P3Dv4 Addon Rant:-)

[shivers9 1,174]

Simbol

Quote

If a developer implements it then let it be!, don't overwrite default P3D files please!

 Lorby_SI

Quote

The platform producer doesn't have to cover every angle so users and devs can't manipulate the product. The days where that was possible are long gone, products are too complex today. 

Both very good points. I think that LM has a good road map and yes it may not be perfect but hopefully the Devs will be able to work with them and smooth  the problems and glitches. As long as we simmers continue to buy stuff from the likes of Carenado and Alaebo and depend on folks like Bert Pieke to try and hack them into P3D so that Guages and system halfway work then we the Simmers are a big part of the problem. Yes I am guilty also!

[Guest]

6 hours ago, Dougal said:

Am I missing something here?

Unfortunately there is a bug in P3D V4.1 where a certain number of entries (seems to vary by PC) in the Add-On.cfg will cause the wrong textures from being loaded and/or not being loaded at all.  The solution was to disable Add-On entries and use only what is need for the specific flight.  As a result of this bug, 3rd party are probably going to use the "old way" of installing.

Fortunately this bugs has been fixed and will hopefully be available soon.

Cheers, Rob.

 

[Pease_W 6]

2 hours ago, simbol said:

If a developer implements it then let it be!, don't overwrite default P3D files please!

 

You've just put a large amount of Orbux products on the shelf!

Want better land classification? Too bad, because (AFAIK) P3D doesn't recognize anything but default files. It also only recognizes default.xml, not any third-party separate additions. So if you don't want the files merged or replaced... what's a poor simmer to do?

Until L M makes the "mandatory" system work 100%, there will be times and psuedo-needs to replace default files.

[simbol 5,814]

3 minutes ago, Pease_W said:

You've just put a large amount of Orbux products on the shelf!

First you are miss understanding my paragraph so let me re-phrase it for you: What I mean is, if a developer implements the .XML method for any add-on you should stick with it and avoid manually overriding P3D default files since the add-on's software and installation technique have taken care of all you need to enjoy your simulation by implementing the new Add-on .XML method.

11 minutes ago, Pease_W said:

Want better land classification? Too bad, because (AFAIK) P3D doesn't recognize anything but default files. It also only recognizes default.xml, not any third-party separate additions. So if you don't want the files merged or replaced... what's a poor simmer to do?

Until L M makes the "mandatory" system work 100%, there will be times and psuedo-needs to replace default files.

Secondly you are terribly mistaken, the .XML method allows developers to "Logically" override any default files that belongs to P3D leaving all the original files intact, this is specifically explained inside the developers SDK as @Lorby_SI pointed out earlier and has explained several times on these forums.

Lockheed Martin is specifically instructing developers to "avoid at all cost" overriding any P3D default files, and in order to allow us to do so, it has provided tools and instructions to achieve this goal, including what ORBX needs for all their add-on's.

I hope this helps to clarify.

Best Regards,
Simbol

[ryanbatc 12,800]

What is the reason LM recommends doing the addon xml way of installing?

What was wrong with the way its been for a decade (or more)?

[Lorby_SI 2,036]

7 minutes ago, ryanbatcund said:

What was wrong with the way its been for a decade (or more)?

Hello Ryan,

The old way was OK because the platform itself was not going anywhere. That has changed with P3D, and you have to make provisions for updates to the base software, so you don't have to reinstall everything all the time. Furthermore, with the "old way" a single addon could kill your simulator dead - with the external installation that is a lot less likely. Finally Windows security / UAC.

Best regards

[ryanbatc 12,800]

I've actually just recently experienced more issues with the addon method and UAC than the old method and UAC...

Plus, like the thread says....  a lot of devs aren't onboard with the new addon xml install method... in fact Lockheed's own acft are installed the old way!

[Guest]

The old methods had a major weakness, it was possible for add-on developers to overwrite each other's files (this did happen in the past) ... it still is possible today only because LM still support the old method.  BUT, if 3rd party developers follow the new Add-On approach this will NOT be possible ... good for developers and good for end users.

But like I said, the Add-On issue has been fixed so hopefully more developers will use this approach in the future.

Cheers, Rob.

[Skywolf 992]

Yeah, I have addressed with Orbx teams on this issue for a while.  Only FSDT and few others do install outside by default.  I don't know why Flightbeam decided to move into the sim.  Once Orbx moves out of the sim root directory and then you will see tons of other players doing the same.  Big player has to move first.  And as Rob said, that 4.1 had a bug which is fixed now and we all will have to wait when the next release is out. 

Eventually all players will move out.  We all just have to keep bugging the Developers to install the addons outside. 

[Gregg_Seipp 565]

I use Simstarter to enable/disable addons to reduce memory usage and speed up my load times.  Last I heard, there was no way to do that if the scenery (etc.) uses the addon.xml way.  As such, I avoid the new method.

[shivers9 1,174]

1 hour ago, Rob Ainscough said:

Unfortunately there is a bug in P3D V4.1 where a certain number of entries (seems to vary by PC) in the Add-On.cfg will cause the wrong textures from being loaded and/or not being loaded at all.  The solution was to disable Add-On entries and use only what is need for the specific flight.  As a result of this bug, 3rd party are probably going to use the "old way" of installing.

Fortunately this bugs has been fixed and will hopefully be available soon.

Cheers, Rob.

 

Thanks for that info Rob. It answers a lot of questions for us and will prevent some of us grumpy old men from wondering what the big hold up is here. I am 70 and don't have near as much time as the younger guys to wait for the wheel to be re-invented! LOL For those who opine with "We have always done it this way....Oh well you know. LOL

[abarter 28]

Dougal thanks for starting this discussion. I have enabled and gone through the error log and fixed allot of "bugs" in my P3Dv4. UT Traffic had a few duplicate keys for one. I learned allot in the last hour or so including RAASPRO is 32 bit version in my install of PMDG's 737ngx. I disabled it as I'm not paying for the 64 bit version that I won't use anyhow.

[vgbaron 3,496]

it's just a question of time before the xml method becomes mandatory. LM has to ensure the purity of the basic P3D install to provide the core functionality for the add on market.

Vic

 

[fluffyflops 1,845]

9 hours ago, ryanbatcund said:

 

Plus, like the thread says....  a lot of devs aren't onboard with the new addon xml install method... in fact Lockheed's own acft are installed the old way!

Most developers cant be bothered to test their products with orbx and gsx.  2 of the most popular addons on the market 

It never ceases to amaze me how a developer can spend months doing a scenery only to not bother checking an afcad parking space or a terrain issue with vector which takes a day tops. 

[Dougal 165]

Well, no doubt I'll regret it very soon, but I've started installing my addons and OrbX products.  All I can do is make sure I've got good backups.  I do have some addons not originally designed for P3Dv4 that add files to various folders.  What I'm going to try with those, is to install them into an empty 'test' folder, then use that folder to install it using the XML method.  I doubt it'll work with Aerosoft and some other scenery, but worth a try I guess...