18 minutes ago, Iadbound said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if LM built its next-gen flight sim on Unreal engine or some non-ESP platform, wouldn't that solve the "can't compete with Microsoft" restrictions?

LM have no interest in the consumer market. P3D is developed to support its own products the fact that you choose to use it is down to you. but will not change if you don`t.

3 hours ago, neilhewitt said:

Basically, the problem is this: P3D was never intended to be a mass-market entertainment product, and it never was.

Let's suppose LM does make P3D significantly better than any other platform out there.

If it wasn’t intended to be such, they sure fooled everyone by allowing every  developer in the mass-market entertainment business access to provide add-ons for it. Who all advertised it through every means to every mass-market entertainment forum possible.

For years it WAS significantly better than every other platform. When it comes to pure flight simulation, perhaps it still is?

12 minutes ago, Doug47 said:

If it wasn’t intended to be such, they sure fooled everyone by allowing every  developer in the mass-market entertainment business access to provide add-ons for it. Who all advertised it through every means to every mass-market entertainment forum possible.

For years it WAS significantly better than every other platform. When it comes to pure flight simulation, perhaps it still is?

Simple answer - lack of alternative viable sim platform. Now we have one.

12 minutes ago, G-YMML1 said:

Simple answer - lack of alternative viable sim platform. Now we have one.

X-plane 12?

I am not a techy guy but it may be possible for LM to expand or change its SDK and make it possible for developers currently supporting the MS2020 simulated simulator to more easily convert their work from MS add ons to work on P3d simulator. That would be the best of both worlds. Since MS and LM simulators share the same family tree then it should be possible and it is possible to place add ons both inside and outside the LM sim. 

OK...Techy guys.....blow my dream out of the water!!🙃

Edited May 3, 20233 yr by shivers9

43 minutes ago, Doug47 said:

X-plane 12?

Actually I consider XPlane11 as the first "viable" alternative to the FSX/P3D world.

However, P3D was obviously more comfy for those who came from the FSX world, despite its flaws. A part of the community went to the XPlane side at that time, but not enough to really motivate the 3rd party addon makers.

Neil nailed it perfectly.

I agree that P3D6 will be a slight evolution of 5.3. Because of the backward compatibility with 5.3, it is legit to think that most remaining P3D users will probably migrate to 6.0 but that's it. I doubt that many people will switch back from XP or MSFS. why would they if they have not done it yet?  Also as Neil said P3D is not available outside the LM web site and it is not well known outside of our niche community, so there is no resaon to believe that it will attract a lot of new young simmers.

Even worse, if 6.0 need slight updates for the 5.3 add-ons to be compatible with the version, we are not even sure that all developpers will release those updates.

2 hours ago, Doug47 said:

For years it WAS significantly better than every other platform. When it comes to pure flight simulation, perhaps it still is?

Gonna have to disagree with you there friend.  As a former P3d user of versions 2-5.xx it was a great and spectacular run, but it has long been eclipsed by the pure juggernaut that MSFS 2020 has evolved to in less than three years. 
 

Just an opinion,

-B

Edited May 3, 20233 yr by btacon

I’ve been using P3D for many years with prosim737 my homecockpit.

I have now ditched P3D and turned to MSFS and using the Prosim737 flightmodel with MSFS.

Even Mkstudios have ditched P3D updates. The new Dublin V2 is amazing with the new parallel runway which P3D will never have at this moment in time.

Even MSFS uses all new Nvidia hardware settings like DLSS. Game changer!

For ME the future is MSFS.

1 hour ago, shivers9 said:

I am not a techy guy but it may be possible for LM to expand or change its SDK and make it possible for developers currently supporting the MS2020 simulated simulator to more easily convert their work from MS add ons to work on P3d simulator. That would be the best of both worlds. Since MS and LM simulators share the same family trThat's an interesting ee then it should be possible and it is possible to place add ons both inside and outside the LM sim. 

OK...Techy guys.....blow my dream out of the water!!🙃

That's an interesting idea....

26 minutes ago, Driver170 said:

For ME the future is MSFS.

For us, P3D users is not. So stop shoving your opinion in our forum, thank you. Also DLSS works in P3D v5 and v4 as well. Not need a setting, but on my freaking old i7 9700KF  with RTX 4090 I get more than 30 fps on very high detailed scenery [ True Earth Florida]. So you are not the only sim using DLSS technology. 

Edited May 3, 20233 yr by PavlinS

To stay on topic, suggest we continue speculating about P3D's future (form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence). 

I can see how P3D could evolve to become part of an integrated simulation environment where customers could rehearse or train for joint operations. An air component would use P3D (or what P3D could become) where a naval or land component would use the other components. It almost sounds like DCS Word, but with the ability to train as well as simulate integration. 

20 minutes ago, David Vega said:

To stay on topic, suggest we continue speculating about P3D's future (form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence). 

I can see how P3D could evolve to become part of an integrated simulation environment where customers could rehearse or train for joint operations. An air component would use P3D (or what P3D could become) where a naval or land component would use the other components. It almost sounds like DCS Word, but with the ability to train as well as simulate integration. 

It is already a procedural trainer across air, land and sea.  That's what it is at its core.  It was never a flight simulator, flight simulation was a feature that it provided if that makes sense but it has always also had much greater capabilities.  I don't mean that as a bad thing.  

I think V6 should update the world to 2023 standards meaning landmarks, POI's are all updated accordingly.   Fix the lighting issues (dark cockpits) EA, and some of the half broken features still evident in 5.3, update performance to truly leverage latest standards while maintaining compatibility with 3rd party add-ons and increasing performance simultaneously and I'd be happy.  

I don't expect a complete re-vamp with V6 but I don't need one to remain content in P3D for what I still use it for.   

Edited May 3, 20233 yr by psolk

17 minutes ago, David Vega said:

I can see how P3D could evolve to become part of an integrated simulation environment where customers could rehearse or train for joint operations. An air component would use P3D (or what P3D could become) where a naval or land component would use the other components. 

I think you’re quite correct and I believe LM have said as much.

This is what they hope to achieve with the Unreal engine.

The other advantage this engine gives them is access to a very large base of programmers and modellers who are familiar with UE through it’s many other game applications.

 

1 hour ago, sdirand said:

Neil nailed it perfectly.

I agree that P3D6 will be a slight evolution of 5.3. Because of the backward compatibility with 5.3, it is legit to think that most remaining P3D users will probably migrate to 6.0 but that's it. I doubt that many people will switch back from XP or MSFS. why would they if they have not done it yet?  Also as Neil said P3D is not available outside the LM web site and it is not well known outside of our niche community, so there is no resaon to believe that it will attract a lot of new young simmers.

Even worse, if 6.0 need slight updates for the 5.3 add-ons to be compatible with the version, we are not even sure that all developpers will release those updates.

I wonder how far the backward compatibility will extend? Since I use v4.5HF2, I am not certain that upgrading to an evolutionary v6 would be a sensible proposition for me.

Edited May 3, 20233 yr by Christopher Low