P3D VAS usage (FSL A320 related)

[charlie130 196]

And all of the above for a whopping price tag. It's a great idea but theirs only so much you can try and create a real a320 in a 10 year old sim with out running into issues and theirs only so much you can try and get away with charging

 

Well put and my belief is that its looking like a 64 bit simulator will be required to fully realise the kind of things we are now asking for.

 

Regards

 

David

 

 

 

 

 

 

I just wish we could go back 15 years and get honesty, value for money and a sturdy product. Not the current wave of over hyped gibberish by twitch streamers, leading to over priced products because the company before them got away with it. That's after getting people to pay to beta test it,because someone else managed to pull that one.

 

I just wish we could go back 15 years and get honesty, value for money and a sturdy product. Not the current wave of over hyped gibberish by twitch streamers, leading to over priced products because the company before them got away with it. That's after getting people to pay to beta test it,because someone else managed to pull that one.

 

[Nyxx 6,993]

Did you get a call from your Chief Pilot for a tea without biscuits meeting? :wink:

It was not even Tea :smile:

[skelsey 765]

Hi Pete,

 

 

 

I'm well aware I can start in the cub and choose the fsl 320. But changing aircraft hits vas. It's fiddly and its a faff.

 

As I have already said, in P3D you do not have to load the Cub first if you don't want to. I never do because, as you say, it is faff! I just saved my default P3D flight as the cub with the engine shut down at LHR, and now I have to do is launch P3D, select the A320 (or, for that matter, any other aircraft) from the menu, change location if necessary and fly now.

 

FSX is a different matter because of the buggy way in which FSX loads aircraft. I think you'll find that even PMDG recommend doing something very similar (load default Cessna/Trike, shut engine down, wait to stabilise, load complex aircraft). That's not to say that you might not be able to get away with loading directly, but the recommendation is there for a reason.

 

 

 

If you tell people enough times "you can run p3d in full screen" people will buy that statement. Instead of saying "yes because it's a badly coded simulator from 10 years ago, that we've tinkered with and adjusted to flog some more copies it's now become unstable with conflicting simconnect, . Net and c++ coding, so yes the draw back is You'll have to press pause when you go from full screen to windowed mode every time" guess what it devalues the product.

 

Are we talking about FSL here or P3D? I've always been suspicious of switching between full screen and windowed mode, whether in FSX or P3D, and I try to do it as little as possible. I've personally had CTDs on occasion switching from full screen to windowed in P3D in the default Cessna, so I think blaming FSL for this is a bit strong. I like full screen (and I like the fact that I can now have P3D in full screen on one monitor and still have a usable second monitor) but if in doubt I run windowed (with any aircraft) as Bad Things tend to happen less frequently this way.

 

Windowed mode is the most stable and therefore that is what is recommended IIRC. Again, this is something FSL are very up front about, so I'm not sure why you're suggesting some sort of underhand thing.

 

I'm sorry that you're experiencing problems but, particularly after the latest update, I think it is fair to say that you are in a minority and if you work with us on the FSL forums we will get you sorted -- for instance, I don't know of any other FS developer that regularly offers customers teamviewer sessions for support.

 

I also can't accept your inferences about "paid beta testing". Please note -- I'd be saying the following regardless of the fact that I happen to have (very recently) been asked to help out on the A320-X beta team. I can't claim credit for the product at all -- I've been on the team less than a month and the really hard yards over the last 6 years had very much been put in by others by the time I rocked up.

 

However -- please remember that whilst we -- and all beta teams from all developers -- try our hardest to break it during Beta (and succeed fairly often as well) -- inevitably when you release something, especially on a platform like MSFS/P3D, you are going to rapidly come across users with almost infinite combinations of hardware, software, addons, workflows etc. It's physically impossible for a beta team to own or anticipate every single possible permutation of P3D setup, though we do our best. When it became apparent that large numbers of people were experiencing issues that we hadn't during the beta, we started looking for the common threads, the developers worked day and night to find fixes and the beta team did our best to make sure they hadn't broken anything else in the process. To do all of that in the space of 48 hours I think is quite impressive -- no less than you should expect as a paying customer, of course, but having seen the effort at close quarters honestly made me proud to be a very small part of that team.

 

Let's not forget that almost no release is perfect on day one, whether it's an FS addon or Microsoft Windows. That's not a reflection on any particular developer, it's just a reality of the infinite number of different hardware and software configurations that there are out there and the fact that it's impossible to test every single possibility.

 

And, as you acknowledge, ultimately FSX/P3D are based on 10 year old software and have their share of bugs, some old, some new. How often have you had a random fault with something that was working just fine previously? I have one friend who all of a sudden the other week couldn't load a flight in FSX Steam after clicking "fly now" at all. He hadn't changed anything at all on his PC, but some investigation revealed Couatl was crashing. Reinstalling GSX and the Standalone Addon Manager solved it. Weird, huh? But just one of those strange things about FS that we've all come to know and love... well, perhaps not love. I'm personally proud that guys like Lefteris, Andy, Rob Randazzo and the rest have all said "Yes -- it's a 10 year old, buggy platform. But we're going to try and work around its bugs and limitations to deliver something special."

 

That's the sort of attitude that's given us the very special aircraft from all top developers that we've enjoyed over the years. Yes, that sometimes means as a customer I have to make compromises or change my workflow in terms of how I operate the sim (like loading the Trike first in FSX, for instance). Yes, it's a faff -- I wish it didn't have to be so -- but to me, it's worth it for the experience that follows. You may disagree - that's fine. I'm not going to argue with you.

 

 

So Simon, consider I finished an hypothetical flight and save it with engines shut down, or even cold and dark, when I load it again it will be the way I left when I last saved it, right?!

 

If you save the panel state -- you can load this panel state again and it will be precisely as you left it.

 

It won't 'remember' how you left it (like A2A for instance) from flight to flight without loading a previous panel state though.

 

Hope that makes sense!

 

 

 

When you say "identical settings", do you also factor in that setting the LOD radius to maximum in FSX gives a different result than in P3D?

 

I'd have to check the exact details, but I'm sure that the LOD radius wouldn't have been set to maximum (I know there are pitfalls there). I'm aware of the difficulties in comparing the two, but fundamentally having set everything it was possible to set the same we still came out an average of I would say 300-500mb down when we compared the two, with very small fluctuations between testers.

 

v3.3.x may be different -- I don't think we directly tested that (at least not since I've been involved). However, v3.3 has a GDI memory leak involving 2D panels (e.g. popups etc) that was fixed in 3.4.

[MarkW 1,491]

So Simon, consider I finished an hypothetical flight and save it with engines shut down, or even cold and dark, when I load it again it will be the way I left when I last saved it, right?!

 

Nope, no persistent state.  Goes back to fully running or C&D depending on your default flight.

[ahsmatt7 1,199]

I'm well aware I can start in the cub and choose the fsl 320. But changing aircraft hits vas. It's fiddly and its a faff.

I still staggering in 2017 the "just expect" culture we have adopted in the Flightsim community insted of owning up to reality.

It's a sign of the times and shows how easily people are socially conditioned.

If a black rapper tells you enough times by media advertising that his 300 buck headphones are worth 300 bucks, because hes indorsed them then people will buy them.

If enough doctors prescribe prozak to overweight people and tell the over weight person it's society's fault for being mean to them and not tell them due to their poor lifestyle choices of donuts and no exercise, you then create an obesity epidemic.

The same conditioning applies here, if a company sticks to the line of "use the cub" then change aircraft. Insted of saying "no we didn't model that because of x and y" Or "no with the extreme coding of the aircraft and the conflicts between. Net and simconnect we couldnt manage to do it" that's devalues their product. And their marketing manager knows it.

If you tell people enough times "you can run p3d in full screen" people will buy that statement. Instead of saying "yes because it's a badly coded simulator from 10 years ago, that we've tinkered with and adjusted to flog some more copies it's now become unstable with conflicting simconnect, . Net and c++ coding, so yes the draw back is You'll have to press pause when you go from full screen to windowed mode every time" guess what it devalues the product.

Once again. You're back to the social conditioning again. If enough people agree to pay twice for a product it's becomes a norm. I'f enough people agree to pay to beta test a product it's the norm.

I just wish we could go back 15 years and get honesty, value for money and a sturdy product. Not the current wave of over hyped gibberish by twitch streamers, leading to over priced products because the company before them got away with it. That's after getting people to pay to beta test it,because someone else managed to pull that one.

Look I managed to do 2 great sectors yesterday from lgw to lin to lgw in a what seems a great product. I also however managed to pull my hair out because it I have to faff around changing from cubs to 320s. I got 3 ctds going from full screen to Windowed mode.

I had another issue when using gsx to board the pax the right mcdu on the menu page to close the door disappears.

I have to change my asn settings to make it work.

I cant do a spot view at Gatwick at night when told by vatsim atc "after the aircraft next to you has push your cleared to push" because the vas will drain and oom.

And all of the above for a whopping price tag. It's a great idea but theirs only so much you can try and create a real a320 in a 10 year old sim with out running into issues and theirs only so much you can try and get away with charging

Its simple economics. FsLabs and PMDG are the top notch in aircraft addons. There are no others that come close to the fidelity of the aircrsft they simulate. Because they are the only ones, they name whatever price they want. Because people buy them, they can keep thst price.

 

Besides, why on earth are you complaining about how expensive it is and then run out and buy the product? No one forced you to buy it, people habe already reported VAS and OOM issues since the fsx version. You knew what it cost you and you still bought it which in turn supported the high price you are against. Its time to stop complaining on here. They arent going to lower the price just because of your opinion.

[roland_lfor 245]

I'm using FSUIPC and as you know it saves the situation when you exit the program with a name like PreviousFlight.

 

Then I see that the FSL panel state handler contains also a panel configuration with the same name (the FSL panel list is initially empty after A320 installation)

 

I did not verify, but I imagine that if load the situation named "PreviousFlight", then the matching panel state is loaded accordingly.

 

Another thing is perhaps to check that "panel serialization" option is ticked within P3D saving options.

[costamesa 88]

We are not allowed to buy it if we have criticized the price or what?? I thought those were different things?

[daniel_schm 16]

Hey guys,

can somebody tell me the average VAS within default airports.

Thx in advance.

[G-YMML1 582]

We are not allowed to buy it if we have criticized the price or what?? I thought those were different things?

 

 

Man...get lost. Please

[costamesa 88]

Man...get lost. Please

Hmm..ok.

 

Thanks for telling me what to do..I needed that.

[RudiJG1 172]

Folks,

 

Does the package comes with the Tutorial? 

It does, yes

[Navigator43 25]

Ever since they released the patch last night my sim had been performing very well it's a wonderful improvement with the vas issue. I also run my sim in windowed mode it's way better especially for FS Labs.

[Nuno Pinto 1,395]

(...) they name whatever price they want. Because people buy them, they can keep thst price.

 

Yeah but people get fed up with that type of thing and learn. Too many expensive addons with too many "same code, higher price with no real excuse" will lower sales, no matter how they put it.

 

An addon such as the FSL320 at 140 eur or the upcoming 747 at 160 eur or similar would sell MUCH MORE and to a higher profit if the price was below the 100 mark. It's not rocket science.

[Navigator43 25]

Addons nowadays are only going to get more expensive. A lot of it doesn't have to do with the developer it has to do with Prepared as in regards to training

[B777ER 2,484]

FYI, Lefteris posted in the FSLabs  forum that version 3.3.5 and earlier of P3D have a memory leak with 2D panels. http://forums.flightsimlabs.com/index.php?/topic/10494-vas/&do=findComment&comment=85005