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. 

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

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.

Oxymoron of the day

"FS2002 compatibility".

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.

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. 

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.

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

 

 

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.

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

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

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/

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.

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.

"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.