7 minutes ago, Dominique_K said:

I agree on the issue of quality/quantity with you and that is why I accept to pay high prices for extremely good aircraft but we already have not so shabby ones, haven't we,  and that with SDK as it is : Milviz, Flyingiron, Just Flight, Carenado, Big Radials and more that I forget. Good enough to have a nice experience in the sim.

The instability of the sim is indeed a major issue but this is not what the not so merry band of MFS professional hater  raise as an issue. SDK, SDK, SDK, they sing these days. Then BOOM 💥 , PMDG announces a product 🤣 ! Can't you be more silly than that ?

I do understand the valid arguments of Avsim head honcho in this thread - I am personally sick and tired of stuff like the ESC bug  - but I would turn it around. Maybe (maybe !) PMDG announcement is the sign of a greater stability of the sim in the months to come. 

The features from the SDK that do work are working good. It is all data together that makes Simconnect causing MSFS to crash.

The moment I removed the Prosim WASM file my MSFS has become rocksolid. Sure, I have no external ac lights or moving parts in spotplane view. But I never fly in spotplane view and when the SDK becomes more enhanced the external lights can work again by using a new Prosim WASM file.

My flying is done between late dawn and early dusk so I will survive 😁

Edited May 23, 20215 yr by GSalden

39 minutes ago, highflyer2020 said:

PMDG mentioned in an earlier announcement they would be sitting with Asobo in their offices in Bordeaux if it wasn't for COVID.

That should give an idea of the level of collaboration between the 2 companies that is going on behind the scenes so doesn't surprise me that PMDG is not as limited by the SDK as others.

They have had to make do with an altar, lots of candles, and a few pentagrams on the floor of their office

3 minutes ago, Dominique_K said:

I was not speaking of you Gerald when alluding to vendettas. The incompleteness of the SDK is a real  issue when it is used by people of good faith. 

and to be even clearer, what really is lacking is DOCUMENTATIONS on the new features MSFS brought. Wich is why there is no special secret SDK, there are just asobos dev helping some top tier devs decypher those features . While the rest of us small devs, just wait for the holes to get filled in the docs, and also rely on some incredibly dedicated Asobos dev taking on their own personal time to give us a hand 

12 minutes ago, leprechaunlive said:

and to be even clearer, what really is lacking is DOCUMENTATIONS on the new features MSFS brought. Wich is why there is no special secret SDK, there are just asobos dev helping some top tier devs decypher those features . While the rest of us small devs, just wait for the holes to get filled in the docs, and also rely on some incredibly dedicated Asobos dev taking on their own personal time to give us a hand 

That must be what Simbol also is stating. Hopefully that will change in the future. 

I still can't believe it hasn't even been a year from release and we already have a PMDG aircraft on our doorstep. Imagine where we'll be next year - it gives me chills.

3 hours ago, GSalden said:

Redoing a overhaul of complete systems is something different than certain parts.

If you read the SDK documentation then most features are still not implemented. If they were than probably most of your ‘lazy’  developers could make their products compatible in a short amount of time.

So the question should be : why was the SDK so poor at release and is still not that enhanced .. ?

 

 

Maybe it wasn't at launch but it should be there now. WT and fbw worked with what they had, why can't the others? They are using the sdk is not ready as a cop out. The crj was released and I don't want to hear it's because of Asobo helping them. The bottom line is technology evolves, you either adapt or get left behind 

11 minutes ago, devgrp said:

Maybe it wasn't at launch but it should be there now. WT and fbw worked with what they had, why can't the others? They are using the sdk is not ready as a cop out. The crj was released and I don't want to hear it's because of Asobo helping them. The bottom line is technology evolves, you either adapt or get left behind 

What if Asobo is helping some developers, and flat out ignoring others? Can you definitively state that is not happening?

21 minutes ago, devgrp said:

Maybe it wasn't at launch but it should be there now. WT and fbw worked with what they had, why can't the others? They are using the sdk is not ready as a cop out. The crj was released and I don't want to hear it's because of Asobo helping them. The bottom line is technology evolves, you either adapt or get left behind 

Some of the more intricate system stuff is JS now, as the formats have changed and so have many of the config files. You'd think given people that know C++ could easily tackle the SDK, but it's pretty frustrating when the documentation is almost non-existent. Keep in mind that there are a lot of 'back connections' and 'dev friends' at play in this stuff, even when Asobo is not involved. As has always been the case, some devs are friends and share info with Skype and what not, then some are more independant. Eventually the proprietary tricks leak onto the forums, but it takes a long time. There are a lot of 'networking loops' so to speak in the dev community in this stuff, if you aren't in one, it's much harder. Almost ever major dev, like PMDG, has these all over the place, not just connections to Asobo. That is part of the reason, it's a knowledge sharing access issue. A lot of these people don't participate in forums much, so you're not likely to see their conversations in an open format.

It's fairly easy to find answers about airport design or general scenery stuff, as there is a LOT more forum activity, but the # of people posting issues & resolutions for plane design is like 1/100th of the scenery stuff, so it's hard to find solutions. This means the people with the most experience in troubleshooting general design issues with respect to having past experience have a distinct advantage, even if someone does not give them the "secret" or documentation.

 

Edited May 23, 20215 yr by Alpine Scenery

21 hours ago, steve310002 said:

I fully agree. I just think even from their position they could make a heck of a lot more profit in the $50 to $60 price range. I am lucky that I 'could' afford to pay more but as much as I respect their great quality and reputation, I just can't justify it to myself out of principle as it's just too much (assuming it will be considerably more expensive relative to lets say the CRJ)

Considering the complexity and re-play value of a PMDG aircraft, the price is amazingly cheap.  You can easily spend more on a restaurant meal!

18 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

What if Asobo is helping some developers, and flat out ignoring others? Can you definitively state that is not happening?

I can't but Asobo can't help everyone at the same time, if they did they probably wouldn't get any work done. This just shows who the men are and who the boys are 

23 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

What if Asobo is helping some developers, and flat out ignoring others? Can you definitively state that is not happening?

Most likely Asobo are partnering with PMDG to flesh out the SDK which will benefit everyone in the end.

After all , if Asobo can help PMDG then they can help bring a flagship product to MSFS which will move more serious simmers (the ones that spend the $$) onto the new platform & flesh out the SDK at the same time.

Over time it almost always gets simpler because of the amount of information available online. Some people are also just more naturally talented at guessing in how to reverse engineer undocumented functionality with trial and error. Some of it just purely discipline, as developing blindly takes a lot more patience than having a blueprint for something. There are so many reasons things are the way they are right now, some of it is Asobo helping some more than others (obviously), but that probably won't matter as much in another 6-12 months once most of the data is available in forums.

It's like saying why can't the C student make the same grades as the A student, probably either laziness or talent, or one has better tutors 🙂

Can be for a multitude of different reasons in different situations.

Edited May 23, 20215 yr by Alpine Scenery

4 hours ago, mpo910 said:

No...I do Not. I talk about a BETA SDK. 

Of course there is a beta SDK. Asobo talks about new features and bug fixes being added to the SDK in every weekly update. The SDK, like the sim itself, is an ongoing work in progress, and new versions come out on a regular basis - usually in conjunction with sim updates. There may be a new SDK version released with SU4 - (which will probably be version 0.13.0.0). I don’t know that for sure, but it is likely.

I can’t speak to what PMDG is doing, but I know for a fact that the Aerosoft CRJ was built using the very same public SDK available to everyone. The initial release version was built using public SDK version 0.11.0.0 - the upcoming CRJ update is built using the current public SDK 0.12.0.0.

What developers like Aerosoft and PMDG do have is a direct line of communication to ASOBO developers working on the core sim. In many cases, things that might be preventing fully-functional systems in a complex add-on aren’t caused so much by missing SDK features, as by missing or incorrect behavior in the core sim itself.

Robert Randazzo talked about this in a recent post on the PMDG forum regarding the DC-6. A forum user asked if the DC-6 would be able to save its state for things like fuel and oil quantities between flights. RSR explained that the DC-6 does indeed have a “state save” function, and it works for most parameters, but the current version of the sim overwrites the saved fuel tank quantities when the aircraft initializes. He stated that (paraphrasing) “we have spoken to Asobo and explained why this is a problem, and requested that the sim not do that on initial load”.

Fixing that particular problem has nothing to do with the current SDK - it is an issue with the core sim functionality that only Asobo can fix. This kind of communication is a good thing - not only for PMDG, but for all developers who can benefit from improvements to core sim functionality driven by requests from 3PDs

1 hour ago, Dominique_K said:

I agree on the issue of quality/quantity with you and that is why I accept to pay high prices for extremely good aircraft but we already have not so shabby ones, haven't we,  and that with the SDK as it is : Milviz, Flyingiron, Just Flight, Carenado, Big Radials and more that I forget. Good enough to have a nice experience in the sim.

The instability of the sim is indeed a major issue but this is not what the not so merry band of MFS professional haters  raises  as an issue. SDK, SDK, SDK, they sing these days. Then BOOM 💥 , PMDG announces a product 🤣 ! Can't you look more silly than that ?

I do understand the valid arguments of Avsim head honcho in this thread - I am personally sick and tired of stuff like the ESC bug  - but I would turn it around. Maybe (maybe !) PMDG announcement is the sign of a greater stability of the sim in the months to come. 

But don't you see how silly this is? Of course PMDG and Aerosoft seem to have come up with good products, but the point is they HAVENT DONE THIS WITH THE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE SDK!  So how do you think they did it, magic? None of this makes the SIM better or worse, it's just a matter of fact they must have used something more 😎

4 minutes ago, kevinfirth said:

they HAVENT DONE THIS WITH THE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE SDK!  

FALSE.