Why not offer both a 32-bit exe for backwards compatibility and an experimental 64-bit exe.  It works for X-Plane and Euro Truck Simulator 2.  That would allow the slow migration and please both (commercial) camps.

It would also have the advantage of this community, who would jump at the chance for a 64-bit sim essentially beta testing it for the commercial customers. 

 

I know it would lead to additional work maintaining two paths essentially, but it still has many advantages.

Why not offer both a 32-bit exe for backwards compatibility and an experimental 64-bit exe.  It works for X-Plane and Euro Truck Simulator 2. 

 

+1

Prepar3d is so much more than a "Flight Simulator" LM does not get involved in a project like this so you and I can play Pilot and Airplane. It and the related development is for Flight, Subs, Lunar landers, Mars landers, Emergency response preparedness, Tanks and on and on. Thinking back to my 21 years in the Air Force, I remember that Pilots hated to be scheduled for the Sim. They would rather do about anything other than that. It only makes sense that a Sim with some scenery and one that looks more like the real world has it benefits. If a tank crew or pilot or what ever can become more involved in the Sim period then they will be much more likely to learn more. It is like real world war games, the more realistic they can be made while not hurting folks the  more effective  the training. You will never understand Prepare3D if you only see it as Flight Sim focused.

 

Go look at what BI does with VBS3.0 for the Army. Most of their upgrades from V2.0 are eye candy. And now you've got another company using UT4 making a competing infantry trainer. 

 

Or look at what DCS is doing with EDGE for their professional customers. You can see videos on youtube of some of the custom stuff created for different countries' militaries. Really impressive stuff.

 

It's an outdated myth that professional customers don't care about graphics. That was more true when cost and technology didn't allow it. But bigger and better graphics are the trend now in the professional market. It's a highly competitive segment and companies are looking for ways to set themselves apart. Graphics have become part of that.

+1

I would guess that is what will happen primarily because 32-bit is already there and won't take much to continue to support, and phasing in new 64-bit content will take time.

 

 

It's an outdated myth that professional customers don't care about graphics.

 

I think that has always been a myth to explain away limitations of hardware and software of the day.  I think the anti-visuals, aka eye-candy hate, was born more out of end user hardware budgets than any real desire to not want or need those visuals.

 

The desire for 64bit is NOT just about visuals ... that's just one very small aspect and we're really only talking about texture sizes and LOD radius.  64bit opens a door to a new "level" of simulation that can go far beyond just the aircraft and scenery ... boats, trains, cars, extensive networking, etc. etc.  ... 64bit can shift from flight simulator to Global simulator.  Aerosoft seem to be in a position to capitalize on this given their diversity of products ... who knows maybe even Dovetail if not LM.  The potential to grow ESP to something massive is there.

 

Cheers, Rob.

 

 

who knows maybe even Dovetail if not LM.  The potential to grow ESP to something massive is there.

 

It's an outdated myth that professional customers don't care about graphics. That was more true when cost and technology didn't allow it. But bigger and better graphics are the trend now in the professional market. It's a highly competitive segment and companies are looking for ways to set themselves apart. Graphics have become part of that.

No one is arguing that tech advances should not include graphics or 64 bit environment.

Our point was that LM is large enough to overcome consumer demands from public FS Forum "activists" B)

 

 

The desire for 64bit is NOT just about visuals ... that's just one very small aspect

 

Small? I beg to differ. You are only saying that because you know that Version 3.0 is still 32 bit.

You know that, or you are just guessing?

I know nothing specific about this, but we will find out soon enough.

Small? I beg to differ. You are only saying that because you know that Version 3.0 is still 32 bit.

 

I think that you may have misunderstood Rob; he wasn't saying that 64-bit was irrelevant.  He was saying the improved visuals are only a small part of what 64-bit offers; that LM would be able to capitalize on this with an environment simulator rather than just flight. 

I think that you may have misunderstood Rob; he wasn't saying that 64-bit was irrelevant.  He was saying the improved visuals are only a small part of what 64-bit offers; that LM would be able to capitalize on this with an environment simulator rather than just flight. 

 

Major point here  !

 

Enhanced environments are exactly what 64-bit (and eventually 128-bit ^_^ ) and faster processors offer. 

 

If Lockheed Martin is serious about Improving the SKA (skill, knowledge and attitude) of eventual pilots with this simulation software, addressing the complex dynamics of some extreme weather situations with powerful visual cues is obviously better dealt with on a platform with higher bandwidth.

 

The closer to reality this sim can get will result in better training. 64-bit should be priority one. 

I think you misunderstand. Environment here is the operating environment - the everythingness, not the weather. That's not to say that more complex meteorology could not be accommodated by 64-bit, only that it too, would be just another component. 

 

 

I think that you may have misunderstood Rob; he wasn't saying that 64-bit was irrelevant.  He was saying the improved visuals are only a small part of what 64-bit offers; that LM would be able to capitalize on this with an environment simulator rather than just flight. 

 

Correct, exactly what I was saying ... sorry if it come out wrong.

 

Cheers, Rob.

We'll know soon enough.

Haha ... trust me, I'm all in for 64bit and the implications that has (i.e. re-buy 64bit versions of all my 3rd party software when/if available) ... the real concern is "time", still many FS9 users and it seems many users don't like change ... including 3rd party.

 

There aren't a heck of a lot of companies that are in a position to be able to take the 64bit risk and survive it ... food for thought.

 

Cheers, Rob.