Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
fmloyola

PMDG update[11 jan]

Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, IcemanFBW said:

I'm not usually one to comment on issue involving other devs, but I feel the need to point out something that simply isn't true.

There is absolutely nothing regarding the SDK that presents a blocking issue to aircraft development besides a custom weather radar API.

I can say that with 95% certainty having worked with aircraft development in MSFS for nearly a year and a half, and having spoken to numerous other devs and with Asobo developers themselves. Although we primarily use HTML gauges at FBW, we also use WASM gauges for systems and autopilot/fly-by-wire, the same technology that payware aircraft use for all of their code. And if Aerosoft is able to put out the CRJ as a complete product (with the exception of WX & terrain radar), I don't see why others cannot do the same.

 

Also, in my personal opinion, Robert's message borders on unprofessional. Having had contact with Asobo developers for quite a while now, they have been nothing but helpful and nice. There are obviously cannot fulfill every one of our requests at once, but are understanding and help out as much as they are able, given the constraints of working on such a large platform with countless other third party developers to communicate with.

Look, I don't have an issue with Asobo, Im grateful for the sim they have given us.. and that its constantly evolving. 

However this isn't the first time PMDG or other Devs have pointed out the time it take between communication and resolution of a certain issue. I also have big respect for you fellas over at FBW, but you have to understand that PMDG has a huge customer base and reputation its built over many years....PMDG is trying to get out a product that most people are waiting for.. they both should work a little closer together. 

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be curious to hear what asobo's take is.  Though I realize I probably won't.  But it seems bizarre that asobo would simply be ignoring PMDG on a weekly basis.  Developers like PMDG are likely going to be responsible for keeping users on a longterm basis vs the ones who are just stopping by to check things out.  Perhaps it's as simple as PMDG not wanting to totally revamp their methods of development.  The frustration looks massive with PMDG right now

  • Upvote 2

12700k, Strix Z690A MB, EVGA FTW3 3090, 32gb DDR4 3600 CL14, EVO 970 M.2's, 43" Samsung X60R 4k and 2  22" monitors,  Corsair RM1000x,  360MM MSI MEG, MFG Crosswind, T16000M Stick, Boeing TCA Yoke/Throttle, Skalarki MCDU and FCU, Saitek Radio Panel/Switch Panel, Spad.Next

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, micstatic said:

I'd be curious to hear what asobo's take is.  Though I realize I probably won't.  But it seems bizarre that asobo would simply be ignoring PMDG on a weekly basis.  Developers like PMDG are likely going to be responsible for keeping users on a longterm basis vs the ones who are just stopping by to check things out.  Perhaps it's as simple as PMDG not wanting to totally revamp their methods of development.  The frustration looks massive with PMDG right now

I agree with this. I’d like to see an answer from both sides of the aisle. PMDG and Asobo both should help enlighten the community. At the end of the day, they’re the ones that promised to look after the core simmers and PMDG is as core as you get for many of us.

Edited by Keirtt
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Gaming rig
Intel i9 9900k OC 5GHz - NZXT Kraken x72 cooler - ASUS Maximus Hero XI 
32GB Trident Z 3200MHz - ASUS ROG Strix 2080ti OC 11GB 
7 x 120mm Lian Li UNI fans - NZXT H710i Case -Corsair HX750 PSU

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, IcemanFBW said:

I'm not usually one to comment on issue involving other devs, but I feel the need to point out something that simply isn't true.

There is absolutely nothing regarding the SDK that presents a blocking issue to aircraft development besides a custom weather radar API.

I can say that with 95% certainty having worked with aircraft development in MSFS for nearly a year and a half, and having spoken to numerous other devs and with Asobo developers themselves. Although we primarily use HTML gauges at FBW, we also use WASM gauges for systems and autopilot/fly-by-wire, the same technology that payware aircraft use for all of their code. And if Aerosoft is able to put out the CRJ as a complete product (with the exception of WX & terrain radar), I don't see why others cannot do the same.

 

Also, in my personal opinion, Robert's message borders on unprofessional. Having had contact with Asobo developers for quite a while now, they have been nothing but helpful and nice. There are obviously cannot fulfill every one of our requests at once, but are understanding and help out as much as they are able, given the constraints of working on such a large platform with countless other third party developers to communicate with.

This is an interesting perspective, coming from the head of the FBW team.  I am going to guess that Randazzo doesn't want to recode some of PMDG's modules/functions from scratch, and that is the real meaning behind his latest comments.  It was one of Randazzo's postings or his interview with Fabio (I can't remember which), where he mentioned that some functionality can be done without Asobo changing the MSFS SDK, but that PMDG would have to start from the beginning and it would take a lot of time to code if they were to recode from the beginning.

Randazzo was alluding that it would be faster for PMDG if Asobo could make the change on their end.  At the end of the day, time is $$$ for PMDG so it's understandable they would prefer Asobo can accommodate the changes for PMDG, because it saves PMDG $$$.  Randazzo also mentioned in these latest comments that Asobo is hunkered down for the release of SU8 so it's also understandable that at this time, Asobo can't focus on making the changes for PMDG.

But once again, this is a very interesting perspective from IcemanFBW and the FBW team.  Nothing is there to stop PMDG from doing what they want, besides time and resources (which equates to $$$).

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

i5-12400, RTX 3060 Ti, 32 GB RAM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Iceman, no offense brother, but how can you comment when you don't even know what the showstopper is? 

I'm not saying you're wrong, but your comment forces us to believe either you or Rob. 

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 1

Take-offs are optional, landings are mandatory.
The only time you have too much fuel is when you're on fire.
To make a small fortune in aviation you must start with a large fortune.

There's nothing less important than the runway behind you and the altitude above you.
It's better to be on the ground wishing you were in the air, than in the air wishing you were on the ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, WestAir said:

Iceman, no offense brother, but how can you comment when you don't even know what the showstopper is? 

PMDG won’t tell us.  Why?  Because the minute they do someone from WT or FBW will prove that it’s not a limitation with the sim itself.  Rather, it’s probably PMDG’s unwillingness, or inability, to adapt to a new platform.

I’m not sure I can believe much of what RSR says these days.  Every other month he does a complete 180.

Edited by Gilandred
  • Like 5
  • Upvote 4

Gary

 

Ryzen 5800X, EVGA FTW3 RTX 3080, Asrock Steel Legend X570, 32 GB Trident RGB 3200, Seasonic Prime 850W

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Gilandred said:

PMDG won’t tell us.  Why?  Because the minute they do someone from WT or FBW will prove that it’s not a limitation with the sim itself.  Rather, it’s probably PMDG’s unwillingness, or inability, to adapt to a new platform.

I’m not sure I can believe much of what RSR says these days.  Every other month he does a complete 180.

If the SDK doesn't allow him to do something in X format, then the SDK isn't complete. Just because the same task can be done in Y format doesn't give developers who use Y a right to say "SDK is fine now."

As an aside, it sounds like if PMDG started re writing their 737 code a year and a half ago when they learned MSFS used another format, they'd still be coding today, and we still wouldn't have the NG3. So your solution, made in hindsight, still isn't a solution...


Take-offs are optional, landings are mandatory.
The only time you have too much fuel is when you're on fire.
To make a small fortune in aviation you must start with a large fortune.

There's nothing less important than the runway behind you and the altitude above you.
It's better to be on the ground wishing you were in the air, than in the air wishing you were on the ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, WestAir said:

If the SDK doesn't allow him to do something in X format, then the SDK isn't complete. Just because the same task can be done in Y format doesn't give developers who use Y a right to say "SDK is fine now."

If that’s the case, and again we don’t know because PMDG won’t say, then Asobo is completely within their right to prioritize “Y” development over “X” if that is their native development code format, which is what their SDK was developed around.  PMDG can demand a focus on X all they want, but then progress will be much slower than developers who go with Y from the get go.

  • Upvote 5

Gary

 

Ryzen 5800X, EVGA FTW3 RTX 3080, Asrock Steel Legend X570, 32 GB Trident RGB 3200, Seasonic Prime 850W

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Z=PMDG has to spend more time and money recoding certain aspect. As they promised M amount for upgrade............

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, WestAir said:

If the SDK doesn't allow him to do something in X format, then the SDK isn't complete. Just because the same task can be done in Y format doesn't give developers who use Y a right to say "SDK is fine now."

 

Doesn’t really mean that the SDK is incomplete either.

Asobo has said from the beginning that the SDK supports Y format because it’s better suited to run in the modern sim. But if PMDG insists on X format because it saves them money, then they themselves are to blame for sitting around and having the solution handed to them. 
 

9 minutes ago, WestAir said:

As an aside, it sounds like if PMDG started re writing their 737 code a year and a half ago when they learned MSFS used another format, they'd still be coding today, and we still wouldn't have the NG3. So your solution, made in hindsight, still isn't a solution...

True, but they would’ve been 1.5 years ahead into their development pipeline at this point.

I’m not supporting either parties, but Jorg has said from the very beginning that the introduction of the Y format would although require some new development pipelines, the end product as a result of using Y format would be much superior. He also offered 3PD’s direct access to the SDK team to ease their transition to Y format.

Even after all this, if PMDG expected Asobo to cave in, it’s entirely on them.

I am very certain that the only reason Randazzo is making those comments is to stir up the community to put collective pressure on Asobo to give in to PMDG’s supposed demands for legacy code compatibility. 

I’m also inclined to believe FBW’s Iceman’s comments that the SDK is missing only some functionality such as WX and Terrain data, and that building a fairly complex aircraft as demonstrated by FBW, WT, Fenix, among others, is fairly achievable. 
 

 


 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

on one hand I want to side with asobo for the reasons stated above.  On the other hand, asobo is still the same developer who can't get the live weather thing right.  Something that we've had in every other sim for a long time.  So I'm not sure who to believe.  But I'd be willing to bet the story is more than just what we are saying in this thread.  

  • Upvote 2

12700k, Strix Z690A MB, EVGA FTW3 3090, 32gb DDR4 3600 CL14, EVO 970 M.2's, 43" Samsung X60R 4k and 2  22" monitors,  Corsair RM1000x,  360MM MSI MEG, MFG Crosswind, T16000M Stick, Boeing TCA Yoke/Throttle, Skalarki MCDU and FCU, Saitek Radio Panel/Switch Panel, Spad.Next

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great points Fazz. I do think PMDG is in a lose lose, though. Imagine they decided to recode in WASM, with a 4 year dev time. Then 2 years in, on Jan 2023, Asobo says "old formats work now." - PMDG would have sank 2 years dev costs without seeing their product released any faster.

To.make matters worse, those dev costs are expensive and take away from other products, like the 777, 747, and 757. It's a lose lose no matter what Rob does.

  • Upvote 1

Take-offs are optional, landings are mandatory.
The only time you have too much fuel is when you're on fire.
To make a small fortune in aviation you must start with a large fortune.

There's nothing less important than the runway behind you and the altitude above you.
It's better to be on the ground wishing you were in the air, than in the air wishing you were on the ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, micstatic said:

on one hand I want to side with asobo for the reasons stated above.  On the other hand, asobo is still the same developer who can't get the live weather thing right.  Something that we've had in every other sim for a long time.  So I'm not sure who to believe.  But I'd be willing to bet the story is more than just what we are saying in this thread.  

I would agree completely with this. It is extremely hard to side with either. Not that it should be x vs. x, but it would be better to understand the position of each with more information. I’m really hoping Asobo uses this opportunity to explain their position in the next dev Q&A. Personally, if I was Asobo/PMDG, I’d be working on a way to bring RSR back for another live segment and a chance to truly air out some details without giving away “trade secrets”.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Gaming rig
Intel i9 9900k OC 5GHz - NZXT Kraken x72 cooler - ASUS Maximus Hero XI 
32GB Trident Z 3200MHz - ASUS ROG Strix 2080ti OC 11GB 
7 x 120mm Lian Li UNI fans - NZXT H710i Case -Corsair HX750 PSU

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The main issue here that I can see is that ASOBO has released this MSFS2020 with many issues that are not fixed and every update breaks something else, buggy, and very unstable platform for the time being.
PMDG is well known for blaming everybody else for their shortcomings, unwillingness, or inability to fix their own products.
A perfect example is this carry-on of problems related to LNAV/VNAV/VSD/AP for so many years to all of his aircraft products (FMS equipped). Indeed, now after such a long time is working on it, how good is gonna be this fix? We'll see, hope for the best.
Yes, like some other developers, PMDG is looking for a quick buck with minimum work that in the end will not sit well with the customers and reputation.
I might be wrong here, but from what I see FBW, FSLABS  teams quietly work and progress nicely on their products without pointing fingers at others.
  • Upvote 1

I9- 12900K- CPU @ 5.0GHz, 64 GB RAM @ 5200MHz, NVIDIA RTX 3090

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With all due respect to the FBW team, FBW isn't anywhere near where the 37 is in development.  They're still working on the gauges and what not.

I think what PMDG/RSR are talking about the things needed on the sim side, not necessarily on the aircraft SDK side, from what I gathered in Fabios last live stream.  The aircraft itself looks mostly done.  I think RSR was talking about sim states, etc., needed for making panel states and what not.  The 'immersion' side of the house.  There were others that RSR didn't mention, so who knows what they might be.

In any case, if we're talking sim side stuff, that could take quite a looooong while as RSR alluded to.

I might be wrong, and probably am, but this is what I gathered from all the information.


Jeff D. Nielsen (KMCI)

https://www.twitch.tv/pilotskcx

https://discord.io/MaxDutyDay

10th Gen Intel Core i9 10900KF (10-Core, 20MB Cache, 3.7GHz to 5.3GHz w/Thermal Velocity Boost) | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 24GB GDDR6X | 128GB Dual Channel DDR4 XMP at 3200MHz | 2TB M.2 PCIe SSD (Boot) + 2TB 7200RPM SATA 6Gb/s (Storage) | Lunar Light chassis with High-Performance CPU/GPU Liquid Cooling and 1000W Power Supply

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...