PMDG 747 will come to x plane aswell?

[sizziano 172]

 

 

(Please be aware, that I'm NOT saying, this necessary is the case. This is pure conjecture on my part!)

 

I agree with everything you said and my question was posed so we can avoid conjecture.

[jcalder 25]

I own a business that makes parts for only a certain brand of equipment.  My partner and I come across things like this all the time.

​We get asked the same questions, "we need your part for *insert different brand*, why don't you make it?".  "You could easily sell x number of parts if you made them for x brand".  "You don't make parts for x brand because you're scared of *insert reason*".

​We have our reasons why we develop for what we do, we actually used to go into in depth explanations for people which was always a complete waste of time.  No matter what technical response we gave, it was always put down or we were dismissed as being lazy or stupid when the reality is we just can't do it for certain brands unless something on the OEM machine is changed.  We also have competitors that have a similar product that work with other brands.  But fact is, we would have to leave out important features of our part and it's not worth it.

​RSR stating that Xplane has limitations goes beyond any information I'd give.  All that did was open up the floodgates to "What reasons".  Then if he were to go as far as to go in depth, more often than not the person the problems are being explained to doesn't understand and they get frustrated or start insulting you.  Someone early sarcastically quoted RSR's comment of "Marketing hog-wash" so it's happening here already because people aren't hearing what they want to hear.

​While I don't blame customers for their concerns or complaints, I read them and listen but have taken to rarely replying.  Sometimes the complaining public brings up a good point, but usually it's just the same boring rhetoric.

​Figured I'd throw in my two cents since I see this exact same discussion happening constantly in a completely unrelated field.  (we make agricultural equipment parts, has nothing to do with airplanes or computers)

[sizziano 172]

Someone early sarcastically quoted RSR's comment of "Marketing hog-wash" so it's happening here already because people aren't hearing what they want to hear.

The problem is we aren't hearing ANYTHING. PMDG have gone in depth in the past about differences in the platforms and things they can and cannot do (circuit breakers in the DC-6 being a prime example). Sure some people like you say won't be satisfied but all I asked was a bit more explanation on what where some of these limitations RSR was talking about. Plenty of XP devs have worked around the limitations in the sim the same way ESP devs have been doing for years with the stagnant 32-bit platform. I never demanded anything and certainly not in the way you describe. All I asked was simple elaboration on a vague statement, maybe the silence is all the answer I need. So if PMDG eventually decide not to further develop for XP I'm ok with that but I would be mighty curious to hear about their technical reasons for doing so (if there are any).

 

 

Felipe Vicini

[PinkJackal 86]

I would also like to know what's PMDG next product for XP, if any.

[anubhavs 66]

Settle down folks. I think people are using their disappointment at Robert's answer that there won't be a 747 on XP in the near future - and using that to question PMDG's motives. We are all on PMDG's board and I don't see the point to being rude to them or calling them names. Yes I am disappointed as an XP user - but I also recognize they don't owe us anything, not even an explanation on the technical details behind their decision. Nothing wrong in asking them, but also don't hold it against them if you don't get an answer.

 

The only thing I requested for is an answer whether they ARE going to do anything on XP platform going forward - so XP users can plan accordingly, that I hope they put to rest once and for all. The how and why of it would be interesting to know, but not imperative and it tends to devolve into a "my sim is better than your sim" conversation, which we should avoid.

 

To to the mods - if RSR will be giving an answer I hope you let this go on. But if not, this is about to devolve pretty soon.

[sizziano 172]

Settle down folks. I think people are using their disappointment at Robert's answer that there won't be a 747 on XP in the near future - and using that to question PMDG's motives. We are all on PMDG's board and I don't see the point to being rude to them or calling them names. Yes I am disappointed as an XP user - but I also recognize they don't owe us anything, not even an explanation on the technical details behind their decision. Nothing wrong in asking them, but also don't hold it against them if you don't get an answer.

 

The only thing I requested for is an answer whether they ARE going to do anything on XP platform going forward - so XP users can plan accordingly, that I hope they put to rest once and for all. The how and why of it would be interesting to know, but not imperative and it tends to devolve into a "my sim is better than your sim" conversation, which we should avoid.

 

To to the mods - if RSR will be giving an answer I hope you let this go on. But if not, this is about to devolve pretty soon.

Well RSR has already stated

that they have been looking at ways to bring the NGX over to XP eventually though I think we all would like a bit more information on whether this is still the case and how goes the progress. But you know, When It's Ready™

 

 

Felipe Vicini

[anden145 2,285]

We'll see what the future holds...

 

I can certainly agree with 'jcalder' in this instance. No matter what reason RSR/PMDG gave, it would always (by some) be discarded as them being lazy or unwilling to develop for X-Plane. And, that they're just making up excuses or lying about the reason(s). They would most likely be accused of deliberately antagonizing or even discriminating against certain groups of flight simmers...

I can understand the frustration from the community regarding the few answers as to why and when.

 

But seeing if from PMDG (or any other developers) view, I can certainly understand why they avoid giving any concrete answers, and/or really are weighing their words in this regard. If I were a developer, I would certainly avoid 'opening that can of worms'.

 

But please, people! Nobody has stated, that PMDG are going to cease development for X-Plane! The only response which has come, is that it's 'not in the foreseeable future'. 

[DavidP 1,408]

PMDG don't need to explain anything, really. It's their sand pit, they can say as much or as little as they like. Some of the reaction here is quite childish, really.

[anden145 2,285]

PMDG don't need to explain anything, really. It's their sand pit, they can say as much or as little as they like. Some of the reaction here is quite childish, really.

 

Agreed!

[Desaix 235]

We are all half children playing a game here, do not forget.

And children live on expectations, and you know how much children cry after big disappointments...Forgive us  :wink:

 

P.S. I bet both don't fly exclusively in Xplane 

[Airfighter 150]

(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.

 

 

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.

 

(as X-Plane commercial developer)

 

I will totally disagree.

 

If they were those kind of limitations you are referring to, shouldn't be possible to have aircrafts in X-Plane like IXEG's 733, or FF's 767/757, PMDG's DC-6, and many many more. Actually, any kind of ratio between available aircrafts in X-Plane and developers or customers, is in favor of X-Plane.

 

As all the modern gaming platforms, you can easily code any system logic, with the available high level language LUA plugins (Gizmo/SASL/FlyWithLua). You can even use directly OpenGL (LuaGL library). With X-Plane 11, Laminar introduced it's own simplified LUA API, XLua.

 

If there were such limitations, Reality XP couldn't create their GTNs for X-Plane.

 

If there were such limitations, NASA couldn't have in the public domain available its own plugin. https://github.com/nasa/XPlaneConnect 

 

Really, I cannot understand from where your assumptions are coming.

 

If someones economic model does not fit X-Plane, that's fair enough, and I will accepted. But statements that X-Plane as a platform is not capable, while the opposite is proven, then this is misinformation to the flightsim community, and economically damaging to X-Plane developers.

[pete_auau 1,154]

 

 

We are all half children playing a game here, do not forget.

 

last time I read  its  a  simulation not  a  game

[Desaix 235]

last time I read  its  a  simulation not  a  game

Yeah sorry, I thought there were no kids and wifes reading here 

[tonywob 4,768]

Interesting discussion going on here, I'm amazed it's stayed relatively calm  :wink:

 

I'm not a developer on ESP but I periodically look at the SDK to see what's possible in P3D. X-Plane I think has a cleaner and more open SDK, but the ESP platform seemingly allows developers to do more (especially with scenery which is my main area of interest). Regarding aircraft, I'd be very interested to know as well what limitations PMDG have hit with X-Plane.

 

For a simmer who finds both the 737NGX and IXEG 737 very detailed simulations on their respective platforms, what does the 747 do that can't be simulated on X-Plane but can on FSX/P3D? I much prefer general aviation and stick-and-rudder flying and I don't think either platform has any glaring advantages over the other in this department (unless you are talking about helicopters). Visually both sims can produce some very immersive environments and the flight dynamic differences aren't something I've really cared too much about to notice (neither feel anything like the real thing to me).

[Chock 17,769]

Pretty obvious why the 747 is in FS and P3D and not in X-Plane when you look at this excerpt from the PMDG 747-400's cfg file:

 

[pogo_stick]
spring_effectiveness = 19.42
induced_bounciness = 1.3
jumping_up_and_down_stability = 142.02
general_boinginess = 1.0

flappy_winginess_factor = 12.045

 

Try doing that with blade element theory.