With FSUIPC letf out...

[jcomm 5,890]

How will users with fancy hardware, and  / or applications that rely on FSUIPC do ?

For instance, in order to be able to use my ELITE hardware with FSX / P3D I have been using FSUIPC ( just the non-registered version, although I own the registered FSUIPC since it's very commercial release and would support Pete as much as he has been supporting the flight simulation community... )

 

[fsxkitty 62]

I read somewhere that DTG plans on incorporating FSUIPC-like functionality into the game itself.

Even if that functionality isn't included, what makes you think that there won't be an FSUIPC for FSW?

[jcomm 5,890]

I think that's what I read from one of Pete's posts - that FSUIPC functionality will be offered as part of DTG FSW:

http://forum.simflight.com/topic/83295-fsuipc-and-dtgs-new-64-bit-fsw-sim/

[Hubinwa 27]

On 5/8/2017 at 2:07 AM, jcomm said:

I think that's what I read from one of Pete's posts - that FSUIPC functionality will be offered as part of DTG FSW:

http://forum.simflight.com/topic/83295-fsuipc-and-dtgs-new-64-bit-fsw-sim/

Thanks for posting the link and raising the topic.  The way I read it is,  Pete has limited knowledge of what DTG is creating and has little interest in starting development from scratch if that is needed. A full FSUIPC interface would certainly make FSW more attractive for me. Hopefully DTG will comment on the hardware interface options they are planning.

[Paraffin 2,197]

You won't need a "full FSUIPC interface" if FSW has the same thing internally, and everyone making products you use are supporting that protocol.

For example, X-Plane doesn't have FSUIPC. Instead we have XPUIPC that works the same way, which lets me run the moving map in Plan-G flight planner that supports FS9, FSX, P3D, and X-Plane. 

It's not rocket science, just a data format. If a protocol like this has worked cross-platform in the past, it will probably work with FSW, once they publish the interface and everyone is on board with the new protocol.

 

[MadDog 353]

While FSW will not support FSUIPC, the developers have specifically mentioned that it will support Simconnect... this is very welcome news!  With some exceptions, the majority of FSUIPC's interaction with FSX/P3D is through Simconnect.  Even 10 years ago, Pete Dowson was hopeful that Simconnect would eventually replace FSUIPC... before he knew that development of FSX was to be discontinued.  I'll be interested to see if DT has enhanced any of the Simconnect functionality in FSW.

[Hubinwa 27]

One of my favorite functions of FSUIPC is assigning 2 functions per "button" press. For example, using a toggle switch for landing gear. Toggle down(button press)=gear down, toggle up(button release)=gear up. Without FSUIPC, I have not been able to configure this type of example in any of the big 3 platforms. If FSW has this capability without FSUIPC, then kudos to them.

[gboz 157]

4 hours ago, Hubinsc said:

If FSW has this capability without FSUIPC, then kudos to them.

Yes FSW can do this "on release" function now.

gb.

[Gypsy Baron 10]

Pete Dowson has stated that he will not be developing a FSUIPC addon for FSW. He is, however, developing a new FSUIPC5 x64 for P3D x64.

There is more to FSUIPC4 that just assigning buttons/switches. Much more. There is access (with the registered version) to all the FSX offsets.

Those that can be written are accessible as well as all that are read only. There is also a range of 'user-defined' offsets that can be used to create complex conditional control assignments among myriad other uses. There is the ability to define L:variables which then appear in the FSUIPC4 assignment menus so that one can assign switches/key strokes to send parameters to those L:Vars.

Then there is a most powerful capability built in to FSUIPC4 which is the Lua implementation.  Again,  access directly to offsets and L:Vars. Simple and easy to implement.

My current FSUIPC4 implementation for the 'aircraft specific' assignments and special functions runs to over 7500 lines in the ini file. I make heavy use of conditional assignments where 10 switches handle over 100 assignments for each of my more complex aircraft. Very little mouse or keyboard activity is needed with my setup. Most everything is handled by those 10 switches. In many cases, a single button/switch activation simultaneously operates 3 or 4  controls on some of my aircraft. (engine select, primer select, fire extinguisher set, starter activated is one example) I also have unique as well as 'common' Lua scripts for each aircraft.

I have 100's of hours of work invested in my FSX setup using FSUIPC4 and Lua. Pete has said that the new P3D version will afford the same  functionality as the current FSX version and that my 7500+ lines in my INI file can simply be moved over, as is!

I do not see that level of integration happening with FSW and certainly not a simple 'copy over' of current configuration files, And I have seen no mention of Lua scripts in any FSW discussions.

Without the ability to customize my installation to the extent I currently have and not spending 100's of hours again to do so, I'm afraid the only path to the 64-bit flight sim world in via P3D.

  Paul

[Chock 17,769]

Whilst I have had registered versions of FSUIPC since 2009 (according to my simmarket order history anyway), I've never really used it very much other than for things actually which required it, although some of the functions of it I admit have proved useful for bits and bobs over the years, so I have always felt it only fair not to use a freebie version of it since quite a few things do, thus I regarded Pete Dowson as deserving of payment for his efforts in creating it and I will certainly buy the new version when it comes out, as it apparently will be doing at some point. But as much as I like to support effort and contributions to simming, it's as well to be aware that other people can actually program stuff, and so the fact that it may or may not be FSUIPC in FSW does not mean it won't be able to have similar functionality to what FSUIPC offers, for example there is the XPUIPC plug in for X-Plane and there is no reason to suspect that if it proves necessary to create something similar, DTG will do so. After all, we know that much of the reason for FSW's creation is so that DTG benefit from the sale of add ons for it, so it would not make any sense whatsoever for them to have a base simulation which was limited in the kind of add-ons it could support, otherwise there would have been no point in them going to the extent of trying to move things on from where FSX-SE is.

Yes things are going to change with the advent of new sims coming along. Some stuff won't work and we might find ourselves buying other bits and bobs, but we wanted that. And really, anyone who has been using flight sims for years knows that ever was it so. Are we still crying about not being able to use FS95 or FS98 add-on aeroplanes and scenery we bought? Or lamenting that our Commodore 64 Datasette cassette copy of Ubisoft Fighter Bomber won't run on our Windows 10 PC? No of course not. There is no reason for us to cry about recent progress either, because we all want flight sims to progress and that is the price we pay for them having done so.