4 minutes ago, kevinfirth said:

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 😎

Every project is different, every plane has a different level of needed complexity and features, and on and on. There are plenty of issues with the CRJ as well. Some developers, like WT, made it a priority to learn the GPS systems and other avionics stuff, whilst others did their best to stick within the limits of the sim. As noted prior, there is no single reason for it, but there are many reasons. If I had to weigh one more heavily than the others, would depend on the specific plane and issues hit.

AFIK, they did use the same SDK, but that doesn't really matter that much. Hence, if you don't know how to do something, you only have 4 choices. Figure it out blindly, ask someone else in the know (a dev friend), go online and try to find the answer, or ask Asobo.

Obviously the last solution (ask Asobo) is easiest if you are stuck on a very hard problem that is seemingly not solvable. There are those that will pound away at a problem and use every resource possible to try to solve it, but that has limits too.

10 minutes ago, kevinfirth said:

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 😎

Read the post above yours. The crj was done with thr public SDK 

Asobo has said several times in the past that the SDK tools we have access to are the same one they use in the office.

Now they probably have newer versions of them right now, as we don’t get SDK updates until they push them with sim updates. But still.

Edited May 23, 20215 yr by Tuskin38

Just now, Tuskin38 said:

Asobo has said the SDK tools we have are the same one they use in the office.

Yes and no, since they have direct access to the code behind, it's a lot different regardless of what they are using at the end-point.

 

Just now, Alpine Scenery said:

Yes and no, since they have direct access to the code behind, it's a lot different regardless of what they are using at the end-point.

 

I meant for making scenery and aircraft on top of the sim. Not engine level stuff.

3 minutes ago, Tuskin38 said:

I meant for making scenery and aircraft on top of the sim. Not engine level stuff.

Technically, it's likely true, but using something even partially 'under the hood' isn't the same when you have access to the full enchilada, regardless of what you are doing. 

Edited May 23, 20215 yr by Alpine Scenery

There is no telling him he is even shouting it out load at us " HAVENT DONE THIS WITH THE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE SDK!" 

Also " it's just a matter of fact they must have used something more"

Really!

"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." 

But PMDG as a "fact" use a diffrent one^^ ...its now a "fact" its worth another

 

 

Edited May 23, 20215 yr by Nyxx

Asobo can tell you to do X,Y,Z in the XML or JS that may not be referenced or exist in the SDK, so in that sense he may be right... BUT, overall we do all basically have the same tools. Not everyone is on the same boat though, even with the same tools.

So it's a matter of, 'define what you mean by the SDK'...

I mean the SDK is only a tiny piece of the development anyhow, knowing what to write is more to it. For any programmer, imagine coding in VS.NET with no auto-complete or intellisense and no documentation...

At some point, knowing what to put where is more important than what tools you use. That said, I have seen metadata and directives in various places in development that will not compile under normal means, locked down functionality. In that sense, Asobo definitely is not on the same playing field when it comes to certain things (that's obvious though). How much of that they are wiling to help another dev with is probably not very much.

So most devs are relatively using the same tools so to speak, but Asobo themselves are not on the same restrictions obviously with the same tools.

 

 

Edited May 23, 20215 yr by Alpine Scenery

49 minutes ago, highflyer2020 said:

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.

Agreed with this.  In partnering with Aerosoft on the CRJ, Aerosoft would have pushed Asobo to a certain point...far enough for their product to work.   PMDG can now pick up from there and push Asobo even further, as far as need for their generally more complex products to work.  In the end this is good for us as simmers and other developers.

So 6 months ago RSR was not very upbeat about prospects, since then we've experienced almost a 180 degree u turn to where we are today.  That's a good thing to be sure.

But the SDK hasn't, as far as I can see, been developed to any significant extent that could justify that reversal in fortunes.

So the justification in this thread is that they've had significant support direct form Asobo which has enabled them to achieve current results.  I can buy that.  But being given privileged access to knowledge and core sim level stuff, isn't that pretty much equivalent to using a more capable SDK, even just if it was a better documented one?

So maybe this is just all in the phrasing. anyway, back to the topic, I don't have any more to add to this, and PMDG releasing top-tier products for MSFS is a good thing regardless. 👍

$$$

42 minutes ago, kevinfirth said:

they HAVENT DONE THIS WITH THE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE SDK! 

Assumptions. Wrong assumptions, most likely.

The CRJ was produced with the existing SDK, all the FBW and WT stuff was developed with it. WT even programmed a full FMS and it is possible to program the electrical system of the Airbus (for example) with the existing SDK.

Edited May 23, 20215 yr by crimplene

44 minutes ago, kevinfirth said:

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 😎

That was not my point which was that a very few people use the SDK as it is, for another agenda of relentless demolishing of the sim. The same have explained us months back, that we should have subscription, then that everything was coded for the console, that the programming environment was word not allowed and so on and so forth.  We even had a fake picture of a carrier with a flock of 320 landed on it. Serious people willing only our good. Not.

But anyway, I am going to answer you.  Of course they have done their bird   with the publicly available SDK (see, no need to capitalize). And, with magic too ! Magic being their own experience dealing with complex aircraft simulation for tens of year, the expertise of their programmers to move a simulation coded in some language/environment to another language/environment and, last but not least, the  professional  channels they have opened with Asobo to exchange technical matters for months. Some magic, hey ?

 

 

Edited May 23, 20215 yr by Dominique_K

3 minutes ago, kevinfirth said:

So the justification in this thread is that they've had significant support direct form Asobo which has enabled them to achieve current results.  I can buy that.  But being given privileged access to knowledge and core sim level stuff, isn't that pretty much equivalent to using a more capable SDK, even just if it was a better documented one?

So maybe this is just all in the phrasing. anyway, back to the topic, I don't have any more to add to this, and PMDG releasing top-tier products for MSFS is a good thing regardless. 👍

Pretty much, the same problem with any technical discussion in a forum, people have their own ideas as to what something might mean. In the end, no-one is really on the same playing field, and never has been. Xplane is the one exception to where you could argue MOST people are on the same exact playing field, not perfectly but close enough. The other sims, nah, there are various things that make it harder for some than others, but that is almost everything really.

27 minutes ago, Dominique_K said:

That was not my point which was that a very few people use the SDK as it is, for another agenda of relentless demolishing of the sim.

True, there are those that only come in here to rag on the sim. I am not one of those, though I do occasionally rag on it because some stuff is that aggravating. There are those that ONLY come here to talk about how horrible everything in MSFS is, and for some reason those people like to throw gas on the fire (just like every forum). There are things it does that are ahead of all the other sims, we all know it, but the SDK can be frustrating at times.

Edited May 23, 20215 yr by Alpine Scenery