You also state the 777 price will go up once they release a 64bit version for new customers. Why would that be? I can't say I've heard of that before but I'm not fully up to date with all the in's and out's

 

 

The expectation is that a single license will carry you through all minor P3D v2.x and v3.x updates.  We can't really see beyond the 3.x event horizon just yet- so I don't want to comment on anything over that horizon- but it puts any further requirements a couple years out based on our own estimates of LM's progress.

 

Obviously we cannot offer a license into infinity, as we wouldn't be able to reasonably maintain continued development that way- but I anticipate seeing x64 arrive with P3D v3.0... 

 

The license cost in P3D will go up rather significantly for new entrants once we hit v3.x and x64 compatibility...  Which is why we are offering the promotional pricing now...

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/461652-07feb15-pmdg-777-200lrf-300er-for-p3d-released/?view=findpost&p=3172483

 

Unless, they're just talking about that $135 price that it is at already. It's not quite clear to me.

I read that quote above and it doesn't say to me that they are specifically paying a higher license cost to anyone else.  It reads that the license cost - i.e. the cost to you for licensing the pmdg aircraft will go up.

I'm a bit confused with "licensing costs" since other developers have released P3D versions either as a free new installer, or the same price as the FSX version.

 

 

 

I read that quote above and it doesn't say to me that they are specifically paying a higher license cost to anyone else.  It reads that the license cost - i.e. the cost to you for licensing the pmdg aircraft will go up.

 

That quote was for a different context.

 

When I said licensing costs, it's to reference that the end user's, not PMDG's, license is for a different purpose, and therefore will have a different cost. For instance, the 777 for FSX is licensed for entertainment purposes, while the PMDG general-purpose license is for more academic reasons and not for entertainment as that is obviously not permitted by Lockheed Martin (in their own bright red words).

 

There's no way I could know what licenses PMDG have to abide by.

Daniel, I am thinking the same as you are, thats how I read that quote as far as the end users cost.

 

    I thought there might have been some confusion others were having thinking the end user cost was going up because of higher license costs PMDG might have had with a third party.

I'm a bit confused with "licensing costs" since other developers have released P3D versions either as a free new installer, or the same price as the FSX version.

 

A few things to consider when it comes to why some devs offer a free license for their product across multiple platforms like FSX and P3D.

 

First, for scenery developers they are not paying licensing fees to airports or ground textures they develop, so for them to port an FSX product to P3D, the only cost to them is the time required to make a new installer and any changes to the product to make it work correctly in P3D.

 

For aircraft developers it's different. PMDG pays licensing fees to Boeing and Boeing dictates the terms. Since other aircraft developers make aircraft that might not be officially licensed products from Airbus or Boeing, they can do what they please and offer cross platform upgrades with the only only expense to them being the man power to make a new installer and make sure the product works in P3D.

 

So if a RealAir makes a plane simulating the Cessna Citation and they aren't developing on their own and not paying any license fee to Cessna they can do as they please. PMDG on the other hands has to go by the book which includes fees to Boeing, attorney fees, and of course the man hours to make the product fully functioning and compatible with PMDG, hence the extra cost and reason to pay for it again, not to mention P3D is a different platform even though it's similar to FSX.

 

 

Sean Campbell

 

 

I'm a bit confused with "licensing costs" since other developers have released P3D versions either as a free new installer, or the same price as the FSX version.

 

Some of those "other developers" have no other people to license to. Weather program developers, as an example, do not need to seek a new license to license the weather data from Mother Nature (though they may need one from their data source, depending on their source). Scenery developers usually develop the scenery themselves, so, unless they paid a license fee to someone, they have no licensing issues either.

 

I will not address our side of this directly, since it's not my place, but RSR discusses it here:

 

While we are eager to see these products released under P3D, PMDG works with licensed materials and this means we must respect the license control wishes of our licensing partners.  While it may be acceptable for some vendors who are working without intellectual property licenses (think: scenery) or in flagrant violation of intellectual property licenses to release products on multiple platforms without permission of the intelectual property owner, PMDG maintains a strong and respectful relationship with our licensing partners and we will not violate the provisions of such agreements.

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/440788-26apr14-p3d-development-status-thread-updated/

 

...and here:

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/427010-multi-platform-pricing-policy-expectations-fsxp3dxplane/ (2nd to last paragraph)

 

 

 

--------------------

 

 

 

The rest was of the questions in this thread were addressed here:

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/461729-08feb15-p3d-pricing-policy-some-facts-on-this-issue/

 

 

As far as the x64 update goes, see the last section here:

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/454218-lockheed-martin-prepar3d-development-status-thread-updated-25oct14/

 

Note the "we anticipate," and not a "we absolutely will."

 

 

 

--------------------

 

 

 

Please understand that this is actually a pretty complicated topic, despite what it may seem on the outside. I can see a little of how it must look from the outside, but I'm hoping the links here help paint the picture a little better for you all.

Aww heck not this again.

 

FSX = Entertainment = Entertainment Licence = PMDG pays Entertainment license costs to data supplier. You get a very cheap airplane for what you are getting.

 

P3D = Educational / TRAINING Licence (NO ENTERTAINMENT ALLOWED) = PMDG pays commercial licence costs and passes those on to the end user as they should, still resulting in a very cheap airplane for what you are getting.

 

Kyle is quite right; You do not pay a licensing fee to the Earth to license topographic data (ORBX?) or to licence weather data (HiFi?) - merely perhaps fees to access existing data irrespective of use.

 

But enter any sort of proprietary data such as aircraft performance etc, and you will pay, and pay a lot, if the intended product is for commercial training and or learning activities which is what P3D is for.

 

So I wish everyone would stop whining about this like it is PMDG's fault.

 

If you decide to make the change to P3D as I have, you need to accept you have effectively purchased a training and learning sim and will pay for accordingly. I accept I lose access to certain packages and products (JS41) and that is my decision.

 

Don't make it sound like it is the developers fault for following the rules!

 

Caveat: This is in no way intended to be, or provoke, a licensing discussion of any sort. Should this (inevitably) be the case, I want no part of it.

 

Kind regards

 

Wes

Ok guys,

 

I think I understand all of the arguments and agree with it

 

Thx for your contributions !

 

 

I think I understand all of the arguments and agree with it
 
Thx for your contributions !

 

Glad to help clear things up!