Midnight Music

Valuable P3D advice, must read.

Recommended Posts

Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

My guess is many will ignore this and fix version 4 until it is broken. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

LOL!  Rob writes that post here, the other website copies it (I'd have thought a link would have been better, but ok), and we post a link to the copied article here, where the original article is!  LOL!!! 

 

 

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, DaveCT2003 said:

LOL!  Rob writes that post here, the other website copies it (I'd have thought a link would have been better, but ok), and we post a link to the copied article here, where the original article is!  LOL!!! 

 

 

 

Guess more people need to read this, quite a few posts on FB and other forums where people have already caused problems by shoehorning things into V4 

Share this post


Link to post

Yes, good advice. However, in the fifth para I noted the following statement:

"Do NOT use utilities designed to allow you to “unify” your installations by feeding non-Prepar3D v4 scenery/utilities into Prepar3D v4."

ORBX FTX Central 3 immediately springs to mind and it's LC Unification process. I have all the P3D4 ORBX regions installed via FTX Central 3 and everything proceeded uneventfully. This process uses local content where appropriate and available from a previous installation (P3D3). have not noted any downsides so far*. Perhaps the above advice was not directed specifically at FTX Central 3. Also, I feel certain that ORBX are very savvy about such matters.

*My only gripe with the unification process (and the Migration Troubleshooter) is the reorganisation of FTX entries in scenery.cfg to re-establish priority over everything else. If you forget to copy and cut any entries above the ORBX entries (for example, the 3 Scotflight entries) before running the Forced Migration module, you will find yourself faced with a replacement/renumbering headache to reinstate your preferred status quo. Better to paste back your own entries using Notepad++ after FTX Central 3 has finished.

Mike

Share this post


Link to post

FTX Central do not unify install over platforms. It just manage installations, but all sims have own files and files relevant to simulator version. There are differences between FSX, P3D2/3 files and v4 will get own files too when there will be something extra.

 

Anyway ORBX still installs into P3D folder and not just into ORBX folder, but replaces original files or will add extra files to default scenery folder (scenery/world/scenery) install effects and sounds into P3D folders... 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

This statement is just plain crazy:

"Before you install ANYTHING into Prepar3D v4, you should take the time to research whether the developer merely adjusted their installer to account for Prepar3D v4, or whether the developer actually took the time to re-export BOTH the code elements AND the model elements of a product using the developer/SDK tools that were provided by Lockheed Martin for use with Prepar3D v4."

How do you do that? How many folks even know what Rob's talking about? How would anyone find this information? If this is what it takes for a "stable" platform it ain't ever going to happen..........Doug

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Cruachan said:

Yes, good advice. However, in the fifth para I noted the following statement:

"Do NOT use utilities designed to allow you to “unify” your installations by feeding non-Prepar3D v4 scenery/utilities into Prepar3D v4."

ORBX FTX Central 3 immediately springs to mind and it's LC Unification process. I have all the P3D4 ORBX regions installed via FTX Central 3 and everything proceeded uneventfully. This process uses local content where appropriate and available from a previous installation (P3D3). have not noted any downsides so far*. Perhaps the above advice was not directed specifically at FTX Central 3. Also, I feel certain that ORBX are very savvy about such matters.

*My only gripe with the unification process (and the Migration Troubleshooter) is the reorganisation of FTX entries in scenery.cfg to re-establish priority over everything else. If you forget to copy and cut any entries above the ORBX entries (for example, the 3 Scotflight entries) before running the Forced Migration module, you will find yourself faced with a replacement/renumbering headache to reinstate your preferred status quo. Better to paste back your own entries using Notepad++ after FTX Central 3 has finished.

Mike

Isn't that what the FTX insertion point tool is for in FTX Central? It works fine for me and ensures anything I want to have priority over FTX entries stays that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

With those things, considered- here are some rules to live by:
• Do NOT install aircraft, scenery, utilities into Prepar3D v4 that were not designed using the Prepar3D v4 SDK. (Re-read that sentence it is important!)
• Do NOT force Prepar3D v4 to utilize scenery that you previously had installed for Prepar3D v3, FSX, FSX-SE (or yes… XPL!)

I don't think this is an absolute rule. And I don't think it's going to ruin a perfectly good sim if you happen to find a scenery that works fine. If it works, it works. If it doesn't, just remove it. I'm more of a I'll-find-out-myself kind of guy. I don't need somebody telling me what is right and wrong for MY sim.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post

I read about folks on forums all over throwing all kinds of stuff into V4 and then having crashes. I think holding back is a good idea. I've put very little into my V4 set up as I am waiting for proper updated addons. I have not done any tweaks either. At the moment my V4 is working extremely well and looks great. However, I am getting tired of trying to go everywhere in a Lockheed Electra 10 or a Beaver...:laugh:

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

1 - If the addon's installer wants to place anything within the core sim... think twice.  Seriously.  It's neither required nor preferred by L-M.

2 - If you don't know if the addon has been developed with the correct SDK.  Ask.  Simple as that.

 

I am a developer... and I am telling you, it is time you held developers accountable for doing the right thing... not the quick thing.  It's really quick to make a new installer that knows how to find the new sim and install files the old way.  It is not appropriate to do that.  As developers we should be doing what's right, not what's easy.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

For future sanity, this is what I am doing:  

1. I have a P3Dv3 install with just the client

2. I install my P3Dv3 scenery add-ons there to see what files they put down and where, which file they modify etc.

3. Then I create a folder in P3Dv4 addons and follow the add-on.xml method.  

4. Test with the content error check turned on.  If I see there are error, I simple disable/remove and move on.

Eventually, I will have all my add ons outside and then have a very clean sim install.

Share this post


Link to post
55 minutes ago, GHarrall said:

Isn't that what the FTX insertion point tool is for in FTX Central? It works fine for me and ensures anything I want to have priority over FTX entries stays that way.

Hi Glenn,

Would you believe it, I forgot about that! I'll check it out next time this happens. Clearly ORBX have had the foresight to cover all the bases. When I think of the time I wasted last night! Ugh! Idiot! It's really a case of old habits dying hard.

Thanks for the reminder.

Regards,

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, W2DR said:

This statement is just plain crazy:

"Before you install ANYTHING into Prepar3D v4, you should take the time to research whether the developer merely adjusted their installer to account for Prepar3D v4, or whether the developer actually took the time to re-export BOTH the code elements AND the model elements of a product using the developer/SDK tools that were provided by Lockheed Martin for use with Prepar3D v4."

How do you do that? How many folks even know what Rob's talking about? How would anyone find this information? If this is what it takes for a "stable" platform it ain't ever going to happen..........Doug

Why would it not ever happen????

If the developers didn't take the easy way out, it would happen.

If people read what Rob posted, they would know what he was talking about. Rob does a pretty good job keeping things stupid simple. Besides,he spelled it out in the article he wrote.

Share this post


Link to post
59 minutes ago, AviatorMoser said:

I don't think this is an absolute rule. And I don't think it's going to ruin a perfectly good sim if you happen to find a scenery that works fine. If it works, it works. If it doesn't, just remove it. I'm more of a I'll-find-out-myself kind of guy. I don't need somebody telling me what is right and wrong for MY sim.

You don't think it's an absolute rule??? Based off of what?

Seriously, you have a well known developer literally telling you that his support team is seeing problems with what people are doing to p3d v4 but you don't believe it. He's telling you that the massive performance drops with the dynamic lighting is being caused by people throwing in p3d v3 sceneries not optimized for p3d v4, but you don't believe him.

What would it take for someone to convince you of these things he wrote about.

Is that your approach to your health. You don't want a someone who knows about the human body  way more than you do telling you how to be healthy and what you should and shouldn't do to you body? I'm sure you'll just find out and see?

I seriously don't  understant the logic of people in this community anymore.

The smartest thing I have ever learned was to learn from other people's mistakes so I don't make the same ones.

Apparently, that is lost on the avsim  community.

 

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, ahsmatt7 said:

You don't think it's an absolute rule??? Based off of what?

Based off what I said. I can just find out for myself if something is working correctly or not. I don't need to abide by any sort of "rule" but I can consider it as good advice.

Quote

Seriously, you have a well known developer literally telling you that his support team is seeing problems with what people are doing to p3d v4 but you don't believe it. He's telling you that the massive performance drops with the dynamic lighting is being caused by people throwing in p3d v3 sceneries not optimized for p3d v4, but you don't believe him.

He has every right to post what he thinks -- especially because he has to run a support team. I just disagreed with his "rules". Because there is all kinds of stuff out there that may work fine out there even though it's not officially updated to the newest SDK. Like Manfred Jahn's C-47. Works for the most part, not perfectly, but it doesn't crash my sim, and I'm almost certain it doesn't affect PMDG's simulation.

Quote

What would it take for someone to convince you of these things he wrote about?

Nothing, I'm convinced his support team has to deal with all sorts of issues.

Quote

Is that your approach to your health. You don't want a someone who knows about the human body  way more than you do telling you how to be healthy and what you should and shouldn't do to you body? I'm sure you'll just find out and see?

I'm smart enough to know what's good for my body and the consequences of any risky lifestyles.

Quote

I seriously don't  understant the logic of people in this community anymore.

The smartest thing I have ever learned was to learn from other people's mistakes so I don't make the same ones.

Hey I agree with you on learning from people's mistakes. I just don't agree with these so called "rules". It's more like good advice -- not essential. And that's just like, my opinion, man. :)

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, AviatorMoser said:

I don't think this is an absolute rule. And I don't think it's going to ruin a perfectly good sim if you happen to find a scenery that works fine. If it works, it works. If it doesn't, just remove it. I'm more of a I'll-find-out-myself kind of guy. I don't need somebody telling me what is right and wrong for MY sim.

x9999999999999999999999999. 

I can't agree more with this.

You can't live your life with your mind set on "if aint broke aint fix it".

Share this post


Link to post

Many are running Taxi2gate p3d scenery in v4 without issues. God knows when the taxi2gate developer will offer new installers as their communication skills are below poor. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Good advice. It seems obvious if you have followed everyone's headaches and growing pains since the v4 release. I've blown up enough installs over the years to know better anyway.

I finally purchased v4 today, and will only be installing Orbx, ChasePlane and the A2A 172 for now. Hope the AS16 installer comes soon.

Share this post


Link to post

One also has to keep in mind that Robert did give this advice because they keep seeing more and more users asking for technical support about their products, who have happened to install things into V4 which aren't 100% compatible. 

So he has an interest in reducing work for his support team. And the best way to do that is remind people to not mess up their installation with 3rd Party software that is not up to v4' SDK standards.

Share this post


Link to post

All I'm seeing here is a discussion of semantics. The difference between a rule, a law, a suggestion etc.

Bottom line - LM has suggested that for best results, no add ons be installed that haven't been vetted through their process.

Does this mean that your system will crash and burn if you use a "non" approved item? Nope.

Just because ti installed and runs w/o any problem also doesn't mean that it won't crash your system down the road.

But there IS a reason that the majority of tech support responses from LM begin with -"If you uninstall ALL your add ons, do you still have the problem?"

Perhaps RR might have been better saying Rule of Thumb as opposed to rule. It's a good idea to adhere to the dev's suggestions (LM) just know that if you deviate and have an issue that it could be of your own doing.

Just MHO,

Vic

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post

From my side, I can only say big thank you to PMDG and Robert.

A quick test revealed to me that what he wrote is right:

I am using Flytampa Vienna and PMDG747 currently as one of my favorites, and I am seeing following GPU usages (GTX980) with 4x SSAA:

No FT Vienna + PMDG lights off: 38%, lights on: 60%

FT Vienna + PMDG lights off: 50%, lights on: 100% (and FPS drop from 30fps to 28fps).

I strongly doubt FT airports have been exported by the new SDK, rather only adapted through the available patch files.

We need to be extremely cautious.

I decided to go back to 0, and really question each addon I install, beginning with the basic ones.

I'd also like to know if it's possible to check it myself.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, WarpD said:

1 - If the addon's installer wants to place anything within the core sim... think twice.  Seriously.  It's neither required nor preferred by L-M.

2 - If you don't know if the addon has been developed with the correct SDK.  Ask.  Simple as that.

 

I am a developer... and I am telling you, it is time you held developers accountable for doing the right thing... not the quick thing.  It's really quick to make a new installer that knows how to find the new sim and install files the old way.  It is not appropriate to do that.  As developers we should be doing what's right, not what's easy.

If only Ed;-)

If only all (or even a few more) devs thought and acted as you do.  I've pretty much given up trying to get devs to do 'the right thing'.  It became SUCH a 'walking on egg shells' dilemma, with so many devs either being defensive, or worse, 'don't try to tell me how to do my job' attitude.  Remember how things were when P3D first launched?  Don't get me wrong, I'd love nothing more than to see exactly what you're saying. I just think it'll take years.

The other thing that springs to mind, that makes what you're saying SO important...  What percentage of flightsim users actually use forums?  What about all the people who just buy stuff, and expect it to work out of the box?! My guess would be a lot. They're going to be in for a nasty shock me thinks.

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, Dougal said:

 It became SUCH a 'walking on egg shells' dilemma, with so many devs either being defensive, or worse, 'don't try to tell me how to do my job' attitude.

I can understand some of them to a degree. They had developed techniques to circumvent shortcomings of the engine as it were that weren't exactly offcial FSX SDK either. When these workarounds that served them well for years stopped working during the evolution of P3D they found themselves in the situation that some of the stuff their design was lauded for by customers didn't work anymore and that they had to learn a new way to do it, with no guarantee to receiving the same result.

Share this post


Link to post
25 minutes ago, Farlis said:

I can understand some of them to a degree. 

Indeed - so can I. The whole thing puts both devs AND users in a tough spot. All we can really do I think, is EXACTLY what we're doing here..... KEEP dialogue going and keep learning;-)

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now