XP12 Must be Backwards Compatible

[JBDB-MD80 1,531]

18 hours ago, Janov said:

The word you are looking for is "cheapskate", I believe 🤣.

 

Not really I was really tired of spending money on FSX and never invested in the "64 bit version" and crossed over to the devil. No one should spend tons on flight sims unless its their favorite aircraft not on desktop anyways. XPlane11 needs to be a crossover to XPlane12 and not the same way Lockheed Martin goes about business which breaks every aircraft in all versions before new release.

Edited July 21, 2021 by jbdbow1970

[Gary1124 181]

If Laminar releases an SDK, people can make their own stuff. There is excellent freeware in all of the sims. Some better than payware.

The Cessna 206 Soloy in P3D/FSX comes to mind.

Or the Sunskyjet KPHL in FSX which works in P3D with minor tweaking

Just saying.

[GoranM 3,815]

3 minutes ago, Gary1124 said:

If Laminar releases an SDK, people can make their own stuff. There is excellent freeware in all of the sims. Some better than payware.

The Cessna 206 Soloy in P3D/FSX comes to mind.

Or the Sunskyjet KPHL in FSX which works in P3D with minor tweaking

Just saying.

https://developer.x-plane.com/sdk/

[Janov 2,383]

I know that backwards compatibility is of high concern to Laminar Research. There is a limit to this, naturally - otherwise progress would not be possible. It is a balancing game.

Maybe some developers try to "cash in" on new versions, but I think that is rare, because it carries the risk of getting a bad reputation.

I think that really depends on the individual add-on, the X-Plane features it depends on - and how much work is involved in upgrading it.

If you sell a scenery and a new version only has a new flightmodel...then it would be hard to justify selling a new version. If there is a total technology swap (like FSX -> MSFS) then no one (although some have asked...) would expect old add-ons to work.

 

[mSparks 2,123]

2 hours ago, Gary1124 said:

Just saying.

xplane sdk is by far the best in the business.

And due some really nice upgades for xp12.

A lot of developers however abused it in ways they never should have, these may well break badly in the next version with no easy fix.

[Greazer 1,355]

On 7/20/2021 at 6:08 PM, Janov said:

The word you are looking for is "cheapskate", I believe 🤣.

I have hundreds of freeware and payware addons that take a long, long time to install and maintain etc. Many developers are no longer on the scene or have moved to other sims. It has nothing to do with money but all the countless hours to install and maintain the addons and they should be useable "as is" in the next version.  All I need is that, and for them to fix the most annoying issues (lighting, radioactive trees, clouds, performance, visuals etc) and XP will be a viable sim.

[GoranM 3,815]

I have thousands of dollars worth of FS9 and FSX add ons.  None of my FS9 add ons were compatible with FSX.  I had to pay for all updates.  Are my FSX add ons even remotely compatible with MSFS?  I'll bet my house they aren't.

I've had every version of MSFS from FS5 to MS Flight.  Not a single add on was compatible between each version.

I think you need to come back down to earth and realize, that with new features, comes a need for add on updates.

It's not up to LR to address these things for you.  It's up to the developers.

The alternative?  Stick with XP11.  

[Gary1124 181]

My policy for addons is to set a list of practical must have.

Scenery-Believable for region

Towns-At least correct footprint and major street grids

Vector- Roads, tracks, powerline runs etc. close to correct.

Weather- at least believable

Aircraft-the ones I could possibly fly as a PPL with complex and IFR certification and or Multi. At my age I could never touch a Jetliner, Corporate jet, or Warplane. But a Cessna, Piper, or Beech piston single or twin is possible or even a light turbine. Also, a kit plane or light sport.

ATC-Not sound like robot.

My basics help keep my addons minimal and also my losses if I upgrade platforms. I also run P3D V4 but I still use FSX due to cherished planes that work better. With the full Orbx and UTX combo they look alike anyway but atmospherics better in P3D. Better than Xplane11 even with ASN.

Another thing to remember to. Pay more for the leaders' stuff. They usually upgrade to new platforms with a discount to prior platform owners. The exception being A2A who codes independently for platform.

Edited July 24, 2021 by Gary1124

[Greazer 1,355]

3 hours ago, GoranM said:

The alternative?  Stick with XP11.  

👎

[GoranM 3,815]

Then you either buy more add ons for MSFS, because I know you have it and keep saying how good it is, or you wait for add on updates for X-Plane 12. 
crisis over. 

[jcomm 6,080]

MS FS and X-Plane are just the same regarding this model of updates.

That was one of the aspects that attracted me in War Thunder, IL-2 Battle of Stalingrad and also, somehow, DCS World...

All but the last have seamless upgrades and in WT and IL-2 you don't even have to install anything - just push the update.  In DCS all of your add-ons are also automatically upwards compatible.

Beauty !

[GoranM 3,815]

1 hour ago, jcomm said:

MS FS and X-Plane are just the same regarding this model of updates.

That was one of the aspects that attracted me in War Thunder, IL-2 Battle of Stalingrad and also, somehow, DCS World...

All but the last have seamless upgrades and in WT and IL-2 you don't even have to install anything - just push the update.  In DCS all of your add-ons are also automatically upwards compatible.

Beauty !

In a perfect world, we would all love upwards compatibility.  And when I say all, I mean developers, too.  

Free updates to new versions of the platform are time consuming.  The Saab update was 3 years, on and off, in the making.  But we like to think of that as invested time for NEW flight simmers.  Bringing new things to the add on.  Kind of a band aid approach, but not so rudimentary.  A lot of the Saab was code rewrites from scratch.  

Of course we would love to not have to spend time working on updates, and instead, dedicate that time to new projects.  But sometimes, when we ask for new features from LR, they tell us, "This will require you to update your add ons."

To people like myself, it's worth it.  (The Saab is still selling well today, 8 years after release).

Austin decided to make a much more realistic turboprop engine model in XP11.  This totally ruined the Saab engine code.  But streamlining/deleting an add ons code in favor of base sim code is almost always preferable.

There was a time where add ons didn't need updates between versions.  If something was broken in a new version of X-Plane, we could report it to LR, and they issue an update to X-Plane.  I think I came into the transition stage, where add ons started to need updates.  The Saab, for example.  We added a weather radar for the XP9 version, but then we saw what XP10 could do with a weather radar, and it looked much better.  So we scratched XP9 compatibility off our list, and made it for XP10 and above.

If add ons for DCS are upwards compatible, that's great.  But as technology improves, and as features begin to get implemented, things will change.  Unless they decide to keep the features and the base sim the same.

 

Edited July 24, 2021 by GoranM

[jarmstro 2,406]

1 hour ago, GoranM said:

But as technology improves, and as features begin to get implemented, things will change.  Unless they decide to keep the features and the base sim the same.

Certainly it is reasonable to expect to have to wait and pay for new features to be added to a plane. But I do hope that the planes in my existing fleet will be very quickly patched to at least run as they do in XP11. If I need to pay a token sum so be it. 
 

Another matter that I have not yet seen discussed is what the price of XP12 will be set at? Will they go mass market and try and compete with MSFS or will they go exclusive and charge accordingly?

Edited July 24, 2021 by jarmstro

[mSparks 2,123]

1 hour ago, jarmstro said:

try and compete with MSFS

Ive talked about it a few times.

MSFS is the standard $60 for a flagship + $60 for the streamed scenery (as a one off $120) or $10 a month as part of gamepass.

XP11 is $60 for the flagship. 

Give or take discounts, offers and variants.

I doubt XP12 pricing will be much different fundamentally.

Much like the MSFS main competitor being FSX, the main competitor for XP12 will be XP11.

Despite the vocal minority the two sims sit in quite different market segments (broadly speaking mac/linux owners will never buy msfs, xbox owners will - most likely - never buy XP12)

Edited July 24, 2021 by mSparks

[jarmstro 2,406]

5 hours ago, mSparks said:

MSFS is the standard $60 for a flagship + $60 for the streamed scenery (as a one off $120)

No it's not? It's $60 for the standard edition which includes the streamed scenery. It's $120 for the premium deluxe edition for which you get a few extra hand built airports and some extra default planes. But because the hand built airports are nothing to write home about and most of the extra planes are not worth having in unmodded form the standard edition is the.one to go for imo.