I don't see the big deal over 64bit nor am I about to start over with add on scenery or aircraft licenses. If my current Orbx, Aerosoft, FlyTampa, A2A, PMDG stuff won't port over for free, I'm not interested and it would have to be mighty impressive out of the box to get me to ditch all of that money in software.

 

 

Now that DTG Flightsimulator 64 bit has been announced , probably due to be released later this year, I am curious as if this will affect LM's long term strategy regarding P3D 64 bit...

 

LM's plan is unchanged, I had posted hints of the plan regarding 64bit ... you'll have to wait for LM's announcement ... I'm not able to provide any more details, but I assume you were fishing for information

 

Cheers, Rob.

It really makes no difference to LM or most of us who choose to go the Prepar3d route. Humans are a funny lot on this earth. We have survived all manner of adversity and evil over millions of years to reach this point in history. Now when we should be at the top of our game we will drive a thousand miles out of our way to be taken advantage of by the bottom feeders like Lawyers, Politicians and Advertisers. All that has happened is that this company has said it is going to once again release a new (?....LOL) version of a +10 year old product and they hope this and plan on that and may be able to do something else. 

It is very simple really. There is nothing for LM to react to. I like you don't work for LM but I suspect as I have said before that they have had 64 Bit ready to go for a long time. It will break a lot of stuff and the timing needs to be right for the change.

 

Edit: sorry Rob was typing while you posted. 

I think it's a cheap shoot trying to ride LM 64bit wave and 180 degrees change in DTG direction overnight?

They were supposed to cater to the home entertainment sector;

now they are directly competing with LM after that statement,

I'm looking forward to the DTG Simulator!  Don't really care if all of my P3D add-on's don't work if its a better simulator.  Will have to wait and see....

 

What is better, being more realistic. One of the biggest complaints about Train Simulator, for many of their products, is that the physics are not realistic compared to train sims like RUN 8. Train Simulator is more into the eye candy type of simulator and Run 8 is more directed towards actual people that work on the railroad and want something that behaves like a real train. I don't see how a company making a product like Train Simulator, is going to totally change their focus when they start making a flight sim. If they can't manage realistic wheel slip or dynamic braking  in a locomotive, do you think they are going to worry about a 737's behavior in slow flight?  

Just have to love this community. Three pages so far about vaporware. I say that not in a negative way but as Jeroen said - it's a "we plan to", "we are going to" - etc. Which is exactly what other developers tend to do altho DTG is sticking their neck way out discussing future plans this early. All to often I've seen the mood shift to very negative when progress doesn't go as expected by the community.

 

IAC, if DTG pulls it off AND it turns out to be a better sim - people will buy it, plain and simple.  But I wouldn't run out and sell your LM stock just yet!

 

:wink:

 

Vic

Rocket science is pretty easy: mix appropriate chemicals together in a tube, set light to one end and stand back. Used to make rockets in my schooldays!

Pete "Wernher Von" Dowson!! :-)

 

 

Rocket science is pretty easy: mix appropriate chemicals together in a tube, set light to one end and stand back. Used to make rockets in my schooldays!

Pete....That was before you exploded  onto the FS scene!!

We've already got DX11 with low-to-no OOMs in P3D. Unless the core rendering engine is completely new from the ground up, and looks and feels like a next gen flight sim, this may be evolutionary, not revolutionary (and that's not what I'd want when jumping to a completely new platform and breaking all old ties with compatibility).

 

Reserving judgment till the first batch of screenshots and tech demos appear...

LM's plan is unchanged, I had posted hints of the plan regarding 64bit ...

well... you must have scared DTG with that hint :smile:

How will LM React?

DTG to LM: "We have just released the 64 bit enhanced version of FSX that you showed us how to make."

LM to DTG: "When can we expect our first royalty check for the tech we shared with you?"

 

What is better, being more realistic. One of the biggest complaints about Train Simulator, for many of their products, is that the physics are not realistic compared to train sims like RUN 8. Train Simulator is more into the eye candy type of simulator and Run 8 is more directed towards actual people that work on the railroad and want something that behaves like a real train. I don't see how a company making a product like Train Simulator, is going to totally change their focus when they start making a flight sim. If they can't manage realistic wheel slip or dynamic braking  in a locomotive, do you think they are going to worry about a 737's behavior in slow flight?  

 

 

Bob,

 

We will have to wait and see like I said.  I use Train Simulator 2016 often and the locomotive physics are not that bad. Forgot to mention, I worked for Union Pacific for ten years as a Conductor and have also used their train simulators that the Engineers train on and they are not perfect either.  The point I am making is no PC game is going to be exact like the real thing and you are sadly mistaking if you think otherwise.

How will LM React?

DTG to LM: "We have just released the 64 bit enhanced version of FSX that you showed us how to make."

LM to DTG: "When can we expect our first royalty check for the tech we shared with you?"

 

 

 

 

They were supposed to cater to the home entertainment sector;
now they are directly competing with LM after that statement,

 

Without a backwards compatible SDK I don't think they'll are competing with LM.  It'll be a new market ... at first I thought they'd retain some of that compatibility, but per Martin's (DTG) latest info it seems that's may not be the case and the SDK may actually follow after the release of the 2nd product.  At least that's what I got out of  Martin's posts.  

 

I was trying to find the thread I participated in (one of the many 64bit threads) that is over a year old before DTG announced anything in regards to flight simulation ... where I suggested that a new platform would most likely be 64bit and then later on a 64bit SDK would be provided ... this seems to be exactly how DTG are proceeding.

 

It's interesting to see "some" (certainly not all) individuals express an enthusiasm on a product that hasn't been released yet (never saw that same level of enthusiasm from those individuals expressed towards P3D versions of the years) ... I just hope that enthusiasm isn't guided by low end hardware (aka my PC/Laptop should be good enough to run anything all maxed out).

 

But it's good to see DTG posting here, I hope we can get them their own forum so that we can minimize all the thread jacking in other forums.

 

Cheers, Rob.

 

 

Martin's (DTG)

 

LOL Good thing you added DTG to that otherwise I would have thought you meant the other Martin: Lockheed Martin. Confusing times. :wink: