Backward compatibility sounds to me as a business model MS chose to make the transition with the new platform less traumatic and risky than Flight. Although I think Asobo's work has nothing to do with the bizarre business model and concept of MS Flight, I believe MS want to avoid a mistake they think could happen again if they make a clean cut with the ESP stock.

This is also to ensure some momentum in the initial sales and use of the simulator until the new content starts to be developed. 

On the other hand, as long as the legacy mode is optional, I think a transition can never hurt... As long as the legacy freeware material is identified in a way or another...

And I agree with those who said that the flight model is modular. Probably not in the other simulator we know...

Personally I prefer going fromn scratch especially in this version where the default scenery and aircraft are good enough for hours of fun and immersion.

So, channelling my inner Churchill here..."We have nothing to fear from compatibility but compatibility itself"

Best course of action will be, once a "new" addon is released, to check if it takes advantage of everything MSFS has to offer. I will not buy an addon coming in the FSX compatible mode, not even with future promises of eventually one day switching to the "new mode". I have seen that enough already on FSX/P3D

20 hours ago, domkle said:

 

Asobo spoke of having a dual mode for benchmarking the new FDE architecture. That would be a mistake in my opinion, to release FS20 with this dual mode, an endless source of complaints.

 

Stupid question..

FDE stands for?

 

Next to that, couldn't agree more! 🙂

18 hours ago, adino said:

So..backwards compatibility = No buy!

right?🙄

hahahahahha, no, never like that!

2 hours ago, Victoroos said:

Stupid question..

FDE stands for?

 

Next to that, couldn't agree more! 🙂

I think it stands for "Flight Dynamics Envelope" (or something like that).

Edited January 29, 20206 yr by Christopher Low

2 hours ago, Victoroos said:

Stupid question..

FDE stands for?

 

Next to that, couldn't agree more! 🙂

Never stupid to ask !  This is how the simcraft is modeled to fly. Christopher gave the acronym above. To simplify a lot,  Asobo is working on a new architecture where the FDE is defined by 1000 points chosen on the aircraft fuselage which may react differently to the airflow parameters. In the FSX architecture, one point only does the same job. 

2 hours ago, Christopher Low said:

I think it stands for "Flight Dynamics Envelope" (or something like that).

 

FDE actually stands for Flight Dynamics Editor.

One feature I really hope will be in the new sim, is a nice modern user interlace for a flight dynamics tweaking tool. flight dynamics in the sim, tinkering with the .air file,  have been described as a bit of a black art. As someone who has found the need to mess with such things, it would be great to have the capability to do that with ease, with a simplified interface and all parameters explained in regard to their function. 

2 hours ago, domkle said:

Never stupid to ask !  This is how the simcraft is modeled to fly. Christopher gave the acronym above. To simplify a lot,  Asobo is working on a new architecture where the FDE is defined by 1000 points chosen on the aircraft fuselage which may react differently to the airflow parameters. In the FSX architecture, one point only does the same job. 

ooh, that story,  I remember!

and all the others below it Thanks ^^

Edited January 29, 20206 yr by Victoroos

Actually, I think FDE means "Flight Dynamics Engine." 

The term is used colloquially to describe the parameterization, contained in a binary .air file and a plain-text aircraft.cfg file, which defines the aircraft's performance when processed by the FDE.

 

 

On 1/27/2020 at 8:51 PM, MatthewS said:

Sorry but this is a little naive.

In the worse case you need to completely "emulate" the behaviour of the old engine because you can't simply translate API calls.  This also means you need to ensure the same presumptions (and hacks) used by developers with the old engine will still work under your emulation.

So contrary to your opinion, this IS hard and when something is hard it requires a lot of effort to implement correctly. 

Asobo don't have unlimited resources do they? Thus resources need to be spent on backward compatibility rather than moving the platform forward.

All IMHO of course.

You can translate or emulate, API calls can be translated via a "wrapper", which is much less complex than emulators tend to be, in terms of code length/man-hours to produce.  

You presume that the necessary work is non-trivial.

1) how do you know this?

2) what are your credentials to make this assertion? (i.e. - why should we take your word for it?)

On 1/28/2020 at 1:58 AM, Pastaiolo said:

My only worry is SOME developers selling their ported over addon with the same features and flaws into the new simulator. And probably a price which is not anymore a good indication of an entertainment only game.
That's why i prefere a clear cut with the past.

Give me every complex aircraft I now have in FSX/P3D in the new MSFS on day one at zero cost and I don't care how "out-of-date" the programming or the flight model happen to be.  Having backwards compatibility gives us consumers options, as well as the developers.  It's a win-win.  

3 hours ago, TechguyMaxC said:

Give me every complex aircraft I now have in FSX/P3D in the new MSFS on day one at zero cost and I don't care how "out-of-date" the programming or the flight model happen to be.  Having backwards compatibility gives us consumers options, as well as the developers.  It's a win-win.  

First of all, it won't be at zero cost.

Second, if out of date products are not an issue you can do yet another amazing thing. You can keep flying in FSX/P3D and that's it.

New Simulator, new technology, new offerings (or old offerings with new technology). This is what i believe in and this is what i am willing to pay for, nothing less.

5 hours ago, Pastaiolo said:

First of all, it won't be at zero cost.

Second, if out of date products are not an issue you can do yet another amazing thing. You can keep flying in FSX/P3D and that's it.

New Simulator, new technology, new offerings (or old offerings with new technology). This is what i believe in and this is what i am willing to pay for, nothing less.

I'm not sure if you know how hypothetical statements work...  Or are aware of the fact that Asobo has implemented a backwards compatibility mode precisely to enable the use of existing FSX/P3D add-ons without the need to port or re-develop the add-on.

17 hours ago, TechguyMaxC said:

Or are aware of the fact that Asobo has implemented a backwards compatibility mode precisely to enable the use of existing FSX/P3D add-ons without the need to port or re-develop the add-on.

The fact they implemented this doesn't mean at all that the products you had in FSX/P3D will come for free.

PMDG is the prime example of it. Even moving from FSX to P3D didn't raise many compatibility issues (especially in the first versions), and because of the different purpose of P3D price was increased.

Now with MSFS, what do we know is that you will have to pay again for the same plane. This is a fact. Did you know it?