No probs, Sean.

 

Like I said, I need SpecSavers! Any chance of your P3D set-up as 8-9 FPS in VC is not what I expected?

 

Thanks.

Hello everyone,

I just wonder which part of 90$ goes to where? How much for licence , how much for pmdg , how much for developers? If we can buy aerosoft , as realistic as pmdg I think , for 40$ , then where is 50$ gone? After 7 march , it will be 135$ and so this 95$ difference for what?

 

First of all, Aerosoft is NOT as realistic as PMDG. But anyway, I think all the money goes to PMDG. Afaik you don't have to pay LM anything in order to make add ons for P3D. Maybe PMDG has to pay something to Boeing: don't know what deal they have. But afaik all money goes to PMDG (who are the developers btw). And the final P3D is higher simply because they can ask whatever they want to. P3D isn't a game, officially, and so some developers think asking more money for their P3D products is a nice thing to do: professional software often is more expensive. But of course that's utter nonsense and nothing else but a way to squeeze some extra easy money out of jt all, but hey, what can you do about it.  ^_^

 

In the end though, when you look at how much time you spend flying those planes, they aren't THAT expensive. A lot of PC games are ditched after a few hours of play but planes like these can and will be flown for hours and hours and days and weeks so... you have to see it all in perspective! ^_^  (I simply don't buy this plane because I have no need long haul planes.)

Hello everyone,

I just wonder which part of 90$ goes to where? How much for licence , how much for pmdg , how much for developers? If we can buy aerosoft , as realistic as pmdg I think , for 40$ , then where is 50$ gone? After 7 march , it will be 135$ and so this 95$ difference for what?

 

I'm not sure if they have or want to lay out the particulars, but PMDG has said at least that the extra part is licensing and for free updates in the future. I've wondered about the licensing part for some time, and I wouldn't be surprised if the commercial nature of Prepar3D makes their Boeing license cost greater. Plus the added cost is going to get you updates to the 777 to match the current version of Prepar3D and the future 64-bit version at no additional cost. FSX is a fixed coding target that is easier to plan a budget into the cost. Prepar3D is an evolving platform, that a developer will have to support with costly development time. Like with v2.5 of Prepar3D, there is a lot changing that is currently requiring developers to spend time to support. Just think about the development cost of upgrading the 64bit that will be FREE to PMDG Prepar3D owners.

 

Guys come on... 83 dollars?! I've already purchased it for FSx. A discount for the people who has purchased it for FSx is a must. PMDG is not fair. The only thing they have changed is a DLL.... Really disgusting.

Sounds fair so far to me. $134.99 is pretty steep though.

As I posted before, on this same thread, and although I do not own P3D, nor intend to migrate unless the track Steam / Dovetail follows forces me too, or before P3D goes 64 bit, whichever comes first, I do think that the effort to integrate their add-ons into this platform is worth being supported by their user community.

 

Im my opinion, regarding complex modern airliner simulation, and until anything new really becomes available for FSX and derivate platforms, PMDG offers by far the most Complex, Detailed, Quality add-ons. Their price tag is, given what we get for each of these superb add-ons, fair, and if this was already my opinion before starting to use the 777-200, and now also the -300, the chance to really enjoy all of the details ( well, not all literally, because I didn't have the time nor the knowledge about the 777 to... ) justifies any support to PMDG, within reasonable limits.

 

Given that they're even offering the P3D version for a reduced fee until March, I'd say that even I will probably buy it, even if right now I do not intend to buy P3D v2

Fellow hobbyists... with all due respect, PMDG is a business that wants to make money, not a charity.  Like many of you I also had it for FSX... and their 747... and their 737NGX.

 

It has nothing to do with "fair." It has everything to do with their business model and the fact that time is money... and time was spent on attorneys, compatibility, etc. Remember... the economic saying "there is no such thing as a free lunch" is very true.  If you don't like their policy, then don't buy the product. 

No probs, Sean.

 

Like I said, I need SpecSavers! Any chance of your P3D set-up as 8-9 FPS in VC is not what I expected?

 

Thanks.

Have you added the fiber fraction entry to your p3d config? I'm not at my computer to see the exact wording but there's a topic here in this forum about it.

I added .01 for it and it boosted my fps.

 

Give that a shot if you haven't already. I'm getting 30 fps out of mine BUT I had to turn off all autogen. I prefer a smooth landing at 30 rather than what I was getting at 15-19.

I did some test all day yesterday with the T7 and VAS is for sure back as a "killer". Sitting in EKCH with 1024 textures and normal settings for all autogen and no AI traffic at gate c37 (and ROBS other long haul settings) i was at 3,4-3,6GB VAS which is a no go to land here for a flight more than 1 hour for sure.

 

So hopefully 2.5 can give us some more headroom again ?. OOM is going to be a killer again i am afraid. The inbuild AItraffic has some really nasty memoryleak. I saw a jump once going from 3,3GB to 3,85GB in a second around EKCH and OOM was in place even with 3.85gb.

 

A little sad now that the performance is pretty good in P3D.

 

What about the graphic option you can save profiles like in FSX?. How do you load them in P3D without having to restart P3D and deleting the shader folder. Just from the startup screen?

 

FSDT does also not have the option to switch between HD textures directly anymore (the addon manager)

 

 

 

Michael Moe

 

 

Well I just finished my first long haul... a 17 hour flight from KDFW to VHHH.  I have good news and bad news

 

The good news is PMDG has an excellent panel state restore where, if you save your flight, it loads it like you never left... thus resetting the VAS back to a low number.

 

The bad news... is that I had to save and reload 3 times to avoid an OOM.  Even over the open Pacific ocean, my VAS kept climbing... this is the only aircraft I have experienced that in.  Doing a bit of research it seems FSX users experience similar things.  I need to play with it more... apparently there is a setting with the sound package that will free up memory, etc.  But it is definitely a heavy hitter in the VAS department.

 

 

  Doing a bit of research it seems FSX users experience similar things.

 

Phil you need to compare it to FSX-SE not FSX (fsx is a dead duck)

There are a number of VIDS showing flight in heavy settings and the fantastic VAS readings associated. 

Phil you need to compare it to FSX-SE not FSX (fsx is a dead duck)

There are a number of VIDS showing flight in heavy settings and the fantastic VAS readings associated. 

 

Thanks Zoran, I may try to look at some videos.  I seem to remember one of the Aerosoft fellows doing a test and he stated VAS (at least in the situation he was using) seemed a bit higher on the steam edition.

 

Ultimately if P3D goes to 64 bit (seems to be a given from what I have read) that will fix these OOM issues. 

Price, loyalty, double dipping aside - it truly is a great simulation!  lol   So credit to PMDG for that....and for supporting P3d!!!.  ....had that been done sooner I could have saved 90$ - that aside too. :-D

 

 

This too will past.

Thanks, Appliance(sorry, do not know your name)appreciated. I thought as much. Seems like there is a vogue here for 'if-it's-not-the-latest-it's-outdated' hardware.

 

Logic said to me, I get high FPS on the other two 32-bit platforms and don't get even a sniff here, surely it cannot just be the card. Your reply more or less nails that it is 'out-dated'. I'm on the verge of buying either a 960 or a 970. I was offered a 760 4Gb at over £230 and thought that was far too much for an older card.

 

So, far have not been able to see anywhere here, a recommendation for a card that is a universal choice rather than personal choices.

980 gtx. It's worth the money. P3d utilizes gpu more than fsx.

I understand P3D is a different animal and PMDG can do what they want with their pricing strategies.

 

However the price is too steep for me to purchase it when I already have a perfectly working 777 in FSX. Perhaps when we see a 64-bit P3D and this is made available for it, I will break out the wallet.

No vas issues here during 8 hour flight over Atlantic. Most sliders to the right w/ftx global and asn. Running single monitor @ 1080p. Pmdg has done an outstanding job.

I think PMDG had some restriction being enforce by Boeing for licensing their product under the P3D platform. Robert has hinted that it was between Boeing, PMDG and LM lawyers are we don't have a sit at the table. That's speak loudly about what condition they are under. If they want to expand into the commercial and professional use of their product, they most follow a specific guideline. That much is clear.

Have you added the fiber fraction entry to your p3d config? I'm not at my computer to see the exact wording but there's a topic here in this forum about it.

I added .01 for it and it boosted my fps.

 

Give that a shot if you haven't already. I'm getting 30 fps out of mine BUT I had to turn off all autogen. I prefer a smooth landing at 30 rather than what I was getting at 15-19.

Hi Sean. Just checked my P3D.cfg. Do not see a Fiber Fraction entry there.Where would I place such an entry=0.01?

980 gtx. It's worth the money. P3d utilizes gpu more than fsx.

Thanks, wiler. Will check it out.