Why scenery developers focus on MSFS instead of P3D?

[shivers9 1,174]

4 minutes ago, ttbq1 said:

Aerosoft said they started a long time ago, but still today they don't have anything either...It is clear aircraft 3PD don't have the platform to develop their planes yet

OH, I get that. Not a hit on just PDMG...that is really the point....they were all duped once again just like the mess that MS caused with that "Flight" failure. Just seems like people don't get it.

[HiFlyer 9,343]

7 minutes ago, shivers9 said:

they were all duped once again just like the mess that MS caused with that "Flight" failure. Just seems like people don't get it.

That's a pretty heavy (negative) spin on what PMDG actually said on their forums.

I suspect Mr Randazzo would likely beg to differ on your interpretation.....

EDIT: Come to think of it, lets take a look at the actual words. https://forum.pmdg.com/forum/main-forum/general-discussion-news-and-announcements/84814-26sep20-let-s-get-down-to-business-shall-we

Edited September 26, 2020 by HiFlyer

[shivers9 1,174]

3 minutes ago, HiFlyer said:

I suspect Mr Randazzo would likely beg to differ on your interpretation.....

Again it is not something aimed at PDMG. I am sure Randazzo would not say that he was duped in public. He has a lot of money tied up in this goat rope if they have in fact been working on this project for a year already. We all have to hope that somehow this whole thing can be pulled from the burning dumpster for the sake of both those who have bought the product and the Dev's who have in some cases invested a lot of money over the past year. It is not going to be easy. You can't put lipstick on a pig if it doesn't have and lips.

[micstatic 4,316]

As an airline flyer I’ll continue with most flying in v5. But some nice vfr stuff in msfs.  Future looks great.today’s pmdg announcement for me is confirmation P3d isn’t dead. I mean it’s obvious maddog, tfdi, majestic, fslabs aren’t close either. I’ve picked up orbx te Florida lately. Abq. A handful of others. 5.1 on the horizon. Good times no matter what sim you fly 

[OzWhitey 3,353]

3PD’s have hyped MSFS, because they see a massive potential increase in their market.

I have tried to temper people’s expectations of the NGXu release being imminent. Now we hear that it will be another year until we are flying it. For those who know PMDG release schedules, there’s a good chance that this means it will be 2022+ before we have the plane. There is a small chance that PMDG will never be able to get it to work satisfactorily, as there still seems to be many unknowns as to how they will implement their airliners in the sim.

So complex airliner simulation remains speculative in MSFS. Usable VR is speculative. A2A GA planes with a working GTN750 also remain speculative.

Those who deleted P3D were very hasty in their actions. Prepar3d will remain the simulation of choice for realistic airliner ops and even GA ops (A2A) for the forseeable future.

Come on LM, show us what you can do with v5.1!

[bofhlusr 453]

On 9/20/2020 at 4:40 AM, virtuali said:

...

That's the reply to your answers. Users buy ( or not ). Sales drives development choices. Users are always right. Developers only follow.

@virtuali This is the GOLDEN RULE: He who has the gold, rules.

Edited October 2, 2020 by oneleg

[bofhlusr 453]

On 9/20/2020 at 5:45 AM, ComSimPilot said:

...not excited to fly the default A320 of MSFS when there is FSL, PMDG, Leonardo, Majestic, Leonardo, TFDi out there. ....

@ComSimPilot If you have a super realistic perfect sim plane already, even better than a PMDG plane, or if you are a real life pilot that fly the real plane, what's the point of flying the same plane in a sim or another sim?  A *perfect* sim is still a sim. It will never be like the real plane. Just like porn will never be like the real thing.🙂 Let's just enjoy the sim that we already have.

[bofhlusr 453]

On 9/20/2020 at 6:21 AM, virtuali said:

The A380 manual ( and the A350 is very similar ), is about 7000 pages long.

I AM reading it now, because you never know what it might be used for ( sometimes we dabble the idea to do an airplane ), so we can talk again in a couple of years, when I'll finish it, so I might have a better idea how to code it...perhaps the new Webassembly system and the SDK will be better by then.

@virtualiReading 7000 pages?  Happy to hear your optimism given the pandemic situation. 🙂

[bofhlusr 453]

On 9/26/2020 at 11:42 PM, OzWhitey said:

3PD’s have hyped MSFS, because they see a massive potential increase in their market.

I have tried to temper people’s expectations of the NGXu release being imminent. Now we hear that it will be another year until we are flying it. For those who know PMDG release schedules, there’s a good chance that this means it will be 2022+ before we have the plane. There is a small chance that PMDG will never be able to get it to work satisfactorily, as there still seems to be many unknowns as to how they will implement their airliners in the sim.

So complex airliner simulation remains speculative in MSFS. Usable VR is speculative. A2A GA planes with a working GTN750 also remain speculative.

Those who deleted P3D were very hasty in their actions. Prepar3d will remain the simulation of choice for realistic airliner ops and even GA ops (A2A) for the forseeable future.

Come on LM, show us what you can do with v5.1!

@OzWhitey If developers are simply motivated by money, I just had to look up LM's motivation in showing what it can do with the future development of P3D.... and instead ran into this rather interesting article which keeps things in perspective:

https://www.fool.com/investing/2020/08/24/lockheed-martin-scores-62-billion-f-16-sale/

 

Edited October 2, 2020 by oneleg

[kaha 205]

My concern regarding study level aircraft in MSFS is as such:

 

If I got Umbertos posts right, the Scenery SDK does not allow for native DirectX rendering in a 3rd party dll for security/stability reasons which is the reason that their airports in MSFS don't have information screens.

That said I doubt that it will be allowed to handle complex aircraft simulations in native C++ code or any fast interpreter with no checks. This in turn means that indepth aircraft system simulations are not possible or at least slow in execution because of security/stability checks the host software will have to do.

I might be wrong, though. 

Karl

[virtuali 4,419]

43 minutes ago, kaha said:

That said I doubt that it will be allowed to handle complex aircraft simulations in native C++ code or any fast interpreter with no checks. This in turn means that indepth aircraft system simulations are not possible or at least slow in execution because of security/stability checks the host software will have to do.

While it's true that's nothing's faster than native C++ code making DirectX calls directly, that doesn't mean MSFS cannot handle complex instrumentations graphic or system simulations.

WASM modules *are* C++ and, they run *almost* as fast as native C++ code, since they are not interpreted, but compiled to native binary code ahead of time.

For instrumentation graphics, there are 3 different drawing APIs provided ( FsRender, NanoVG and a GDI+ wrapper ), at different levels of abstraction, with FsRender being the closest to DirectX and the GDI+ wrapper being the more high level. The advantage of this approach is not just secure code, but also means developers won't have to deal with the DirectX specific version.

And, WASM modules can also call both Simconnect and have functions that replace the existing Gauges/Panels C++ interface.

I don't think there will be too many performance problems, they difficulty is more from a functional point of view, because the main difference from a native module and a WASM module, is that's not possible to call any API other than the ones provided by Asobo, most notably the whole Windows API is not accessible, and neither will be 3rd party libraries that might have been used to do all sort of things: database access, network connections, , call 3rd party DRM, and any other possible reason to use libraries. This will be the biggest challenge to create any kind of complex simulation: it will depend a lot by how much can be done with WASM and how much the Simconnect interface will be completed and bugfixed.

In addition to that, developers can also use what Asobo has been using for all default airplanes: Javascript + Coherent GT. My guess this will be the preferred choice for freeware, but it's still way more powerful than the previous XML gauges used to be.

So no, I don't think MSFS has too many limitations per-se, it's just that is different enough that converting an existing airplane is not an easy process, and will require a more mature SDK, that's why you are reading about products being delayed.

And no, I don't think the MSFS SDK will ever be as powerful and as flexible than P3D's, which basically has no limitations and allow developers to do almost everything with the sim, including replacing the whole flight model, so it's possible that some products that required those features will stay on P3D.

[Christopher Low 5,338]

An interesting final sentence, Umberto.

[aguiar 22]

15 hours ago, Christopher Low said:

An interesting final sentence, Umberto.

Indeed

[rickgo 64]

@ umberto

When are you going to be having your next sale? Nobody is buying for p3d so seems like a sale would be appropriate. Cant help but think about ksdf with that MD 11 in the future.I already have KMEM.

[Rocky_53 1,566]

MSFS has at last brought to the simming community the kind of sim we have all been dreaming of. I mean, come on, the weather depiction, flight dynamics, atmosphere, procedurally generated sceneries, photo terrains are all things the simming community has been asking for for years. Unfortunately, the sim IMO has been released far too soon and has a way to go before it's what I would suggest acceptable. But that aside, if Asobo continue to work hard at releasing regular updates and supporting the simming community, then I personally won't be worried at all about lack of sceneries and addons for other sims. As a P3d supporter and regular simmer of the platform, I am still nonetheless more excited with MSFS than I have been with any other simming platform and am excited for the future of flight simming with MSFS 2020.

Edited October 5, 2020 by Rockliffe