Speculative: PMDG Update

[Ray Proudfoot 8,928]

32 minutes ago, EGLD said:

it just goes to show how hard a group simmers are to please

i mean i get how you would like this, but implementing historical weather is almost the very definition of niche 😛

it's a shame you'll miss out because of that

We have different opinions and realistic weather for the hour of the day I want to fly in different parts of the world is important to me. Otherwise I’ll be flying with nighttime weather should I wish to fly around Sydney in my morning.

And when there’s been interesting weather anywhere in the world people like to fly in those conditions. I’m far from being in a niche.

There are other reasons I’m in no hurry to try MSFS. No 3rd party Ai aircraft for one. If you’ve seen AIG’s aircraft in P3D you’ll know what I’m talking about.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,928]

38 minutes ago, EGLD said:

i wasn't aware we aren't going to get activesky - is that a permanent limitation on external weather programs?

shame, but still not a deal break for me

It would seem so. Asobo want total control of the weather as it impacts on the look of the terrain and they want to make it look just like they have planned.

Whether Hi-Fi can workaround that is unknown.

[amahran 47]

1 hour ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

It would seem so. Asobo want total control of the weather as it impacts on the look of the terrain and they want to make it look just like they have planned.

Whether Hi-Fi can workaround that is unknown.

I suspect it’s a licensing issue. If the SDK is open, that means parameters can be read out if the sim, which may violate the licensing agreement between Meteoblue and Microsoft/Asobo.

EDIT: Christ, going through the past few pages, the negativity in this thread is definitely something...

Edited February 8, 2021 by amahran

[duckbilled 310]

35 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

It would seem so. Asobo want total control of the weather as it impacts on the look of the terrain and they want to make it look just like they have planned.

Whether Hi-Fi can workaround that is unknown.

I'm speculating that they are contractually forbidden from providing any assistance for 3PD weather development. My guess is meteoblue is legally the exclusive weather provider for MSFS, because AS/MS got special access to the Neo. Airbus could have easily stated that they had to use meteoblue if they wanted access. If not, how did AS/MS compensated Airbus for access? They didn't do it out of kindness or for publicity, and I doubt MS wrote Airbus a check.

Anyway, we keep having the same argument here and it is getting a bit tiresome. It really is no one's fault, because none of us know what the truth is. Multiple developers have said that the SDK doesn't contain enough information to create complex addons. They are all saying the exact same thing. If it was one developer saying this I can understand the skepticism, but they are all saying it, even Aerosoft. At some point, folks may want to re-calibrate their truth detectors. We have one massive corporate entity (MS), who is partnered with a developer who's staff count dwarfs that of any 3PD developer (AS), who is telling us everything is peachy and on track. At the same time, we have multiple small businesses with deep experience in developing FS products who are saying the the state of the SDK is what is holding them back.

While the truth is probably somewhere in the middle, we should think about this logically. AS/MS could stop development on MSFS today and not skip a beat. They'll just move on and create something else. PMDG, FSL must create aircraft for MSFS to remain relevant, so if they are saying there is a roadblock, there probably is a real roadblock. Why would they lie or take a lazy approach when they can just clear the roadblock on their own and start stuffing their pockets with cash?

AS/MS is peeing in our faces and telling us it's raining. At this point, I don't think they know how their sim works, and that's why they can't release the SDK.

I'm looking forward to being proven wrong:)

 

 

 

 

[Chock 17,769]

32 minutes ago, duckbilled said:

While the truth is probably somewhere in the middle, we should think about this logically. AS/MS could stop development on MSFS today and not skip a beat. They'll just move on and create something else. PMDG, FSL must create aircraft for MSFS to remain relevant, so if they are saying there is a roadblock, there probably is a real roadblock. Why would they lie or take a lazy approach when they can just clear the roadblock on their own and start stuffing their pockets with cash?

AS/MS is peeing in our faces and telling us it's raining. At this point, I don't think they know how their sim works, and that's why they can't release the SDK.

I'm looking forward to being proven wrong:)

The SDK just needs to be finalised and it will be pretty much when the Aerosoft CRJ is released and the aerodynamic update is part of the sim. This will be when developers know the goalposts are not going to continue moving, so it will be the equivalent of the starting gun going off for the likes of PMDG, FSL, A2A etc.

It's largely because the sim was released a few months before it ideally should have been, doubtless under pressure from MS although in fairness, the timetable was probably ticking for that without knowing that we'd have a pandemic, so it's debatable whether even MS was in a position to put the brakes on anyway, but it'll all be pretty good in about two months or so.

Edited February 8, 2021 by Chock

[duckbilled 310]

1 minute ago, Chock said:

The SDK just needs to be finalised and it will be pretty much when the Aerosoft CRJ is released and the aerodynamic update is part of the sim. This will be when developers know the goalposts are not going to continue moving, so it will be the equivalent of the starting gun going off for the likes of PMDG, FSL, A2A etc.

It's largely because the sim was released a few months before it ideally should have been, doubtless under pressure from MS, but it'll all be pretty good in about two months or so.

That's reasonable. I would expect Aerosoft to be the first one out the door due to their lowered bar for realism and the fact that they an official partner (boxed distribution).

I think you comment is the closest thing we have to the truth, so I'm going with it. I'm hoping that the FBW and WT teams can push Aersoft to raise the bar on the CRJ. We should be able to import and fly a flightplan with speed/alt constraints and SIDs/STARS from day 1. IMO. For many people, anything less will fail to prove that MSFS is a capable sim for the skeptics.

 

[Chock 17,769]

It's worth bearing in mind that Aerosoft's 'lowered bar for realism' is primarily more to do with their target market than an inability to make super-fancy add-ons. There is nothing stopping Aerosoft (or any other company) from doing what other more obsessive developers do, in hiring people with the skills or desires to work on a five-year project as opposed to a two-three year one.

We know the Aerosoft CRJ is coming in at about 50 quid price-wise, as opposed to nearly three times that price. Some of that is knowing their customers and speculating on what the wider audience of new flight simmers will stomach price-wise, some of it is doubtless that they're getting some kind of financial reward for working on the SDK which is offsetting the cost somewhat.

Either way, it'd be a mistake to imagine that what Aerosoft makes is because they are not capable of making anything fancier; they just know what they want to do and what that will support in terms of effort versus reward. If others want to run with the SDK and push things further, then they will be able to do so, but they will have to embrace some different skills in order to do that, as they have in the past when pushing FS9, FSX and P3D past its comfort zone.

[tweekz 2,165]

6 minutes ago, Chock said:

Either way, it'd be a mistake to imagine that what Aerosoft makes is because they are not capable of making anything fancier; they just know what they want to do and what that will support in terms of effort versus reward.

Plus, what people must not forget, this CRJ would most likely be the best regional jet if released in XP. Most of them come with default or fantasy FMCs. Except for the SSG E-Jets.

[Kilo60 660]

10 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

We have different opinions and realistic weather for the hour of the day I want to fly in different parts of the world is important to me. Otherwise I’ll be flying with nighttime weather should I wish to fly around Sydney in my morning.

And when there’s been interesting weather anywhere in the world people like to fly in those conditions. I’m far from being in a niche.

There are other reasons I’m in no hurry to try MSFS. No 3rd party Ai aircraft for one. If you’ve seen AIG’s aircraft in P3D you’ll know what I’m talking about.

My sediments exactly!

[WestAir 2,522]

10 minutes ago, Kilo60 said:

My sediments exactly!

I'm going to be a nerd here but isn't it "my sentiments exactly!" or has my entire life been a lie?

[Kilo60 660]

Just now, WestAir said:

I'm going to be a nerd here but isn't it "my sentiments exactly!" or has my entire life been a lie?

LoL... you're right!

 

Autocorrect gave me earth like debris...

[WestAir 2,522]

22 minutes ago, Kilo60 said:

LoL... you're right!

Autocorrect gave me earth like debris...

lol! It's alright, MSFS still has you beat in the number of bugs per line of text. 😄

[Christopher Low 5,332]

Steady on, Dave. As far as I can see, Ray is just stating the reasons why he has decided to stick with P3D for the moment. However, that does not mean that he is not interested in what others have to say about Microsoft Flight Simulator. I have also decided to stick with P3Dv4 (and have in fact been "updating" some of the UK2000 VFR Airfields regional airports so that they are interesting enough for me to pay them a visit in the PMDG 737-600), but I still like to check out what is going on over here

Edited February 9, 2021 by Christopher Low

[Scottoest 1,561]

17 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

It would seem so. Asobo want total control of the weather as it impacts on the look of the terrain and they want to make it look just like they have planned.

Whether Hi-Fi can workaround that is unknown.

Jorg said the weather functioning accurately and properly is something they consider "core functionality" in the sim and are going to put in the work to make sure it works as well as possible, rather than just leave it to be "fixed" or replaced by the add-on market.

However, he also said that they have no issue with any weather add-ons that manage to work within the limitations that exist.  And add-on makers will probably figure out more ways to inject themselves into the weather systems as time goes on and they tinker with the code more.

[micstatic 4,314]

1 hour ago, Christopher Low said:

Steady on, Dave. As far as I can see, Ray is just stating the reasons why he has decided to stick with P3D for the moment. However, that does not mean that he is not interested in what others have to say about Microsoft Flight Simulator. I have also decided to stick with P3Dv4 (and have in fact been "updating" some of the UK2000 VFR Airfields regional airports so that they are interesting enough for me to pay them a visit in the PMDG 737-600), but I still like to check out what is going on over here

well said.  I'm doing the exact same thing.  Well V5 instead of V4.