VAS is my only concern, because I absolutely hate to get them low VAS warning dings from FSUIPC.

 

Sometimes I don't even get those. It just crashes.

There are programs now where you can update navdata.  Did it months ago...  http://www.aero.sors.fr/navaids3.html

 

 

That's pretty cool. Had no idea bout that. 

Thanks

There are programs now where you can update navdata.  Did it months ago...  http://www.aero.sors.fr/navaids3.html

 

I have been using that site for NAV updates every cycle for years, and I'm very thankful for it. The context of this conversation is why do we have to? Why are we still getting very old data for a new product that has a price on it?

 

The main problem is that NAV update site does not add/remove/move physical runways or airports. LM has had plenty of time since May 17, 2010 to make these corrections to the default scenery. This way 3rd party scenery designers can move on to bigger and better things than to correct the basic ancient data! 

 

HDR, shadows, and Oculus can wait until major airports are correct.

 

Anyone else get the impression that v.4 may well not be too far behind v.3 (in terms of release)?

 

Firstly, a few testers commented that they were aware of both versions 3 and 4.

 

Then earlier today someone was asking about increasing the LOD distance on the P3D forum. The first response was from a tester who remarked that the feature wasn't in v3, but would/should be in v4 and the second comment, from a moderator, was to read the previous reply and "Watch this space!" These posts have subsequently been removed by Beau who stated fairly enough that "I deleted the posts referencing v4 to avoid confusion and edited my post for clarity. We aren't currently commenting on the timing or content of future major/minor releases."

 

"Watch this space" doesn't sound like the sort of thing you'd say for a wait of a year or two (I'd have thought anyway), making me wonder if v.4 could effectively be v.3 in terms of features/content, but 64-bit and potentially Dx 12... Or maybe LM have simply decided to release a new version each year and cut down on the point releases .

 

Elsewhere you can read comments such as "Add-on content with paths configured for v3 will update much more seamlessly with future releases of Prepar3d" which also suggest to me that LM are thinking about v.4 and not just 3.x which strikes me as a little unusual given the previous versions' two year life cycles.

 

 

As to the cost of the upgrade/new version:

 

I suppose it depends how serious you are about flight sim. £120 is a lot if you view it in 'game' terms and the content you get is IMO less than you would have between previous versions of Microsoft FS (for e.g. there has been no new terrain textures, autogen or clouds in any of the releases and very little in the way of 'designed for the new version' or even first party aircraft). In contrast, I would expect Dovetail's 2016 offering (or FS 11 had it been made) to have all new graphics, whereas LM are still using much of what was there with FSX. I'd expect a new MFS/more mainstream title release to have fully implemented the SpeedTree tech as autogen for e.g. and not just 'unlocked' it (together with all new autogen buildings, 3D grass and normal map support for terrain textures - Yes, there'd be a performance hit, but the low detail SpeedTree LODs would just be planes in the distance anyway and I imagine it wouldn't have been all that difficult to maintain the legacy models as a low-end/tick-box option). I've not yet seen v.3 in the flesh myself, so it's hard to comment, but certain graphical elements such as a decent sun glare and rain effect (particularly on the wind shield) are oddly MIA for a 'full title' along with other bits and pieces such as built-in real world weather (as we had with FSX).

 

I get the impression that P3D's budget is nowhere near that of previous MFS releases though, and rightly or wrongly LM leave a lot of base sim graphics to third party developers (REX + Orbx for e.g.). Of course I might be completely out on that one; clearly the product's got an entirely different focus and primary target audience. The actual release itself is also incredibly low-key; no previews or high quality screenshots even, just a few links to some previously released YouTube vids made by testers, which many had just assumed were 2.5, and aside from the avatar one (yes!) showed nothing new at all - Let's face it, if you have to ask "Is this the new version?" it doesn't exactly point towards monumental changes. It's probably not the case, but to me this seemingly casual launch gives the impression of a small development team working with limited resources. Again though, this is just the impression I get if ignoring the different target audience etc, etc... That said, given the state of the simulation industry I for one am very glad LM are there to take care of the serious side of things, even if releases are a little light in the way of content at times. DCS is a great sim, though purely combat oriented and somewhat limited outside of that scope and who knows what DTG will bring to the table in 2016 with their new sim (other than a lot of DLC of course ). By it's very nature and license P3D is in no danger whatsoever of being 'dumbed down' and if it wasn't for LM we'd still all be using the ageing and no longer supported FSX (which, good as it is, is looking a bit dated these days). P3D gives us all the familiarity of FSX, but with a host of bonuses and is under constant development.

 

For the serious simmer, £120 across 2 years for an updated core sim (which only LM themselves can deliver) is absolutely worth it IMO. The VC shadows and HDR alone breathed a huge amount of life into the platform and made it feel current again and the 3D waves were also a great addition. I really hope we see some new graphical features in 3.0 and more to come in subsequent 3.x releases. There are certainly a few new things for designers to play with at launch (SpeedTree and real-time reflections to name a couple) which is excellent news, even if LM haven't given any examples of what's achievable through their own content. I'm also personally pretty pumped about the avatar system (first person will be my pref.) as aside from a/c inspection, I think it'll help to ground the world around you and should make the experience much more tangible and immersive.

 

So... Very much looking forward to v.3 myself and seeing what's possible with the platform over the coming months. I do wish that LM would be a bit more communicative about their plans though and that v.4 won't arrive in 4-6 months time for £120 without an upgrade path .

Paul, this question has been beaten to death for years both here and elsewhere, but in short...

 

The way that the "nav data" is scattered among literally thousands of compiled files instead of being in one, coherent and logical database structure makes it extremely difficult - not to mention expensive - to update reliably.

 

As for the airport facilities, there are 24,000+ airports in FSX/P3D which are "baked into" the .bgl files. Extracting, correcting and recompiling them would be a massive and expensive project.

 

WRT to v4.0 don't expect to see that for several years yet... :He He:

I have been using that site for NAV updates every cycle for years, and I'm very thankful for it. The context of this conversation is why do we have to? Why are we still getting very old data for a new product that has a price on it?

 

The main problem is that NAV update site does not add/remove/move physical runways or airports. LM has had plenty of time since May 17, 2010 to make these corrections to the default scenery. This way 3rd party scenery designers can move on to bigger and better things than to correct the basic ancient data! 

 

HDR, shadows, and Oculus can wait until major airports are correct.

 

 

It is a tremendous job to update the many thousands of airports and runways all over the world, and in doing that much other things would probably be broken. I don't think you will ever see that in the next decade by either LM, X Plane or DTG.  

Wow

 

P3D3 qualifies for a new version number.  While it does not appear to change tectonically, as in major changes in the architecture, it's tectonic plates, it qualifies as a major shakeup of the software.  There are changes to the users experience and interface that will be temporarily disorienting, for the better, for those users who kind of live in that space.  You will see better, move faster, control more, feel freer (sp?).  These are not just bug fixes; this is not a bugfix release.

 

If they changed the menu system a certain way I might be able to do more with the Distortion Fix for wide views.

 

I just might just get a dev ide of speedtrees.  Although I just bought a camper, but with oculus rift and speedtrees who needs camping?

 

 

As for the airport facilities, there are 24,000+ airports in FSX/P3D which are "baked into" the .bgl files. Extracting, correcting and recompiling them would be a massive and expensive project.

 

If only there was a community initiative to crowd source changes to these airport files, but then again that's not fixing the problem either because they will still need to be re-updated in a few years.

Pracines, I agree with you on the nav data. The big issue for me is that when you use a service like PilotEdge (a featured content provider on the P3D page no less) GPS approach data is ancient...worthless using the default GPS when you are given and expected to fly the approach using current charts. While some of the nav data can be updated via that web site, the stuff tied to the airport bgl isn't. So it's 3rd party updatable GPS if you want that functionality.

VAS as always been a memory management problem, not a 32bit problem.    With this release, I rest my case.

Paul, this question has been beaten to death for years both here and elsewhere, but in short...

 

The way that the "nav data" is scattered among literally thousands of compiled files instead of being in one, coherent and logical database structure makes it extremely difficult - not to mention expensive - to update reliably.

 

As for the airport facilities, there are 24,000+ airports in FSX/P3D which are "baked into" the .bgl files. Extracting, correcting and recompiling them would be a massive and expensive project.

 

WRT to v4.0 don't expect to see that for several years yet... :He He:

That's kinda the point, though. Maybe for V4 the argument could be successfully made to LM to look at separating the approach data out of the airport specific BGLs

If they changed the menu system a certain way I might be able to do more with the Distortion Fix for wide views.

 

I just might just get a dev ide of speedtrees. Although I just bought a camper, but with oculus rift and speedtrees who needs camping?

Fantastic news if you are continueing with your great Distortion Fix !

Only that makes upgrading to v3 worthwhile...

That's kinda the point, though. Maybe for V4 the argument could be successfully made to LM to look at separating the approach data out of the airport specific BGLs

That is one of the suggestions I've made in the developer's forum at L-M. They need to create a completely new, centralized and most of all upgradable nav & airport facilities database.

Ok guys, if you all transfer $ 5 to my account , I will buy v3 and test it for you all....LOL

 

Then I will let you know within a week how great it is....

 

LOL.   Best message in this thread to date.  

 

If PMDG 777 flyer can fly a 12 hour flight with Payware airports at both ends, FTX/GEX scenery in between with sliders maxed in 4k resolution without having to reload and not even DING on final...  It is worth every penny of $199.99.   So... long haul flyers.. buy this and test it and let us know the results.

 

 

Fantastic news if you are continueing with your great Distortion Fix

 Just slowly decompressing from the chaotic events of this summer (including my mother passing away - kinda a crazy whole year).  Things are kinda back to normal, caught my breath, but I'm not in my stride yet.