PMDG 737 NG3 delayed to 12+ months

[Nyxx 6,993]

13 minutes ago, micstatic said:

You can quote me on this. I’m sorry for insulting msfs 

I wont, because its ends there. But I have a huge amount of respect for you saying that.

/shakes hands

Time to move one.

Edited October 22, 2020 by Nyxx

[ShawnG 1,823]

5 minutes ago, JoeFackel said:

Not even close, 95% of the addons i had to update for V5 were free updates. I spent around 20 bucks for upgrades.

good for you.  I did not have that experience, however looking back probably 30-40% of my addons required, or will require a paid update if I ever decide to do it, so It might not have been fair to say "most".  given the subject of this thread, one big one is that you probably had the NGXu prior to April, so you did not consider it an "upgrade cost" to go to 5,  However, the original NGX was useable in v4 and not in v5, so the NGXu is a necessary upgrade purchase for v5 if you don't ravenously send Randazzo money at every opportunity. Like I try not to do, with varying degrees of failure.

[JoeFackel 760]

NGX works also in V5. Not officially, but not a challenge to get it into V5.

 

[airlinejets 709]

1 hour ago, JoeFackel said:

Not officially, but not a challenge to get it into V5.

Is that like the academic/professional licensing challenge thing?

[ShawnG 1,823]

Well, I wish I had that information a few months ago, but to be fair, I didn't even try.  PMDG have usually gone to great lengths to keep their jets from being installed in sims where it would have worked fine anyway, so I didn't attempt.  I suppose you would just make a registry entry to point to p3dv5 as p3dv4?  no big deal for me, but I don't know if everyone should be attempting such things.

[Noel 4,499]

7 hours ago, SKEWR said:

I'm tired of VFR in MSFS (lack of good airplane simulations IMO) and don't want to hassle around with P3D anymore

I'm sorry but I do not get this idea of VFR only and I read comments from others along the same vein.  I have been at it now about 75 hours 90% in the TBM, and do only IFR flights.  I love how RNAV GPS and ILS approaches are selected from the MFD's Procedures dialogue. It's not the NGXu but it's very decent in its own right.  I wish NG3 was coming much sooner though.  Fortunately, as I did this morning, I can fire up P3D 4.5 and enjoy the polished sim that it is, even though scenery really is just a placeholder for actual scenery it's now become rather apparent.  Can still have fabulous flights in it however and I use FSCaptain for logging piloting skills and career.  Once PMDG and hopefully Majestic get into MSFS it will be hasta la bye bye for P3D.  So we will keep it functioning until that day.  I'm about 20% P3D and 80% MSFS now and quite frankly the variety isn't bad, but again, it's not the scenery that is part of that calculus.

[sd_flyer 6,042]

8 hours ago, SKEWR said:

I I'm tired of VFR in MSFS (lack of good airplane simulations IMO) 

Oh boy you are up for a treat! $8000+ and you own true hardcore IFR sim! 🙂 

https://flyelite.com/product/pi-135/

[Mace 1,926]

3 minutes ago, sd_flyer said:

Oh boy you are up for a treat! $8000+ and you own true hardcore IFR sim! 🙂 

https://flyelite.com/product/pi-135/

That's cheaper than buying a Piper Tomahawk with holes in the fuselage.

[SKEWR 364]

3 hours ago, Noel said:

I'm sorry but I do not get this idea of VFR only and I read comments from others along the same vein

Hello Noel.

I should have stated why I posted "VFR Only" a bit more clearly.

As stated I'm an "airliner guy". The existing 747, 787 and, to a lesser extent thanks to freeware, A320, aren't where I would like them to be in regard to simming. I understand complex aircraft take a while to develop and I'm OK with it. I'm on a self imposed break, and wanted to share my thoughts on this forum.

In regard to your advice, I've simmed the DA62 all around the northeast US. The end, for me, came when I was thinking of doing a Japan tour and remembered how much fun I had simming the 747D in Japan. I don't believe the DA62 would be as fun. However, maybe the TBM might be what I need. I'll try it... just not today.

Thanks for the suggestion.

[SKEWR 364]

2 hours ago, sd_flyer said:

Oh boy you are up for a treat! $8000+ and you own true hardcore IFR sim! 🙂 

https://flyelite.com/product/pi-135/

😁

I'd love to take you up on your offer but I have to save my money to re-purchase PMDG or FSLabs planes another 58 times!!!

[airlinejets 709]

4 hours ago, SKEWR said:

😁

I'd love to take you up on your offer but I have to save my money to re-purchase PMDG or FSLabs planes another 58 times!!!

If you're really into airliners, check out the Aerowinx PSX 747.

[Lorby_SI 2,038]

On 10/21/2020 at 7:12 PM, Oldschool61 said:

How can it take that long to make one aircraft??  They should have all the physics data from prior versions.  J

What makes the PMDG/FSL/Majestic/... planes great is their systems simulation and external FDE (if they have one). This code is implemented as programmatic C++ gauges/DLLs. Those don't exist in MSFS anymore. The entire legacy concept of making these assets is simply gone.

Asobo is working on a replacement in form of the WASM sandbox, but - well, they are still working on it. And it has its limitations from the get go.

IMHO, the makers of complex aircraft only have two choices: wait until Asobo has finished WASM, hoping that some of the legacy coding can be salvaged, or try and rewrite everything from scratch as HTML/Javascript or RPN gauges - where it is uncertain if the same level of sophistication can even be achieved. 

Best regards

Edited October 23, 2020 by Lorby_SI

[micstatic 4,319]

just curious.  Is there an advantage going from DLL to WASM?

[Lorby_SI 2,038]

1 hour ago, micstatic said:

just curious.  Is there an advantage going from DLL to WASM?

I don't think that they are coming from anywhere, MSFS never had this option in the first place. They made a decision to use WASM for programmatic assets. Decisions about software architecture factor in a multitude of aspects that define their "value". We don't know the criteria that Asobo had to weigh against each other. Only thing we can say is, that in-process DLLs obviously didn't meet those criteria (or may even have been technologically impossible with their platform, who knows).

Best regards

Edited October 23, 2020 by Lorby_SI

[RXP 2,338]

There is at least two advantages about WASM which are self evident: the first one is that it is cross platform which makes it a sound technology for deliverables running both on PC and XBox regardless of the respective CPUs, the other is that this prevents any rogue gauge from circumventing the Market Place DRM or crashing the simulator (and even this doesn't need any rogue gauge right now).

Aside from these two, there are no advantage whatsoever I can think of, because there are sill ways to load external DLLs with Flight Simulator which are either supported by the Operating System, or by high-jacking one of the runtime module they are using which is not in the WindowApps folder and which they've just tried to masquerade as a binary file of some sort. If using WASM really was mainly for security reasons, they've missed this loophole.

Edited October 23, 2020 by RXP