Sign in to follow this  
paulyg123

Progress seems to be slowing for FSX

Recommended Posts

It seems like 3rd party add ons for FSX has grinded to a crawl.  Nothing really new for FlyTampa, Level D's last update was Dec 2010, the 787 from QualityWings is crawling along.  And where's the new 747 from PMDG?  Maybe I'll take a long leave here and check back with everyone in 4 years and see if there are any goodies out there to buy.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

FSX is almost ten years old (next year in October). I can't say I'm terribly surprised that development for FSX products are slowing down. They should continue to. Prepar3d is a vast improvement over FSX, in my opinion (I don't own it, but I will when I build my next computer).

 

While FSX has served many of us well, I think that personally, it's time to put it to bed. It's old, inefficient, buggy code.

 

 

 

And where's the new 747 from PMDG?

 

The team is working on it right now. They posted some screenshots recently, it's looking very nice. I come along and check for updates maybe once per month. 

 

Some other projects that are coming out for FSX/P3D are the FSLabs A320, Aerosoft A330, and QualityWings 787 - so development is not totally dead (yet)!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because FSX is nearly 10 years old is no reason to stop developing for it as a significant user base still exists. For the most part FSX developers have to find spare time to fit development in around their day jobs. As the quality of addons increases so will the time taken to create them.

 

Addons like the QW 787 will take time because a 787 is a very complex aircraft to model even to the usual QW level of detail, and QW appear to have pitched their level even higher on this one. LevelD were probably never serious about the 757 anyway.

 

To say FSX development is slowing down is to ignore the evidence. Aerosoft are regularly turning out new and updated products. A2A have released several GA sims in recent times. Alabeo, Carenado and Just Flight also regularly release addons.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy Smokes!

 

I'll have to respectfully disagree about FSX.

 

I'm currently working 3 new commercial aircraft development projects, each one is an Intermediate Level aircraft for FSX, and our team has had to turn down several more very interesting projects. Alos, REX has some exciting projects in the works for FSX as well.

 

FSX:SE (Steam) truly a good step forward from the disk version and helps developers write and debug software where it wasn't easy or in some cases possible with the disk version.

 

I believe FSX has solid future, is very stable and is already owned by a lot of people. Development will continue at a good pace for quite a while.

 

Best wishes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just when everyone thought FSX was dead. and everyone was resigned to switching to P3d.  Then the new steam version of FSX comes out. Typical!

 

Flight sim is a very annoying and frustrating hobby.

 

I am still evauating P3D v3....It's ok........ But i would imagine a lot of bug fixing has been going on with this new version of FSX?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also disagree. Seems that there is a ton of new stuff coming out for FSX, especially in the scenery dept. Many well know developers have a lot of sceneries in the pipeline and ORBX is continuing to pump out sceneries all the time. As long as developers continue to develop for FSX and P3D in parallel, we should see a lot more in the next few years.

 

 

Sean Campbell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Completely disagree - it seems to me that if anything, development has picked up; based upon my observations every new development project for P3D is developed for FSX, or perhaps conversely, they're developed for both platforms concurrently. And scenery? Whereas before there seemed to be a handful of developers capable of making high quality airports, the number seems to have quadrupled in the past couple of years, and the regions covered have likewise expanded, not to mention more general scenery add-ons. P3D may be driving it, to some extent, but it's not the entire explanation. The past year seems to have exploded .

 

As to aircraft development, it may have slowed, but I believe that's more a consequence of the demand for high quality aircraft with incredible fidelity that require more time to develop. If the acceptable standard was pretty but simplistic aircraft models you'd probably see more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

FSX:SE (Steam) truly a good step forward from the disk version and helps developers write and debug software where it wasn't easy or in some cases possible with the disk version.

 

I don't have FSX:SE, but this makes me curious: How does FSX:SE help developers in this way?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have FSX:SE, but this makes me curious: How does FSX:SE help developers in this way?

 

One of a few examples is that Dovetail updated/added newer libraries which allow developers (coders) to properly debug their software.  Often times a debug program will crash when debugging the disk version.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of a few examples is that Dovetail updated/added newer libraries which allow developers (coders) to properly debug their software.  Often times a debug program will crash when debugging the disk version.

 

I see, thank you that's good to know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To the OP.  Not sure what you've been smoking but there's been a ton of FSX releases this year with more to come.

 

All developers are delivering the same releases for P3D, FSX and FSX Steam edition.

 

Not sure you did enough research before posting this topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And to Generic, when was "recently" that you saw these 747 screenies?  Just curious.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wondered if the "perceived slowing" was because the development pool of programmers has been split into several areas. Some developers may have crossed between platforms, or new developers entered, who previously had no interest in FSX due to its 32 bit fixed code rules ancestry:

 

2004, maybe now pretty well stopped.

FSX, still plenty going on as I think still the base platform.

FSX-SE, Looks like pretty close to original code, but moving on and bringing in a new group of users.  

P3D, Looks very exciting here with many changes to the original FSX code, and maybe the new yard-stick in the future. 

XPLANE, Seems to be getting more traction as more developers build a/c and sceneries.

 

Several years ago I wondered why the 2004 users did not simply accept their platform was 'over', and move on to FSX. I am in the FSX pool with lots of add-ons and FSX aircraft. I now see my self in the same predicament with FSX and probably P3D.

Maybe P3D has a great future compared with FSX, but, hopefully, developers will still continue to produce FSX software due to it providing both FSX and FSX-SE markets. We FSX people just need to be more mindful of VAS issue remedies and hopefully, some one will give us a plus 4 GB memory usage one day.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wondered if the "perceived slowing" was because the development pool of programmers has been split into several areas. Some developers may have crossed between platforms, or new developers entered, who previously had no interest in FSX due to its 32 bit fixed code rules ancestry:

 

2004, maybe now pretty well stopped.

FSX, still plenty going on as I think still the base platform.

FSX-SE, Looks like pretty close to original code, but moving on and bringing in a new group of users.  

P3D, Looks very exciting here with many changes to the original FSX code, and maybe the new yard-stick in the future. 

XPLANE, Seems to be getting more traction as more developers build a/c and sceneries.

 

Several years ago I wondered why the 2004 users did not simply accept their platform was 'over', and move on to FSX. I am in the FSX pool with lots of add-ons and FSX aircraft. I now see my self in the same predicament with FSX and probably P3D.

Maybe P3D has a great future compared with FSX, but, hopefully, developers will still continue to produce FSX software due to it providing both FSX and FSX-SE markets. We FSX people just need to be more mindful of VAS issue remedies and hopefully, some one will give us a plus 4 GB memory usage one day.   

FSX-SE has significant code changes relating to bug fixes, and P3D still retains some of the original ESP/FSX bugs and limitations. I don't see P3D as that exciting as it is specifically prevented from addressing the hobby market and so cannot respond to its demands. Also you have to wrestle with your conscience over licencing. Unless you are a professional pilot or a student pilot of course.

 

FSX may be a ten year old platform but the ingenuity of developers like PMDG, A2A, Majestic, ORBX and HiFi Technology keeps it moving forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

 

FSX may be a ten year old platform but the ingenuity of developers like PMDG, A2A, Majestic, ORBX and HiFi Technology keeps it moving forward.

 

They keep it from disappearing perhaps, but it is hard to justify a claim that it is moving forward. The limitations of the 32bit memory model were being felt within a year or two of FSX being released and the single threaded design hoping the processor core speeds would keep increasing was already known to have been the wrong horse to back even before release. PMDG's last 'breakthrough' design was the HUD which was near enough five years ago and while plenty of people are adding more detail, that just means hitting the limits sooner. With a lot of luck, P3D will find a way to introduce a partial 64bit model with multi-threading. My guess is that they will use multiple collaborative 32 bit virtual machines but they will still have some awesome problems to overcome.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[Generic friendly reminder that AVSIM prohibits the discussion of the LM EULA here.]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[Generic friendly reminder that AVSIM prohibits the discussion of the LM EULA here.]

Hi Kyle,

For the unknowing amongst us, or me specifically,... what is a "LM EULA"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Kyle,

For the unknowing amongst us, or me specifically,... what is a "LM EULA"?

 

Lockheed Martin End User License Agreement

 

People's discussions of it usually bridge the line between legal information (me pointing someone to the LM license comparison page - i.e. me, putting the info out there) into legal advice (i.e. what I would be doing if I told you what you could, or could not, legally do). The latter can get people in trouble if they do not have a license to practice law (and AVSIM, for hosting it, in theory), so they prefer to not have people discuss it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, ok..I can understand how some people may get a little carried away with advice during a discussion, crossing the line can be very easy in the heat of battle. The last thing we need to be doing is upset the keepers of the website.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In some respects I believe that abandonment of FS by Microsoft has been a blessing. If they were continuing to develop it, they would have the financial incentive to continue to make "new and better" iterations to FS that weren't backwards compatible, like EA Sports coming out with a new Madden or FIFA every year with only incremental changes. Would developers have been able or willing to create the spectacular add-ons that are now being made if the base platform was changing every two years? It may be argued that it would have been preferable if development had stopped with a 64 bit platform, but I think the stability of the platform has been beneficial from that standpoint.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In some respects I believe that abandonment of FS by Microsoft has been a blessing. If they were continuing to develop it, they would have the financial incentive to continue to make "new and better" iterations to FS that weren't backwards compatible, like EA Sports coming out with a new Madden or FIFA every year with only incremental changes. Would developers have been able or willing to create the spectacular add-ons that are now being made if the base platform was changing every two years? It may be argued that it would have been preferable if development had stopped with a 64 bit platform, but I think the stability of the platform has been beneficial from that standpoint.

My feelings exactly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We cannot forget the CRJ from Aerosoft that it is looking very good. Just hope they could fix what it needs to be fix it very soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They keep it from disappearing perhaps, but it is hard to justify a claim that it is moving forward. The limitations of the 32bit memory model were being felt within a year or two of FSX being released and the single threaded design hoping the processor core speeds would keep increasing was already known to have been the wrong horse to back even before release. PMDG's last 'breakthrough' design was the HUD which was near enough five years ago and while plenty of people are adding more detail, that just means hitting the limits sooner. With a lot of luck, P3D will find a way to introduce a partial 64bit model with multi-threading. My guess is that they will use multiple collaborative 32 bit virtual machines but they will still have some awesome problems to overcome.

What you experience is not FSX as such, but the addons installed in it. FSX is just a platform. So if the addons are developing, as PMDG, A2A, ORBX and HiFi are, then the experience is improving. I'm not sure we would have had such greatly improved addons if new versions of MSFS had continued to be produced every two years, changing the environment for developers each time.

 

With FSX's memory problems overcome by FSX-SE and now P3Dv3 the limits of 32 bits are less pressing, especially if you use 64 bit Windows. Also LM may not be under any commercial pressure to move to 64 bits any time soon. What hobby users want is not significant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting discussion. As a recent buyer of A2A products and PMDG 777 I am amazed at what these devs have been able to do with the platform. I spent some time yesterday in the flight deck of the 777 just reading through the FCOM and pushing various switches (even the ones I was told not to press....haha).

 

My experience wasn't exactly with FSX but rather PMDG. Of course the 777 is not possible without the FSX background and I am very glad that FS had so many great years of development. I guess everybody has different requirements but the level of detail in the latest models from the likes of A2A, PMDG and Aerosoft had kept me very satisfied. It amazes me how well people understand FSX now and, as mentioned above, this body of knowledge, coupled with a stable platform (from a development POV) has led to the kinds of things that Microsoft would most likely never have intended to model anyway.

 

Tom Marius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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