PMDG is coming to MSFS

[Alpine Scenery 1,609]

12 minutes ago, ashepherd316 said:

the only one i want is the 747

I actually think a DC-6 or DC-8 might be what I've been waiting for, not sure. I've just been looking for any large PROP plane that flies interestingly. To me the 747's have always felt like flying a school bus, hoping the DC doesn't. Not really against a 747 either, but prefer the 737 if I'm going to fly an airliner. Hard to say what I prefer for a larger prop, of course the Dash-8 Q400 was my old favorite, but anything different that flies with unique and interesting character is a big win.

 

Edited May 23, 2021 by Alpine Scenery

[Car147 2,276]

Really looking forward to the 737, 747. and 777. DC 6 will be my first PMDG,

[cavaricooper 2,613]

After 33 pages of this “discussion”, I’d offer a counterpoint- 

 

The odd thing is that all these widely differing opinions are being vehemently proffered by people I admire and look up to. I am not in a position to expound on the abilities of the SDK- I’m simply too uneducated. What I can tell you is that the fine folks at PMDG are working their tails off every day to bring you their FIRST aeroplane in MSFS. It will not be their last, and I am grateful for that.

Reading all this is sometimes difficult for me. I just love what they have done so far, and remain optimistic about the future.

Whether you use P3D, XPL, FSX or MSFS my hope is that we find there is room for us all. It is a TOUGH TIME to be a large Flight Sim Developer, the cheese has moved, and  things will settle. At the moment there are many reasons for anxiety, but this too shall pass.

Best- C

Edited May 23, 2021 by cavaricooper

[Bert Pieke 7,584]

3 hours ago, cavaricooper said:

What I can tell you is that the fine folks at PMDG are working their tails off every day to bring you their FIRST aeroplane in MSFS. It will not be their last, and I am grateful for that.

Carl, I believe we all agree that the DC6 looks great!  And I take your word for the fact that it flies great as well!  It is a welcome addition to MSFS for sure.. 😀😀

What we also noticed is that the original PMDG plan, to start with the 737, got derailed because of problems with the glass gauges, which kind of fits with the notion that even PMDG, after a year and a half of daily collaboration with Asobo, have not yet cracked the nut of making complex avionics work in MSFS.... The same challenge that other 3rd parties are struggling with..

Edited May 24, 2021 by Bert Pieke

[The Flight Level 2,112]

7 hours ago, Alpine Scenery said:

I actually think a DC-6 or DC-8 might be what I've been waiting for, not sure. I've just been looking for any large PROP plane that flies interestingly. To me the 747's have always felt like flying a school bus, hoping the DC doesn't. Not really against a 747 either, but prefer the 737 if I'm going to fly an airliner. Hard to say what I prefer for a larger prop, of course the Dash-8 Q400 was my old favorite, but anything different that flies with unique and interesting character is a big win.

 

I’ve been using Flight Simulator since 5.1 (3.5 inch disk). This may be my first purchase for Flight Simulator outside the GA sphere! Probably will!

[Scottoest 1,561]

23 hours ago, kevinfirth said:

The inexorable conclusion is that not all developers have access to the same SDK and support from Asobo.  That explains all the evidence available, both Aerosoft/PMDG development achievements, AND the inability for other Devs to produce anything similar with the publicly available less than complete SDK version.  Always go for the hypothesis that explains all the evidence, not just that you want to see....

 

The real question is why? And I think the answer is that while Asobo genuinely do want to make MSFS as good as it could be, they themselves recognise it's going to be a 10 year journey.  MS of course holds the pursestrings and controls the strategy, and their interest is little less than $$$.  In that context, the prioritisation of Xbox release and top tier showcaseability  makes perfect sense to me.

 

Doesn't matter what I think about it...  MSFS clearly meets some people's needs.now and that's ok.  When it meets mine, I'll use it.  PMDG producing a complex realistic aircraft in the sim is just one of multiple requirements for me to transition.

I think ultimately it's simpler even than that - shops like PMDG and Aerosoft are a couple of the "big fish" in the third-party add-on pond, making the kinds of products that they know their core audience is anxious for, so the devs make the time to liaise with them and make sure they have what they need.

Short of having an entire third-party support department, it's just not realistic to do this with ALL third parties at that level.  In the case of Aerosoft, I recall Jorg mentioning offhand in a Q&A that Sebastian was directly helping them down the home stretch to get the CRJ across the finish line, working weekend and stuff.

These two companies are also making the kinds of complex tubeliners that specifically seem/seemed to have the most development blockers that needed to be addressed, whereas less complex aircraft have been steadily releasing for months now.  Part of the reason they worked so closely with Aerosoft on the CRJ, was because it was the first of it's kind for MSFS, and Asobo wanted to learn and understand what those kinds of projects need from them.

As for the console port, while I suspect Asobo themselves are prioritizing getting it done right now, I actually don't really think it's that vital to Microsoft.  They know their long-term audience for the sim is on PC, not console - and a flight sim is inherently a pretty niche product for a game console, and a console audience.  I think this is why they didn't care about the console port taking an entire year after the PC version in the first place.

[jarmstro 2,402]

Geeks gone crazy. A bad workman always blames his tools. The more a developer whines the less likely he is to get my money so bring it on PMDG! I really don't care if the SDK does not allow the toilet paper to be properly dispensed in the loo.

[Dominique_K 10,133]

Besides announcing the release of a nice aircraft, this thread has had the enormous merit to debunk the malicious disinformation campaign about the « incomplete »  SDK and should be a reference for further discussions ! 

Edited May 24, 2021 by Dominique_K

[WestAir 2,522]

29 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

I really don't care if the SDK does not allow the toilet paper to be properly dispensed in the loo.

But do you care if it doesn't allow TCAS to work? If it won't allow you to fly an RNAV? If the weather radar can't tilt or if the cargo door automatically closes after 90 seconds?*

A bad workman may blame his tools, but a worse workman uses broken tools.

* This is complete and total hyperbole. PMDG will certainly come out with a resolution to any major issues; I used them only to counter Jarmstro's harsh argument that legitimate issues are the same as whining. They're not.

[EGLD 436]

13 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

Asobo also wants PMDG to succeed in MSFS, because PMDG is the gold standard.  If PMDG can make their study level airliners for MSFS, it's lights out for P3D and X-Plane. What left do P3D and X-Plane really have as an advantage over MSFS at that point?  Very little, IMO.

I think of the two, XP will always be able to make their case for being a way more advanced aerodynamics and flight simulation to be able to sell to commercial companies, but as someone who's using all 3 sims currrently because there is no single platform that does everything - I have no use for XP or P3D once we start getting the top tier Aircraft Devs into MSFS

I doubt I'm alone, and so I think it's P3D that is doomed.

Just my opinion of course.

[jozeff 92]

Xplane  will not be obsolete,  at least not for me. I fly VR only and xp11 is way smoother and a much better experience  than msfs so far. Less tearing, larger cockpit due to steam settings, automatic fps adjustment. Just a better experience over all. I have quite a beefy PC and I guess I need a more powerful one in the future to enjoy msfs in all its glory.

I'm struggling with framerate now and I suspect pmdg 737 will not change that. It would be awesome to have pmdg in this sim of course and I'm really looking forward to it.

Edited May 24, 2021 by jozeff

[abrams_tank 7,387]

33 minutes ago, jozeff said:

Xplane  will not be obsolete,  at least not for me. I fly VR only and xp11 is way smoother and a much better experience  than msfs so far. Less tearing, larger cockpit due to steam settings, automatic fps adjustment. Just a better experience over all. I have quite a beefy PC and I guess I need a more powerful one in the future to enjoy msfs in all its glory.

I'm struggling with framerate now and I suspect pmdg 737 will not change that. It would be awesome to have pmdg in this sim of course and I'm really looking forward to it.

P3D and X-Plane won't become obsolete in the sense that there are no players using them. Even FSX still has players using it today.  However, some of us are saying P3D and X-Plane will become obsolete with respect to new products from 3rd party developers.  At a certain point, 3rd party developers will stop making new products for a certain platform because they aren't generating enough of a profit from it.  Just like almost no 3rd party developers are making new products for FSX today.

It appears that P3D is already headed in this direction as droves of 3rd party developers have either stopped making new products for P3D, or have marginalized/deprioritized products for P3D. 

[jarmstro 2,402]

2 hours ago, WestAir said:

A bad workman may blame his tools, but a worse workman uses broken tools.

But it clearly isn't broken. For instance we were told ad nauseam that it was not possible to have a GTN750 in the sim because of the SDK. Yet lo and behold we now have a GTN750 which seems to me to work just fine.

I suspect that the majority of people don't realise that the hydraulic switches on the CRJ  don't have any actual effect on the plane, apparently because of the SDK. But so what? They are animated and make a click noise which is really all that is necessary. No one in their right mind is going to deliberately turn them off mid flight anyway. Thank God Aerosoft didn't throw a fit and refuse to release the plane because they could not make them work!

[kevinfirth 1,392]

53 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

They are animated and make a click noise which is really all that is necessary.

For how _you_ want to use the sim.

I want to manage aircraft systems properly.  Every switch is there for a reason.   Everyone's requirements are subjective, and if it works for you, that's great, crack on.... but please don't use that to argue that I should be happy with that, because I'm not.

 

[Moria15 950]

You know what?   This plane looks so word not allowed good, but I'm not ready to fly it I don't think.  I am in my 70's now and my idea of fun in MSFS is to load a flight plan in MSFS, start at a gate, ctrl-e the engines  (sometimes I do a simplified start)  whip it upto 2000 or so feet, snap on the autopilot,  watch the countryside and follow atc instructions on height, then about 1500 ft from the ground,  take over and manually land abd all this using OnAir for some context to the flights.  I have really limited add-ons..  in fact my add-ons are 5 airports and 4 planes and I am not going to start using things like Simbrief et al...  I don't even fly the FBW 320.. I use the default one, quite happily 🙂

I watched some of the videos and frankly, I am an old dog now just having fun,  but as I say.. it looks awesome and I am really happy for all of you that have been waiting for the first PDMG 🙂

Graham