I'm in the very much same situation so I'm very interested in this too.

I don't have a problem with having to reinstall some of my scenery packages. A large proportion of them are outside the core sim folders, so they should be perfectly fine. It's Ultimate Traffic 2 that concerns me the most. I get a bit paranoid every time that I have to reinstall that. My AI planes work perfectly at the moment, and I don't want to spoil that!

I hope the improve the sli use and do more with the avatars. 

Unless there is a huge benifit like a gain of 10 or 20 fps I think I'll just stick with 3.0 for the time being.

I hope they improve avatar mode too. I get stuck and run into invisible walls while at certain airports for some reason.

I hope they improve avatar mode too. I get stuck and run into invisible walls while at certain airports for some reason.

That's not the fault of the avatar - it has to do with the scenery boundaries.

 

 

Vic

Well, I guess we don't want to sound like the I-Phone. Every 6+ months we get a new version with the "thinking" that it's the greatest and "never-seen-before-marvel."  When in reality it's just a little plastic container with a few more icons.

Still getting OOMs with the latest version. I hope this is better addressed.

How easily are you getting OOMs? These were a big problem for me in FSX and P3D v2.4, but I have not suffered a single one yet in P3D v3.

FSX (which did serve me well) would OOM pretty quickly.  But then, I did shovel in every addon airport and scenery area known to man.  Happy days.  I had gone overboard.  

 

I'm now on the keep-it-simple wagon with P3D v3, enjoying stock scenery/airports as-is and concentrating more on aircraft.  The best part?  Even my marginal system and card give me an incredibly fluid flight.  Stutters and frame drops are (so far) completely gone and I'm really enjoying 'flying'.  It just works.  Jumping in and out of aircraft used to kill FSX.  I can do it all day in v3 without issue.

 

As I remember, VAS management was greatly improved in v3, but we still have only so much real estate.  Short answer is:  no OOMs  ...yet.

For those that want to know exactly what an installation is going to do to files before they install it, you can install it to a "sandbox" first, see what happens, and then chose which files to move over, and where.  The one I use is Sandboxie.

 

For registry changes there is another method, but addons should not be doing any serious registry changes.  

 

If you're a developer, sandboxing is a great way to understand how many things are done in software by seeing how they are installed.  Also, often when tailing software does not follow best practices as set down by a primary developer it can be used to correct those incompatibilities that emerge.   

When the 3.1 comes out, I will use Sandboxie to do a pre-install, and maybe do a few window clips or some kind of output to show what files are affected.  

 

LM shouldn't have to be worrying about their files causing problems, but certain inexperienced scenery developers think it's their place to over-write native P3D files, when there are other more conventional methods to integrate their products.  Much of the bellyaching in this forum about upgrades is not because of LM.  And those conventional best practices have been known since before FSX, but are usurped by the arrogant imposition of certain developers who think it's "their place" in the scheme of things to just do what they want even though they haven't figured out what they're doing.

...And those conventional best practices have been known since before FSX, but are usurped by the arrogant imposition of certain developers who think it's "their place" in the scheme of things to just do what they want even though they haven't figured out what they're doing.

 

 

Sorry but you fail to understand the complexities of how some products are implemented.   Many of the developers who overwrite files are very experienced and do it because there is no other way to implement the technology that they require.    I know of one company who actually worked with Microsoft and Microsoft gave the company their blessing because there was no other way to implement the technology.

 

There are many files in FSX/P3D that sometimes needs customisation and Microsoft/LM has their products implemented in a way that it is not possible put all product's files in one container.  The gauges, font, effects and certain texture directories (for example) are shared to the whole sim.

 

Roll on now, it is better - much better from a platform point of view.  But simple economics say that it is not feasible for companies to go and make their products compatible for free  - and we won't pay for it.

 

Cheers,

Matt.

Edited December 6, 201510 yr by n4gix
removed excessive quote. again!

Well now. Water improvements, eh? I just hope that this includes "white caps" and the illusion of wave motion at altitude.

 

 

Mee tooo

Sorry but you fail to understand the complexities of how some products are implemented.   Many of the developers who overwrite files are very experienced and do it because there is no other way to implement the technology that they require.    I know of one company who actually worked with Microsoft and Microsoft gave the company their blessing because there was no other way to implement the technology.

 

There are many files in FSX/P3D that sometimes needs customisation and Microsoft/LM has their products implemented in a way that it is not possible put all product's files in one container.  The gauges, font, effects and certain texture directories (for example) are shared to the whole sim.

 

Roll on now, it is better - much better from a platform point of view.  But simple economics say that it is not feasible for companies to go and make their products compatible for free  - and we won't pay for it.

 

Cheers,

Matt.

I am a developer.  Orbx claim that it's so difficult to upgrade is kinda a sham.  What is lacking is the focus for a half a day to fix the problems with their older products.  I suspect because of the fear of not focusing on the money is going to lose them money. 

I could take a day or two and write a routine that would fix their scheme once and for all, but I don't work for them, and they probably would get mad at me.

I know of one company who actually worked with Microsoft and Microsoft gave the company their blessing because there was no other way to implement the technology.

Matt.

If you are referring to who I think you're referring, that's incorrect, as evidenced by the venerable Arno Gerretson having recently written a utility that specifically addresses that issue. No need to reinvent that wheel Denali