Do LM have to go back to support v3.2?

[edpatino 1,960]

Hi all

After P3Dv3.3 release last June 1st, all related forums are full of complaints about compatibility issues with "old scenery" that did not meet the P3D SDK standard and also a lot of P3D crashes due to OOMs. In the meantime, a lot or probably almost all users rolled back to P3Dv3.2. Why don't LM roll back itself into v3.2 and postpone the release to allow for a more solid v3.3 version in few weeks?.

That would imply posting v3.2 again in the P3D download section, just for the licensees that paid for the product and unfortunately did not have in hand a backup of the previous v3.2.

Again, I'm convinced that this past v3.3 release was a huge technical and marketing mistake from LM.

Cheers, Ed 

[SteveW 1,792]

Agree Ed, they could at least provide a permanent link to a 3.2 DL.

 

Anyway they have stated they will address this scenery issue in 3.3. It's not actually just "old" scenery it's the way certain scenery has been built so has been seen to be a bug this time.

 

But eventually after that they may as well stop development, otherwise "old" planes and "old" weather are up next for the treatment.

[jfmitch 33]

I have Simaddons complete set (20+) of Canadian airports, Blueprint airports and some FSX free downloads of airports.  Also use ORBX Global and Vector and a few of their area programs like Europe, and Canada North/Alaska. I am using V3.3 and have no problems at all with any of this scenery.  This is a developer's problem not LM and you have to pick good developers such as Simaddons if you want to have a good experience with scenery.

[edpatino 1,960]

I have Simaddons complete set (20+) of Canadian airports, Blueprint airports and some FSX free downloads of airports.  Also use ORBX Global and Vector and a few of their area programs like Europe, and Canada North/Alaska. I am using V3.3 and have no problems at all with any of this scenery.  This is a developer's problem not LM and you have to pick good developers such as Simaddons if you want to have a good experience with scenery.

 

Hi there, please tell that to Fly Tampa!. If you do, please come back and comment, please!.

Cheers, Ed

 

 

Anyway they have stated they will address this scenery issue in 3.3. It's not actually just "old" scenery it's the way certain scenery has been built so has been seen to be a bug this time.

 

Agreed, Steve

[WotanUK 289]

All of these complaints about v3.3 ditching the old scenery technologies appear to be predicated on the assumption we are LM's target audience.  We are absolutely not.

 

Quite a number of us have maintained that for the moment we are useful beta testers for P3D, but if our interests diverge from that of LM's corporate customers, it's our interests that will suffer.

 

I feel that time is approaching, ironically not so much from LM's side; but from those people that develop the add on's we all use in P3D they are showing signs of frustration trying to retain compatibility while LM are changing the platform, this will only get worse.

[Bobsk8 12,543]

All of these complaints about v3.3 ditching the old scenery technologies appear to be predicated on the assumption we are LM's target audience.  We are absolutely not.

 

Quite a number of us have maintained that for the moment we are useful beta testers for P3D, but if our interests diverge from that of LM's corporate customers, it's our interests that will suffer.

 

I feel that time is approaching, ironically not so much from LM's side; but from those people that develop the add on's we all use in P3D they are showing signs of frustration trying to retain compatibility while LM are changing the platform, this will only get worse.

 

How many corporate customers do you think LM has?  I doubt if it exceeds the number of non-corporate users . 

[ErichB 3,638]

How many corporate customers do you think LM has? I doubt if it exceeds the number of non-corporate users .

Yes, but a single large corporate customer is probably worth much more in revenue than a few hundred basement simmers.

 

We are revenue peasants. Some will leave and more will come, but we will always be there - and probably grow in numbers. Much like collecting taxes from the poor. Useful - but really significant for the likes of a global defence contractor.

[Luke 782]

 

 

Yes, but a single large corporate customer is probably worth much more in revenue than a few hundred basement simmers.

 

This.

 

Cheers!
 

Luke

[mwilk 1,106]

I have Simaddons complete set (20+) of Canadian airports, Blueprint airports and some FSX free downloads of airports.  Also use ORBX Global and Vector and a few of their area programs like Europe, and Canada North/Alaska. I am using V3.3 and have no problems at all with any of this scenery.  This is a developer's problem not LM and you have to pick good developers such as Simaddons if you want to have a good experience with scenery.

I had most of the Simaddon airports for FSX. I declined to pay the ridiculous prices for the P3D versions.

[jfmitch 33]

You get what you pay for.

[JimmiG 244]

3.3 contains a few bugs and unintentional changes, but going back to the 3.2 codebase and rewriting everything would be just pointless and a waste of time. Software development just doesn't work that way. Just wait for the hotfix...

[WarpD 824]

Lockheed-Martin was quite publicly vocal about no longer supporting ASM scenery development. They started that back when v2 was released. So when L-M suddenly decides to actually "pull the trigger" (with developers having had well over a year to rework their scenery to ensure compatibility)... it showed just how few developers bothered to actually make their scenery 100% Prepar3D compatible.

 

It's not L-M's fault this happened. If you need to point fingers... make certain they're pointing in the right direction.

[hesynergy 67]

This.

 

Cheers!

 

Luke

I am a firm believer in terseness in technical discussions, but "This", is taking it a bit far.

 

"This."

 

...is incomprehensible

...was the week that was?

....is my belly button...????

.....is my finger up an orifice?????

......is Trump in Hades??????

 

This....this what?

 

Chas

[Luke 782]

This....this what?

 

What he said. ie. I am agreeing with the poster I quoted and the specific language.

 

Cheers!

 

Luke

[mwilk 1,106]

You get what you pay for.

I know. I paid for it once already and I don't mind paying an upgrade price BUT....