepared to get a new PC.  :lol:

That reminds me..when PMDG releases their stuff for P3D I hope they won't insist on 2.5. Sigh!

Share this post


Link to post

PMDG releases their stuff for P3D I hope they won't insist on 2.5.

 

I have no idea how PMDG will work with new P3D version releases ... I did ask PMDG and got no response.  I do know that LM aren' t going to stop evolving P3D and there will be more versions ... no idea if those versions will have patches or not ... but from what I can sense is LM are re-structuring now so as to have a easier way to patch and more long term flexibility.

 

So it is possible the v2.5 no patch requirement may just be one off specific to v2.5.

 

But growth and change is what P3D is about, it's not for everyone and I'll bet many that say "no go" will eventually be back.  I've tried FSX:SE and was not impressed at all ... just no way I could go back, sorry but FSX:SE just seems flat and lifeless compared to P3D.  I'll endure the P3D growth path and I've got my environment well sorted/documented enough so that moving forward with versions isn't that painful.  Worse case for me is 4-8 hours tops and I have A LOT of 3rd party ... 4-8 hours of work for the 100's or even 1000's of hours of usage is a trade-off I can live with.

 

Cheers, Rob.

Share this post


Link to post

I have no idea how PMDG will work with new P3D version releases ... I did ask PMDG and got no response.  I do know that LM aren' t going to stop evolving P3D and there will be more versions ... no idea if those versions will have patches or not ... but from what I can sense it LM are re-structuring now so as to have a easier way to patch.

 

So it is possible the v2.5 no patch requirement may just be one off specific to v2.5.

 

But growth and change is what P3D is about, it's not for everyone and I'll bet many that say "no go" will eventually be back.  I've tried FSX:SE and was not impressed at all ... just no way I could go back, sorry but FSX:SE just seems flat and lifeless compared to P3D.  I'll endure the P3D growth path and I've got my environment well sorted/documented enough so that moving forward with versions isn't that painful.  Worse case for me is 4-8 hours tops and I have A LOT of 3rd party ... 4-8 hours of work for the 100's or even 1000's of hours of usage is a trade-off I can live with.

 

Cheers, Rob.

 

Excellent Post Rob, - I 100% agree with LM decision to restructure P3D (it is a new sim after all).  I hate the FSX legacy baggage, people have FSX-SE now, if they want to stick to the original layout.

 

This new restructure is what is getting me all excited, I hate when programs mess all the files inside the root directory - it creates management hell.  Addons should be in separate location, and on the long run.  This makes the update path super easy, and it helps pinpoint where the bugs are (whether it is caused by addons or base SIM). 

 

Can't wait for this release.

Share this post


Link to post

@Rob,

 

I can't find the quote from LM but I'm pretty sure the Adam Breed said that these changes to 2.5 were done to assure effective future patching. Whether there will be a version 2.6 or even a patch upgrade route, though is still unknown outside of LM.

Share this post


Link to post

 

 


But growth and change is what P3D is about

 

I completely agree Rob.  Thanks again for all your hard work in improving our future with P3D.

Share this post


Link to post

 

 


I can't find the quote from LM but I'm pretty sure the Adam Breed said that these changes to 2.5 were done to assure effective future patching.

 

I believe your are correct, it's the start of restructuring and long overdue IMHO.  The goal is to ultimately provide more flexibility for LM and 3rd party.  As you know, there are many products that overlap and can and do step on each other ... I think LM's vision here is to allow competing products to co-exist in a much cleaner path structure with more flexibility.  That's my take on it.

 

Cheers, Rob.

Share this post


Link to post

I do know that LM aren' t going to stop evolving P3D and there will be more versions ...

 

Does that apply to 2.x or future major versions?

Share this post


Link to post

Is it true that scenery loads faster with the new file structure?

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this