P3D V3.3 incompatible Sceneries

[amalishkin 10]

Could we start a list of all scenery products that are not working with V3.3 i think it would help people make a decision to move or not, some of us moved and are early adopters and maybe can help others to make sure they know what they jump in.

 

 

I have following that are not working:

 

 

Aerosoft PAFA

Aerosoft PANC

FlyTampa LOWW

 

 

More coming.

[Nuno Pinto 1,394]

Aerosoft LPFR

Taxi2Gate LTBA

 

I bet the aerosoft list will grow like mad. Just a hunch.

[darem 84]

Everything from UK2000

[captain_adf 16]

Vienna is out? Can anyone with 3.3 check FT's Copenhagen please? If not also Orbx's Oslo? If uk2000 airports are off the list for the time being, it would be helpful to know whether EKCH and ESSA are working.

[abandoned account 171]

Remember that the right thing to do is to put some well deserved pressure on the developers of these sceneries instead of just stop upgrading P3D versions. Developers/resellers like Aerosoft are really spoiled when it comes to not having to release any updates ever. If they whink that they can still handle P3D as they handled FSX, i.e. release an addon and never update it, they are dead wrong. They are the ones that should lose money because of this. LM is moving forward, they are doing the right thing. it's time for the 3rd party developers to wake up if they still want to get our money.

[Nuno Pinto 1,394]

I agree partially... I don't see Aerosoft (or any other developer) updating 10 year old sceneries for this new version, nor do i expect them to do that. It would be nice, but i don't see it happening.

[Cargostorm 151]

I do also see an other problem: V3.3 breaks - "by design" - the compatibilty with older airports, forcing developers to work with the P3D SDK (which is fine). We customers however are urged to buy those P3D-compatible sceneries again, which are not necesarily better than the old ones (see Aerosoft Berlin Tegel, EDDT). At this point you have spent the money twice for the same airport.

 

If LM should decide to jump on 64bit with version 4 (maybe at the end of this or next year), yet again, you are forced to buy all the 64bit-compatible airports. This would be the 3rd time for the same airport within a short period of time. Development requires losses, we all now. But I had wished that the loss of compatibility would occur only when changing the platform fundamentally.

[Poppet 703]

Please Note: 

 

Regarding Updating Prepar3D using the Update Installers:

 

Yes,  there is Some Airports that have been effected,  But If your Updating Scenery and if you have FTX Global Base,  you need to Run the FTX Global Installer again.

 

When you Update Scenery,  The Textures in Scenery\World\Textures are over written back to Default again and this will directly effect ground Textures, Thus effecting Global Base

 

Before you post problems,  Be sure to run the FTX Global Installer again (if you have it)   you don't have to Uninstall it,  Just run the Install again 

 

Re-Run FTX Orbx Libs again as well 

[Nuno Pinto 1,394]

I agree we don't have to purchase "P3D compatible" sceneries all over again - If they're sold/advertised as compatible and being compiled with FS2002 tools, we're actually being fooled by the developers - There should be a free update for all of them.

 

I find it hard to believe we're purchasing airports compiled with 10-year-old tools :(

[fluffyflops 1,847]

Flytampa YYZ

Flytampa SYD

[TonyD 131]

Gary Summons has already responded and is going to update his airports - but it is going to take a while.

 

Read this post for more info....in short he is happy that LM are doing away with legacy code even if it is going to cause some headaches in the meantime

 

http://www.uk2000scenery.org/forum/index.php?topic=8548.0

[Cargostorm 151]

Aerosoft made a very good statement in regard of the loss of compatibility with recent v3.3, and I am 100% conform with that:

 

Mathijs Kok: "What is clear however is that P3D will be a less attractive platform for many developers. Making these updates on an existing product could easily eat up the profit on a product. And you run the same risk in three months."

 

http://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?/topic/112689-info-regarding-the-problems-with-p3d-33/#comment-758919

[Stefan Muehlemann 2]

Watch this:

http://www.avsim.com/topic/489577-serious-ground-layering-bug-in-33/?p=3432915

[AnkH 2,233]

I don't see Aerosoft (or any other developer) updating 10 year old sceneries for this new version, nor do i expect them to do that. It would be nice, but i don't see it happening.

 

For me, it is also not even close to be reasonable to ask this from the developers. ONLY from those addons where explicit P3Dv3 compatibility is granted in the product description we can ask an update from the developers. Everything else is up to them, either they have time and resources to do it, or not. We can certainly not ask a scenery to be updated that we installed into our P3Dv3 by using migration tools or by telling the installer that our FSX folder is called Prepar3d. That's one of the reasons why I started to use almost purely P3Dv3 compatible addons since my switch over from FSX, I was somehow expecting this was going to happen sooner or later.

[Bobsk8 12,584]

Aerosoft made a very good statement in regard of the loss of compatibility with recent v3.3, and I am 100% conform with that:

 

Mathijs Kok: "What is clear however is that P3D will be a less attractive platform for many developers. Making these updates on an existing product could easily eat up the profit on a product. And you run the same risk in three months."

 

http://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?/topic/112689-info-regarding-the-problems-with-p3d-33/#comment-758919

I was thinking about this last night, and if I were developing a product for P3D, it ls like trying to take aim at a moving target.  Look at all the updates that developers have created in the last few months and they are probably counting on having to do this again when 3.4 comes in in a few months.