Instead of taking responsibility for their poorly coded addons that use a 15 year old SDK, they are actually taking the opportunity to take even more money from their customers.

 

I see that a lot of people are annoyed and worried about having to buy the same addon twice or more because of compatiblity issues. Remember that this is completely and 100% the fault of the 3rd party developer and their sales models. LM is in no way responsible for this. They are moving forward. Companies like Aerosoft need to wake up and smell the reality. They charge a lot of money for their addons.  Whining about P3D being a moving target just shows how spoiled and lazy they are. The software business doesn't work that way. It's time to wake up and realize that the FSX times are gone.

 

Some developers probably assumed point releases (3.1, 3.2 etc.) would just be minor updates with no major changes required to add-ons. So they thought they could safely label their add-ons as "P3D v3 compatible" and easily keep bringing in money for the entire P3D v3 cycle

 

Obviously if you're only going to support certain point releases, this needs to be clearly stated on the product page or they will have a problem with consumer protection laws in many countries.. Instead of writing it supports "P3D v3", they have to write e.g. "Supports P3D v3.0, 3.1 and 3.2", "Up to 3.2" or "3.3 and above only" etc.

 

The easiest way to fix the current situation is to vote with your wallet. Even though a temporary hot fix has been announced, this debacle has revealed which developers/publishers can be trusted to support their products fully and not.

perhaps the problem is with objects mdl? we were forced to modifiy all scenery objects mdl with prepar3d sdk v3 and now they works.. But this happen since v3.2 do not know if apply also for prepar3d v3.3

Some developers probably assumed point releases (3.1, 3.2 etc.) would just be minor updates with no major changes required to add-ons. So they thought they could safely label their add-ons as "P3D v3 compatible" and easily keep bringing in money for the entire P3D v3 cycle

 

I think you're missing an important point. What happened from P3D v3.2 to V3.3 was NOT something new and surprising that could not have been forseen by the 3rd party developers. It happend because they use a FIFTEEN year old SDK. This can obviously not be pointed out enough. This way of programming should not exist if you label it P3Dv3.2 compatible, not P3Dv2, not P3Dv1 and heck not even FSX or FS2004. We're talking FS2002. The 3rd party developers have been told for years and years that they should stop doing this.

 

All this whining from developers that P3D is a moving target is ridiculous. Having to change a few lines of code every 15 years... well that's not a moving taget. That's just lazyness from the 3rd party developers who want the most money for the least effort.

tolip if you have 250 scenery objects on our last scenery are not a few lines of codes....you have to change all mdl files

but we did it! about the sales with prepar3d i didn't see so many request, you sell 10 for steam and fsx and 2 for prepar3d

tolip if you have 250 scenery objects on our last scenery are not a few lines of codes....you have to change all mdl files

 

I thought MDL files were aircraft models, not scenery. Scenery is in BGLs.

 

Pete

yes but scenery objects are mdl into a large bgl files usually at least mine...airport and all related are bgl ...I use instant scenery objects 3 for positioning objects. and other programs for the airfield

 

I think you're missing an important point. What happened from P3D v3.2 to V3.3 was NOT something new and surprising that could not have been forseen by the 3rd party developers. It happend because they use a FIFTEEN year old SDK. This can obviously not be pointed out enough. This way of programming should not exist if you label it P3Dv3.2 compatible, not P3Dv2, not P3Dv1 and heck not even FSX or FS2004. We're talking FS2002.

 

I don't think you understand what the technical background to this is, else you might have a different opinion.  I was just about to compose an answer with these details so you can approeciate that what has happened is a step backwards, NOT forwards, in terms of techical capability, but I just found this one by Andras which I'm sure he won't mind me quoting:

 

- Those FS2002 methods are actually 2002, 2004, FSX, ESP and P3D 1.4 methods.

Those people who often angrily talk about a "14 years old method" are practically mistaken, as until the P3D 2.x series that - and only that - was the standard method and there were no other methods available to make airport ground sceneries.

 

For the designers adapting to the new layering method is easy, but there are some catches. Namely:

 

1. The new layering that was given by LM is not as versatile or reliable as the old method was and provides less possibilities.

2. The new method doesn't allow textures to be changed according to the season or other conditions

3. LM gave the layering method to designers, but still there are no "conditional jumps" possible, meaning textures or objects changing by a defined condition. By the lack of this, with the new method, no safegate systems, opening doors or the like are possible to design, or anything that changes somehow depending on distance, altitude, seasons, etc.

4. This is also a question of QUALITY, as many designers are reluctant to lower the qualities of their large airport depictions, but alas, by the newer single and simple method, the older qualities are not truly achievable.

5. Those airport sceneries will be slightly faster if they comply the newer requirements, but the cycle will only be full, when LM also provides additional design possibilities, besides the single layering option, which is available right now.

 

Personally, I think the change in P3D3.4 was an oversight, a mistake, by L-M which they are now rectifying. I'm sure that, yes, one day much of the old methods will have to give way to new. Ideally this will be in a major release and with some pre-warning. And again, hopefully, such change will be an advance, not a regression as this mistake turned out to be!

 

Pete

Scenery affected by the issue will probably works again after the LM hotfix. See the post here : http://www.avsim.com/topic/489815-lm-will-release-hotfix-for-p3dv33-in-a-few-days/

 

Well, indeed, that's the purpose of such hotfix!. For what other reason do we need it?

Cheers, Ed

I wonder why exactly would they remove such compatibility that effects so many scenery addons? I'd kinda understand this better if they'd do that going from v2 to v3 or v3 to v4.

I wonder why exactly would they remove such compatibility that effects so many scenery addons? I'd kinda understand this better if they'd do that going from v2 to v3 or v3 to v4.

Same here. I have no reason to question the technical explanations but then where is the benefit? I understand and promote moving on to newer standards but they should offer the same if not better versatility for the scenery developers. If the new method is inferior in that regard than this is way more bad news then the broken sceneries we have now. 

In reading this thread , are we too assume that the P3D way of doing things will eliminate season changes in the scenery so it will be more like X Plane, or am I misreading post #52. If so, I will fly 3.2 from now on. 

 

 

In reading this thread , are we too assume that the P3D way of doing things will eliminate season changes in the scenery so it will be more like X Plane, or am I misreading post #52. If so, I will fly 3.2 from now on.

 

That's exactly what it means Bob, until LM add the possibility of conditional jumps there will be no automatically changing airport seasonal textures or Safegate systems anymore, Ground texture quality may also be affected.

 

Still it's progress, that's what we all want, right ?

That's exactly what it means Bob, until LM add the possibility of conditional jumps there will be no automatically changing airport seasonal textures or Safegate systems anymore, Ground texture quality may also be affected.

 

Still it's progress, that's what we all want, right ?

 

That is one of the issues that I despise about X Plane...  What a step backwards. 

Moving on with the times.....

 

I think that from now on we will have to ask before buying whether or not a scenery developer is commited to support P3D though its development, after all they should all know by now that this platform is still in constant development. What we need to avoid are developers who will sell you a product that works only in one or two versions of the sim but will not bother to update as and when new and better changes begin to appear. We have the power of our wallets and if no assurances are forthcoming well then.....just don't buy from them. We need commitment and good quality products to match P3D don't waste your time with low quality products not fit for this sim. We will soon be able to separate the wheat from the chaff.

I don't think you understand what the technical background to this is, else you might have a different opinion.  I was just about to compose an answer with these details so you can approeciate that what has happened is a step backwards, NOT forwards, in terms of techical capability, but I just found this one by Andras which I'm sure he won't mind me quoting:

 

 

Personally, I think the change in P3D3.4 was an oversight, a mistake, by L-M which they are now rectifying. I'm sure that, yes, one day much of the old methods will have to give way to new. Ideally this will be in a major release and with some pre-warning. And again, hopefully, such change will be an advance, not a regression as this mistake turned out to be!

 

Pete

 

Thank you Peter for the info. Hopefully it puts an end to comments from people that don't have the technical background.

I believe that a Fly Tampa dev mentioned something about there not being a replacement for the development tools to create scenery.