Here we go again.

[ZKOKQ 984]

 

 

under sea terrain for subs

Don't forget Goat Simulator

[ricka47 611]

Goat simulator is actually a lot of fun.  I always thought that it was about raising goats.  But, it's about causing havoc!

[denali 74]

Did you read what they actually do?

 

It would be easier and "free" just to recompile one's existing source into 64bit target ... but going thru a COM (IPC for data exchange) is going to turn 30 FPS into 2 FPS.  Not to mention you have to provide the c header which means one has to have the source code and if one has the source code, then it would be cheaper and easier to just change the Target to 64bit and compile and if any issues come up resolve them.  And finally you'll need to deploy and register the new COM objects ... so I'm not really sure how useful this would be ... if at all?

 

Cheers, Rob.

I'm not clear what the dlls for FTX or any other scenery devs do.  One issue is if they are tunnelling into p3d then it's a no go anyway.  I don't think IPC is as slow as everyone assumes; it can be just as fast if it's done right.   But you are right, much easier just to compile and debug.   I'm just wondering if there is hope for scenery that doesn't have a current developers.  I didn't look at their licensing closely, if they allow distribution.   Interesting though, I figured it could be done.

This is an exciting time!

[cmpbellsjc 2,961]

Wow Jim...I don't think any of us are likely to see a "Finished" version of Prepar3d in our lifetime. In the future, there will likely be space navigation, under sea terrain for subs.

You maybe right but I just don't have the patience for the constant point updates or complete version update which require repurchase. Not to mention waiting for the updates for certain developers to update dlls and such, although they we usually quick. Plus waiting so see what may or may not work, etc.

 

I know a lot of people don't like FSX since it's essential a locked platform with no updates, but in a way it's nice because I don't have to keep up with updates and everything that goes along with it. It just works and keeps on working.

 

I've managed to wait this long so maybe at some point we'll reach a version 4, 5, or 6 that is 64 bit and a solid, stable platform that will near the end of completion before venturing into the space, moon or other areas.

[Guest]

 

I know a lot of people don't like FSX since it's essential a locked platform with no updates, but in a way it's nice because I don't have to keep up with updates and everything that goes along with it. It just works and keeps on working.

 

I've managed to wait this long so maybe at some point we'll reach a version 4, 5, or 6 that is 64 bit and a solid, stable platform that will near the end of completion

 

I hear you, but obviously software never ever reaches completion: the closest you will get to 'completion' is when the developers decide to stop support and stop working on the software. Like with FSX. Now I don't know if you want to call FSX a completed piece of software... to me it mainly is an abandonded piece of software. I am a graphic designer and work with the Adobe suite of programs: if I would have waited for completion when I started working with it back in 1990 or so, I still would we waiting. And I would keep on waiting until the day I die. Or until Adobe goes out of business. Software will always evolve and get better as long as people keep working in it. So in the case of P3D you probably are waiting until LM decides to pull the plug out of the project.  :wink:

 

P3D isn't 64 bit so that is a valid reason to wait for but other than that I think P3D is a solid, stable platform (as far as solid and stable applies to computer software) and once you get it, you do not have to update it all the time. You can install it and keep what you have and enjoy it until eternity.

[Guest]

If folks are looking for a platform that doesn't change, doesn't have VAS issues, then FS9 is probably the better choice and you don't have to deal with any requirements from 3rd party add-ons since they are far and few between that support FS9.

 

But for those that want progress along with the bumps and hickups that may go along with that ... then currently that's P3D or XP11 Beta.

 

I don't see how DTG with their current announced delay is going to be able to catch up with P3D or XP11?

 

Cheers, Rob.

[kevinfirth 1,396]

If folks are looking for a platform that doesn't change, doesn't have VAS issues, then FS9 is probably the better choice and you don't have to deal with any requirements from 3rd party add-ons since they are far and few between that support FS9.

 

But for those that want progress along with the bumps and hickups that may go along with that ... then currently that's P3D or XP11 Beta.

 

I don't see how DTG with their current announced delay is going to be able to catch up with P3D or XP11?

 

Cheers, Rob.

 

Meaning that we can expect to receive a 64bit full P3D before DTG get there? (Sorry Rob, couldn't resist!)

[pmb 5,137]

Meaning that we can expect to receive a 64bit full P3D before DTG get there? (Sorry Rob, couldn't resist!)

I am afraid 64 bit alone will not get back the masses converting to XP11 right now. We'll at least need a new (probably OSM based) scenery tech to replace the old LC-based system to finally get the houses aligned along roads. Those wildly scatterd houses are disturbing a lot of folks, including me. 

 

Kind regards, Michael 

[tutmeister 710]

I don't think there are masses converting. There are a few forums threads here where some people have said it's great and they are jumping in which gives the impression that everyone is moving.

 

In actually fact I bet there isn't much movement. Lots of people buying it but once everything settles down and the hype stops I bet there isnt much movement. X-Plane 11 looks great, I love it and enjoy it but it still cannot do what a huge number of people still do in fsx and prepar3d. It will be a very long time if at all where it will replace them.

 

Chris

[kevinfirth 1,396]

I am afraid 64 bit alone will not get back the masses converting to XP11 right now. We'll at least need a new (probably OSM based) scenery tech to replace the old LC-based system to finally get the houses aligned along roads. Those wildly scatterd houses are disturbing a lot of folks, including me. 

 

Kind regards, Michael 

 

Its the LC system itself that you have a problem with I think....

Just needs LM to scale back the size of autogen buildings, because they are unrealistically large.  Using Arno's Scenproc you can already create OSM based autogen to sit on top of photoreal scenery.

I'm sure if he put his mind to it he could get Scenproc to output vector scenery based on OSM as well.

[pmb 5,137]

I beg to disagree. I followed XP11 threads quite closely. There are quite a number of former hardcore P3D users, which I'd call influential, switching to XP11 right now. I wouldn't dare to predict how many will return.

 

And I agree XP11 looks inded great. I am not among those wanting to fully switch right now, but XP11 default scenery is lightyears ahead over P3D default and I'd even say ahead of my fully stuffed ORBX landscape (at least outside fat regions).

 

Shaders, atmosphere, weather etc. are still lacking, but LR would be stupid if they wouldn't take this possibility to catch folks.

 

Kind regards, Michael

Its the LC system itself that you have a problem with I think....

.

I a sense, yes. I once had a dispute on this with JV  which I - you guess it - lost. I am still afraid they're in trouble now. Fat regions are based on multiple data sets and better (but aside POI even this is questionable, but I'll need more time to compare). Anyway, OpenLC EU cities like Munich or Rome have structurally little in common with their real counterparts as I know them.

 

Kind regards, Michael

[tutmeister 710]

That is a standard argument, X-Plane is better than default etc etc.

The fact is nobody uses fsx or prepar3d as default and X-Plane is lacking because those add ons don't exist.

It doesn't matter if you compare default to default, you should be comparing X-Plane at its best to prepar3d at its best. I don't care that it costs a lot to make prepar3d shine with fully featured add ons. The fact is you can do it and no matter how much you spend you cannot do the same with xplane.

X-Plane won't overtake the established sims until the add ons allow it to have the same functionality. LM may or may not take note but Austin consistently misses what the majority want so we end up with the same argument. X-Plane will soon be better when we have add ons for weather, traffic, atc, textures, seasons, etc. The problem is I've been waiting for those for years and years.

 

I wish X-Plane did all those things because I still like the potential of X-Plane. Prepar3d will definitely be 64bit, we know it is coming. We don't know X-Plane will get all those things though. We are assuming and hoping but Austin has different views.

 

I really want X-Plane to be better because I love flying over photoreal with accurately positioned buildings thanks to GB pro and w2xp with sharp textures out to the horizon. I love the new lighting and so many other things. Until I can do fully loaded complex add on flights in X-Plane it will never replace prepar3d though. It will always be on my system as an alternative that sits alongside prepar3d for vfr flying and I'm not even a fanatical airliner flyer! Plus it still misses a2a!

 

There are plenty of people who don't care about all those add ons and are happy with what X-Plane offers but there are also plenty who no matter how good it looks (it really does!) want the more detailed functionality offered by the other platform.

 

Chris

[Airline2Sim 489]

Chickens and egg. One needs to come first and without the wealth of content available for P3D/FSX you won't see mass migration across to XP. Without mass migration across to XP you won't see the wealth of content as the volume developers won't cater for it for commercial reasons.

 

I like XP, but the lack of content and the screwy weather dumped me back to P3D as my go to platform, but I'll sure give XP-11 a go in the New Year.

[CarlosF 1,241]

 

 

Austin consistently misses what the majority want

 

 

You are totally missing Austin's point...take for example Night Lighting in XP10, PBR in  XP11....Austin has mention that seasons will come, but he wants real time seasons, real time snow accumulation and not the baked tiles FSX/P3D have.

[tutmeister 710]

I'm not missing his point at all. I was sat in front of him when he's mentioned real snow etc etc and I love the idea but there is more to it than that. He is missing the point that for seasons we don't mean green fields then cover them in snow.

Can you explain how you can get light green leaves in spring. Deep rich shades of green in summer. Brown leaves and earthy colours in the fields autumn and trees with no leaves at all in winter. We get all of that by changing textures. Winter doesn't mean snow for most of the world and in fact orbx only show snow in the fifth hard winter season and not in all parts of the world. Laminar need to embrace texture swapping as I see no way to do all of the above without it.

 

I also agree with the observations regarding LC textures. If autogen was smaller and just vector roads were displayed it would be a huge improvement.

 

Just realised this is becoming an X-Plane vs esp argument and I didn't want it to be, I was just pointing out that X-Plane still misses a lot despite how brilliant it looks so won't magically pull everyone over to it. Even though I wish all the esp add ons were available for X-Plane.

 

Chris