You know what I think? with the competition that exists it no longer makes sense all the silence of LM about future versions of P3D.

On one side we have marketing and openness to increase or maintain the hype. On the other discouraging silence... I repeat, not justified.

Even Laminar is actively showing what they want with XP12.

"Stick with us and keep betting on the platform because we will get this, and this and this" or say "version 5.4 will improve this and this and this".

It's ridiculous. Nowadays with all the marketing in the competition it's stupid.

 

I prefer the silence to empty promises that take years to never in materializing per the resent thread pertaining to PMDG.

Isn't it also possible that LM's core market of DOD types might actually want hyper-realistic graphics and world environments for its training tools at some point. If we make the assumption that the Air Force, for example, is training young pilots and other staff for combat simulations, etc., and if those trainees have grown-up on modern video game/simulator engines, CGI-filled movies, Google Earth, etc., it seems likely that those trainees may expect the best quality environment and that the DOD entities would want to make it as realistic as possible. Those requirements could ultimately drive LM to make a true next-gen P3D.  Of course, the question would then become: would they even release it publicly?

Just a thought.

1 hour ago, Iadbound said:

Isn't it also possible that LM's core market of DOD types might actually want hyper-realistic graphics and world environments for its training tools at some point. If we make the assumption that the Air Force, for example, is training young pilots and other staff for combat simulations, etc., and if those trainees have grown-up on modern video game/simulator engines, CGI-filled movies, Google Earth, etc., it seems likely that those trainees may expect the best quality environment and that the DOD entities would want to make it as realistic as possible. Those requirements could ultimately drive LM to make a true next-gen P3D.  Of course, the question would then become: would they even release it publicly?

Just a thought.

I have doubts. Real simulators motsly have worse graphics than msfs or even P3D. The purpose of those simulators are to learns procedures, technics, not to play a video game.

So in fact, nice graphics are not the main requirements.

It would be really nice if LM could make P3D look like MSFS, but, per LM rep comments at the FSExpo show, it looks like LM's license with MS limits what LM can do with P3D. The LM rep said the couldn't make P3D look too much like a game. I read that as MS doesn't want P3D to infringe into its  MSFS market. Either way, and like @sdirand said, most commercial flight simulators' graphics look similar or less sophisticated than P3D anyway.

I see future P3D changes more towards improving fluidity, especially in VR. If we were to use P3D to learn the ins and outs of flying a military jet, what things should P3D have to make that training as realistic as possible? This is the kind of training that would save money by reducing the amount of training hours required in the real airplane. 

I am pretty happy with how 5.3 HF2 is running, Although some improvements/updates are always welcome, but based on the history of flight sim development a lot of things break in updates (with all sims) so I am not missing any updates from them either way. 😎

Correct me if I’m wrong but since v4.5 we’ve had long standing bugs fixed such as:-

• Each end of the runway can have different take-off / landing options set.
• Road traffic no longer causes major stutters
• Dynamic lighting improved that don’t cause brief pauses when the aircraft wheels touch the runway.

Assigning specific tasks to individual virtual processors to improve performance via settings in Prepar3D.cfg was a big think in 5.3.

I’m sure there must be others but one that really needs fixing is the bunching of Ai when positioning at a large airport. They need spacing out to reduce the number of go-arounds.

I imagine further improvements will be made to the Atmospherics. Evolution not revolution. But something significant needs to be brought to v6 should there be one. Quite what it might be only LM know and they ain’t telling.

 

Yeah. Even if - and that's a very big “if“, as I really doubt there won't be future P3D releases - there were no new developments, from LM and/or 3rd parties, P3D would, to me, still have hours of use in it. There are still dozens of destinations I have installed and haven't flown to (it's kind of an addiction), and literally hundreds more waiting for me to get...

3 hours ago, Nocturnal said:

I am pretty happy with how 5.3 HF2 is running, Although some improvements/updates are always welcome, but based on the history of flight sim development a lot of things break in updates (with all sims) so I am not missing any updates from them either way. 😎

Me too my friend, me too! Some time I wonder if updates haven't shortened my life line.

7 hours ago, Iadbound said:

it seems likely that those trainees may expect the best quality environment

I got a friendly chuckle there remembering my own days in the Army. They could care less what you expect, you take what they give you and you better at least pretend to like it. Your point is understood but I just couldn't help myself there. Old age and too many memories. 🙂

1 hour ago, Patco Lch said:

I got a friendly chuckle there remembering my own days in the Army. They could care less what you expect, you take what they give you and you better at least pretend to like it. Your point is understood but I just couldn't help myself there. Old age and too many memories. 🙂

Ha!  Fair enough.

 

Maybe I should have put it this way -- more realistic environment could = more realistic training, which could = better results.  And that may be enough incentive to move it forward, especially since it is obviously possible.

On 6/9/2022 at 4:25 AM, Juliet Alpha said:

You know what I think? with the competition that exists it no longer makes sense all the silence of LM about future versions of P3D.

On one side we have marketing and openness to increase or maintain the hype. On the other discouraging silence... I repeat, not justified.

Even Laminar is actively showing what they want with XP12.

"Stick with us and keep betting on the platform because we will get this, and this and this" or say "version 5.4 will improve this and this and this".

It's ridiculous. Nowadays with all the marketing in the competition it's stupid.

 

Usually saying nothing indicates they have nothing. Or care either way. 

During the FSExpo presentation and Q&A session, it seemed to me they are well aware of the need to raise the bar for the Prepar3D terrain rendering and they even said they are already in talks with different companies including Google. They were also clearly showing, in my opinion, that despite the commercial target of Prepar3D, simmers remain a valuable target and an asset to their product in many different ways (see the answer about using the "academic" license...)

More specifically, in the Q&A, a question was asked about future version support for streaming the terrain ala fs2020, and the presenter said they are considering this and are already talking with both Google and Bing. The question starts at 21:13 in the presentation video below, and the answer was (just the main points):

Quote

"Our terrain needs works, we're looking into option whether we could utilize Bing maps, google maps, others, we have different talks with different companies, we are in the exploration stage at this point, but it is definitely a problem that we know we need to address. "

https://youtu.be/h4d0Xj3XUH4?t=1303

My understanding is that the future of P3D is bright for us simmers.

----
edited: future of P3D seems bright when considering the runner ups selected for best representing the rainbows in a "simulator": 🤣😜

Spoiler

June 9th, 2022 Development Update - Community / News and Announcements - Microsoft Flight Simulator Forums

 

 

Edited June 11, 20223 yr by RXP

7 minutes ago, RXP said:

During the FSExpo presentation and Q&A session, it seemed to me they are well aware of the need to raise the bar for the Prepar3D terrain rendering and they even said they are already in talks with different companies including Google. They were also clearly showing, in my opinion, that despite the commercial target of Prepar3D, simmers remain a valuable target and an asset to their product in many different ways.

This is good. I stand corrected. Thank you Jean-Luc. 

Also from the presentation: When he talks about limiting the gamification of P3D due to their deal with Microsoft, he specifically mentions things like achievements and "leveling up," so I don't see that as a reason why they wouldn't be able to continually advance the rendering engine. It's when they start adding Landing Challenges and Steam achievements that MS would step in.