Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
amalishkin

P3D V3.3 incompatible Sceneries

Recommended Posts

Addon developers just need more "truth in advertising." There are quite a few on aerosoft's page that arelisted as "P3D compatible." But what does that mean? V1.4? V2.4? V3.0 only? Buyer beware until this specificity happens. 


Brendan R, KDXR PHNL KJFK

Type rated: SF34 / DH8 (Q400) / DC9 717 MD-88/ B767 (CFI/II/MEI/ATP)

Majestic Software Q400 Beta Team / Pilot Consultant / Twitter @violinvelocity

Share this post


Link to post

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. 

 

Hi Bob,

 

People used to say the same thing about X-Plane, and maybe still do.

 

I think far more concerning is the fact that certain developers have been porting their scenery over to P3Dv3 without meeting the SDK guidelines and requirements, which obviously saved them some extra work in the short term, yet they have been selling their products as being fully P3Dv3 compatible when they obviously aren't. Had those developers not taken shortcuts, then these issues wouldn't now be here to bite both them and their customer base.

 

Cheers,

 

Jerome

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

If they (and others) would have strictly followed P3D requirements (P3D SDK) there would be less problems now and in future.

 

Couldn't agree more. The news have been out for 2 years that "someday" compatibility with 2002 SDK would be removed.

  • Upvote 1

CASE: Custom ALU 5.3L CPU: AMD R5 7600X RAM: 32GB DDR5 5600 GPU: nVidia RTX 4060 · SSDs: Samsung 990 PRO 2TB M.2 PCIe · PNY XLR8 CS3040 2TB M.2 PCIe · VIDEO: LG-32GK650F QHD 32" 144Hz FREE/G-SYNC · MISC: Thrustmaster TCA Airbus Joystick + Throttle Quadrant · MSFS DX11 · Windows 11

Share this post


Link to post

Oxymoron of the day

"FS2002 compatibility".

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post

Is it just me, but I notice that ORBX airports and FlyTampa all seem to be just fine in V3.3

 

I'm having the problem with some of Orbx airports and have reported it in their forum.  KMRY Monterey for example and there are others.  I would be happy if someone could confirm.


--- Jim  ---
 

Share this post


Link to post

I don't get it why AS is bashed here in the first place. They have an excellent customer service and they usually handle even angry customers with more patience than some other devs. I also do not agree with the statement that V3 compatibility includes subversions (my profession but wouldn't lead us anywhere to discuss this further now.) The important point IMHO is this: It is time to say good bye to all relicts from FSX, not all at once but rather sooner than later. And wouldn't staying with 3.2 for the time being still be a better alternative than not using an add-on? Or going back to FSX? We didn't even expect 3.3. I guess in about a year from now a real new Prepar3D will see the light of life. It will, as many have stated correctly, break all sorts of compatibility. Not looking forward to the heated discussion that this will cause. 

  • Upvote 1

Hans

Share this post


Link to post

This may have been said before but this is going to make us all stop buying sceneries that aren't labelled P3D 3.3 compatible.  I'm going to have to clear out my wishlist.


Gregg Seipp

"A good landing is when you can walk away from the airplane.  A great landing is when you can reuse it."
i7-8700 32GB Ram, GTX-1070 8 Gig RAM

Share this post


Link to post

This may have been said before but this is going to make us all stop buying sceneries that aren't labelled P3D 3.3 compatible.  I'm going to have to clear out my wishlist.

Even worse. I foresee people to stop buying 32 bit addons at all soon. I just rethink my position in this respect, too.

 

Kind regards, Michael


MSFS, Beta tester of Simdocks, SPAD.neXt, and FS-FlightControl

Intel i7-13700K / AsRock Z790 / Crucial 32 GB DDR 5 / ASUS RTX 4080OC 16GB / BeQuiet ATX 1000W / WD m.2 NVMe 2TB (System) / WD m.2 NVMe 4 TB (MSFS) / WD HDD 10 TB / XTOP+Saitek hardware panel /  LG 34UM95 3440 x 1440  / HP Reverb 1 (2160x2160 per eye) / Win 11

Share this post


Link to post

 

 


This may have been said before but this is going to make us all stop buying sceneries that aren't labelled P3D 3.3 compatible.

 

But then they may break again at 3.4, it's a whole new ball game now

The Devs had two years warning that this would happen, still they have got our $, now lets see which ones step up to the plate and put right the results of their lazyness.

Share this post


Link to post

Hey everybody, why don't we go back to the origin and purpose of this thread and share the names of the scenery affected by the issue with P3Dv3.3?.

Cheers, Ed


Cheers, Ed

MSFS Steam - Win10 Home x64 // Rig: Corsair Graphite 760T Full Tower - ASUS MBoard Maximus XII Hero Z490 - CPU Intel i9-10900K - 64GB RAM - MSI RTX2080 Super 8GB - [1xNVMe M.2 1TB + 1xNVMe M.2 2TB (Samsung)] + [1xSSD 1TB + 1xSSD 2TB (Crucial)] + [1xSSD 1TB (Samsung)] + 1 HDD Seagate 2TB + 1 HDD Seagate External 4TB - Monitor LG 29UC97C UWHD Curved - PSU Corsair RM1000x - VR Oculus Rift // MSFS Steam - Win 10 Home x64 - Gaming Laptop CUK ASUS Strix - CPU Intel i7-8750H - 32GB RAM - RTX2070 8GB - SSD 2TB + HDD 2TB // Thrustmaster FCS & MS XBOX Controllers

Share this post


Link to post

Hey everybody, why don't we go back to the origin and purpose of this thread and share the names of the scenery affected by the issue with P3Dv3.3?.

Cheers, Ed

+1


Hans

Share this post


Link to post

It's a difficult moment in the hobby where you have so many format options for the developer to satisfy. In some senses, the wider arrival of 64 bit software will finally lay the compatibility issues of legacy add ons to rest.

 

I sense the point has arrived where developers are tiring of being forced to make expensive changes to their products every time LM brings out a new P3D version. As such, I wonder if many of us will stick with 3.2 as it has attracted a decent portfolio of legacy support. Developers are running a business, after all, and the costs of quad installers and changes to code should not be underestimated. Can we reasonably expect them to keep eating away at their margins by responding to LM's somewhat unpredictable development path? The result of these costs is to make their business models less viable and we could soon see a knock on effect of reduced release schedules etc.

 

When the 64 bit sims arrive, however, a new dilemma arrives in that we've had so many years of platform stability that the investment in add ons for many of us has been pretty huge. The thought of starting again is frankly horrendous, from a financial point of view.

 

This really is a pivotal moment.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

I see many Taxi2Gate scenery is affected. That's too bad because that guy puts out some good stuff and he has LFPG in the works. But, and this is a big BUT, the guy has not very good customer feedback/response skills. He still has not updated many of his installers to version 3 of P3D! While most of us can get the scenery to work this will not be the case when LM does away with this code for good which will likely be in 3.4 now. This is one scenery developer I fear will not bother to make two separate scenery now for FSX and P3D. In fact, I would submit to you he does not even know about any of this conversation which stinks because he does do some great work. People have asked on his forum for months now about v3 installers to no avail.


Eric 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

"If you bought a V3 Product since the release of P3D V3.3 and this does not work, we are more then happy to find a solution for you, but only if you bought it after the release of V3.3 with the Product Information say P3DV3."

 

This is just illustrative of how AS always tries to dodge responsability, unbelievable...

 

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.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

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  
  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...