PMDG 747 will come to x plane aswell?

[dbvetter 1]

I don't under stand the logic here.  Making the 747 for X-Plane would make everyone move over to X-Plane and kill 50% of current bussiness for other developers?   No, Why?,  we would just have the PMDG 747 in X-Plane and the current users of P3D and FSX would stay with their platform after investing a lot of money into it.

 

I have all 3 major sims and spend money in all of them.  Why limit yourself to one Flight Simulator. (unless for financial reasons...I understand.)

 

BTW: I have the PMDG DC-6 in X-Plane and I love it.

[Lorby_SI 2,038]

Why limit yourself to one Flight Simulator.

(as a developer)

 

IMHO, one reason is, that implementing programmatic solutions in X-Plane (like the aircraft systems and gauges) is for one 100% - completely - totally different than on ESP platforms (especially now with the new gauge tech in P3D). Second, the API offered for this is a lot less capable than the ESP counterpart (=SimConnect). Coding for X-Plane is just so much more (tedious) work.

 

For any programmatic solution (like for example my own addons) there is no "porting" over to XP. You have to implement everything a second time in a different way. Some features aren't even possible to achieve with the XP API. I would have loved to make my products available in XP - that would have meant true multi-platform multiplayer scenarios. But there just is no way to make it happen.

 

For an aircraft I guess the only thing that you can actually "port" over is the 3D modelling and the textures. A little game of numbers: assuming that ESP users still outnumber XP users 10:1, and that I am correct in my assumption that only the model can be ported, then the PMDG 747 XP would have to have a price tag of roughly $1000 per license.

[anubhavs 66]

(as a developer)IMHO, one reason is, that implementing programmatic solutions in X-Plane (like the aircraft systems and gauges) is for one 100% - completely - totally different than on ESP platforms (especially now with the new gauge tech in P3D). Second, the API offered for this is a lot less capable than the ESP counterpart (=SimConnect). Coding for X-Plane is just so much more (tedious) work.For any programmatic solution (like for example my own addons) there is no "porting" over to XP. You have to implement everything a second time in a different way. Some features aren't even possible to achieve with the XP API. I would have loved to make my products available in XP - that would have meant true multi-platform multiplayer scenarios. But there just is no way to make it happen.For an aircraft I guess the only thing that you can actually "port" over is the 3D modelling and the textures. A little game of numbers: assuming that ESP users still outnumber XP users 10:1, and that I am correct in my assumption that only the model can be ported, then the PMDG 747 XP would have to have a price tag of roughly $1000 per license.

+1. That's actually good to know - had no idea. Guess that makes sense why the IXEG took 5 years.

[sizziano 172]

+1. That's actually good to know - had no idea. Guess that makes sense why the IXEG took 5 years.

 

Well the IXEG took 5 years because it was a part time job for the devs. Every single airliner complex airliner (and many add-ons in general) use custom plugins to overcome the default limitations. The limitations of the default X-Plane API are moot in this case. Still, it's not an easy task "porting" over the work.

 

Felipe Vicini

[Richard Sennett 2,499]

I don't under stand the logic here.  Making the 747 for X-Plane would make everyone move over to X-Plane and kill 50% of current bussiness for other developers?   No, Why?,  we would just have the PMDG 747 in X-Plane and the current users of P3D and FSX would stay with their platform after investing a lot of money into it.

 

I have all 3 major sims and spend money in all of them.  Why limit yourself to one Flight Simulator. (unless for financial reasons...I understand.)

 

BTW: I have the PMDG DC-6 in X-Plane and I love it.

 

1+

 

After checking the amount of views on the Zibo modified 737-800 post (38,763) views in my mind thats a ton of potential customers on the XP side of things and a huge loss in revenue for new developers to the platform

 

Also the market is not even close to being flooded with payware - in my mind that being the case a good payware purchase would be a no brainer for many that doesnt have thousands invested in XP justifying purchasing a quality payware product without much hesitation 

 

I think many are under estimating how many XP users there are and more importantly will be in the future 

[Lorby_SI 2,038]

The limitations of the default X-Plane API are moot in this case.

I would have to disagree with that. It makes a huge difference if you can do the same thing with 5 lines of code in a high level language or if it requires 50 lines in a low-level dialect. It just isn't worth it, having to code custom logic for every single detail that the other API is offering me right out of the box. And it is very frustrasting to say the least if you realize that what you want to do just isn't possible. These things are for enthusiasts, which IMHO is one of the reasons why there isn't much payware for XP - the relation between effort and result just doesn't work out too well. IMO Laminar should skip one version and concentrate on improving the API instead. That would boost 3rd party addons far more than new clouds.

 

Btw "custom plugins to overcome limitations" - that is not entirely it. Programmatic logic is made in its own right, because you require functionality that the platform doesn't offer. At all. That is not a limitation, a framework cannot cover every single eventuality there is. Quite the contrary, it should give developers the freedom to do things that the platform creator didn't even think to be possible.

 

And the simple fact remains: if you already have the code, you will have to do it again. And worst case it will require even more effort that the first time.

 

Personally I think that we can trust in developers, especially in PMDG who have products in both sims, to know what can be brought to market profitably.

[anden145 2,285]

I would have to disagree with that. It makes a huge difference if you can do the same thing with 5 lines of code in a high level language or if it requires 50 lines in a low-level dialect. It just isn't worth it, having to code custom logic for every single detail that the other API is offering me right out of the box. And it is very frustrasting to say the least if you realize that what you want to do just isn't possible. These things are for enthusiasts, which IMHO is one of the reasons why there isn't much payware for XP - the relation between effort and result just doesn't work out too well. IMO Laminar should skip one version and concentrate on improving the API instead. That would boost 3rd party addons far more than new clouds.

 

Btw "custom plugins to overcome limitations" - that is not entirely it. Programmatic logic is made in its own right, because you require functionality that the platform doesn't offer. At all. That is not a limitation, a framework cannot cover every single eventuality there is. Quite the contrary, it should give developers the freedom to do things that the platform creator didn't even think to be possible.

 

And the simple fact remains: if you already have the code, you will have to do it again. And worst case it will require even more effort that the first time.

 

Personally I think that we can trust in developers, especially in PMDG who have products in both sims, to know what can be brought to market profitably.

 

+1

Well said!

[anubhavs 66]

I would have to disagree with that. It makes a huge difference if you can do the same thing with 5 lines of code in a high level language or if it requires 50 lines in a low-level dialect. It just isn't worth it, having to code custom logic for every single detail that the other API is offering me right out of the box. And it is very frustrasting to say the least if you realize that what you want to do just isn't possible. These things are for enthusiasts, which IMHO is one of the reasons why there isn't much payware for XP - the relation between effort and result just doesn't work out too well. IMO Laminar should skip one version and concentrate on improving the API instead. That would boost 3rd party addons far more than new clouds.Btw "custom plugins to overcome limitations" - that is not entirely it. Programmatic logic is made in its own right, because you require functionality that the platform doesn't offer. At all. That is not a limitation, a framework cannot cover every single eventuality there is. Quite the contrary, it should give developers the freedom to do things that the platform creator didn't even think to be possible.And the simple fact remains: if you already have the code, you will have to do it again. And worst case it will require even more effort that the first time.Personally I think that we can trust in developers, especially in PMDG who have products in both sims, to know what can be brought to market profitably.

Agreed. Honestly at this point I care less about the "Why?" of it. I trust PMDG to know what's viable or not in XP technically. I care more about whether they actually have plans or not and to stop this conjecture once and for all so we can all move on for better or worse.

 

I use both P3D and XP and if the answer is not to expect PMDG on XP in the future, I'll continue to invest in my P3D system. Conversely if there's an XP roadmap, I am happy to wait patiently for it.

 

It's PMDG decision at the end of the day and I'll still support them regardless. I just think them sharing their vision with their customers can go a long way in stopping further rumors and conjectures..

[anubhavs 66]

Then again I just saw this video where Robert Randazzo shared his preliminary plans for the Xplane platform (start from 18:30) - https://youtu.be/oat046jCFo8?t=1109

 

Interesting thoughts there and very encouraging. Wonder if that's still the intention or if anything has changed.

[Datalink 26]

I'm sure if a developer as big/popular as PMDG asked for certain features to be added to XP, I'm sure LR/Austin would do so as soon as they could within their plans.

[bigryan62 1]

Nah.

[shamrockflyer 647]

Very disappointed that the 747 V3 will not make it to X-Plane in the foreseeable future. X-Plane is such a wonderful platform, but I guess it has a wider range of a mature audience that just generally fly GA. If PMDG could drop FSX (the now FS9 of the flight sim world), and take up X-Plane it would please many. There is such a great potential with the X-Plane market, I guess I'm going to have to go and spend money on P3D's academic sim to fly my PMDG aircraft...

[Brian_A_Neuman 198]

Very disappointed that the 747 V3 will not make it to X-Plane in the foreseeable future. X-Plane is such a wonderful platform, but I guess it has a wider range of a mature audience that just generally fly GA. If PMDG could drop FSX (the now FS9 of the flight sim world), and take up X-Plane it would please many. There is such a great potential with the X-Plane market, I guess I'm going to have to go and spend money on P3D's academic sim to fly my PMDG aircraft...

 

Im just curious to know what makes you think that the X-Plane crowd is more "mature"? Also P3D and the MSFS series share a common code that X-Plane does not. I have been simming now since 1982 (35 years if you need to do the math). I have both X-Plane and P3D, I assure you that me flying P3D doesnt make me a less mature simmer than you...

[sizziano 172]

I would have to disagree with that. It makes a huge difference if you can do the same thing with 5 lines of code in a high level language or if it requires 50 lines in a low-level dialect. It just isn't worth it, having to code custom logic for every single detail that the other API is offering me right out of the box. And it is very frustrasting to say the least if you realize that what you want to do just isn't possible. These things are for enthusiasts, which IMHO is one of the reasons why there isn't much payware for XP - the relation between effort and result just doesn't work out too well. IMO Laminar should skip one version and concentrate on improving the API instead. That would boost 3rd party addons far more than new clouds.

 

Btw "custom plugins to overcome limitations" - that is not entirely it. Programmatic logic is made in its own right, because you require functionality that the platform doesn't offer. At all. That is not a limitation, a framework cannot cover every single eventuality there is. Quite the contrary, it should give developers the freedom to do things that the platform creator didn't even think to be possible.

 

And the simple fact remains: if you already have the code, you will have to do it again. And worst case it will require even more effort that the first time.

 

Personally I think that we can trust in developers, especially in PMDG who have products in both sims, to know what can be brought to market profitably.

 

 

You're right of course but there are several developers in XP making very complex add-ons similar to "PMDG level". While they have years of experience working with ESP and would have to learn how to work with XP from scratch, judging by what's available for XP currently it doesn't seem like PMDG would run into any problems that they wouldn't have to deal with on ESP. Like RSR said, both platforms have their strengths and weaknesses as well as quirks. Thing is that for the time being as far as base sims are concerned XP has the upper hand IMHO.

 

 

Felipe Vicini 

[rsrandazzo 6,353]

(as a developer)

 

IMHO, one reason is, that implementing programmatic solutions in X-Plane (like the aircraft systems and gauges) is for one 100% - completely - totally different than on ESP platforms (especially now with the new gauge tech in P3D). Second, the API offered for this is a lot less capable than the ESP counterpart (=SimConnect). Coding for X-Plane is just so much more (tedious) work.

 

<trimmed>

 

Actually, this has absolutely NOTHING to do with my decision that we will not be porting the 747 to X-Plane any time soon.  Our products are designed to be largely platform independent- which takes a HUGE amount of work up front, but was more or less accomplished with this product.

 

The DC-6 development was designed to build the connection layer that will exist between any PMDG airplane and X-Plane.  We simply need the platform to catch up with what we are able to do under other platforms before we can move something as big and complex as the 747 into X-Plane.

 

Currently the platform cannot take this airplane in the level of detail we have created it, without us removing some pieces that our customers feel are pretty critical- and that we feel are critical to the product's success.

 

That is it in a nutshell.