The Good The Bad and The Ugly

[Ray Proudfoot 8,954]

Logically this discussion should be in neutral territory but I suspect if it was it would be swamped with advice about where the future lies.

So this seems the better option.

[BobFS88 635]

6 hours ago, redshift27 said:

This is hardly the appropriate place to debate the pros and cons of XP12, but I find your comment "simply no developer support for the product whatsoever as far as I can tell" quite baffling. Toliss have very professional A319, A321 and A340 models. Flightfactor have converted the B757, B767, A320 and A350. SSG have converted the B747-8. There is a Flightfactor B777 inbound. And XP12 has not even been properly released yet!

Thanks for bring this up, Also Aerobesk DA62 is also available for X pane 12 and the Hot start developer s presently testing the CL650 on XP12.

[sdirand 247]

Problem is that flight simulation as a hobby is already a niche market in the video game market so it was always be difficult for three different actors to have enough market shares and an active community.

FSX was dominating in it's glory days and was quickly replaced by P3D, which now is mostly replaced by Msfs. But at all time, only one sim was really dominating the market. Time of dévelopment are long and the market is already small so I don't think many developpers can focus on two or three sims at once. Add to this, as someone already said, the architecture are differents so it's not so easy to port a product from one sim to another one. And logically, they focus on the dominating sim because they know they can achieve more sales. It always was the case and it will probably remains that way.

One day msfs will face the same fate and will be replaced by something new. it doesn't mean that XP or P3D will disappear, they will always have their fans. After all, some users are still using FSX or even older sims (I know a guy who still fly with fs2002). it's just that you cannot expect anymore the same rate of release for new add-ons. 

We will see how it goes with P3D6. Maybe it will be that "something new" that will replace msfs. If not, I doubt it will catch many more simmers that the current P3D5 users. The worse thing would be an incompatibility with P3D5. If all the developpers need to update their products for P3D6 and if P3D6 doesn't catch a new range of users, I fear that most developpers won't make the required efforts. Some of them probably don't exist anymore. For exemple we have no news from Quality Wings for months so do we really expect them to update their 787? And on the other hand, if 6.0 remains compatible with P3D5, it will probably means that the upgrade compared to P3D5 remains minor and it would be a dissapointment. That' a tough challenge for LM.

 

 

[blingthinger 649]

2 hours ago, BobFS88 said:

Thanks for bring this up, Also Aerobesk DA62 is also available for X pane 12 and the Hot start developer s presently testing the CL650 on XP12.

Indeed! Also, I think danklaue was a driving force behind the Carenado line for quite a while. Though Carenado isn't known for being the greatest use of XPs flight and system modeling, the visual models are very good. Maybe the Thranda line is doing better in some of these regards?

https://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/forums/topic/278871-thrandas-next-plane-in-the-dynamic-generation-series-dgs-the-337f-skymaster/

[1st fltsimguy 466]

I made the decision, years back, to move to XP because of ortho scenery opportunities.  XP12 is weak on scenery without Ortho, shorelines on lakes and oceans for instance are horrid without ortho.  But flying is a dream in XP11 and XP12.  Love the new features but sure wish they would do some even bigger basic out-of-the-box scenery, ground improvements to match the new trees and environment.

The along came MSFS.  So I made the decision to maintain both, sceneries addons on two separate 16 TB HDs.  Each system has its pros and cons.  I hate being tied to bandwidth, and internet, I hate being bumped off mid-flight, I hate CTD that happens with MS.  But both systems have their pros and cons, and I am just going to stick with both for different reasons.

I have worked over the years to build a large repository of ortho for XP and it serves my flying needs immensely.  If a new P3D comes along I will check it out.

cheers. 

[newtie 533]

22 hours ago, shivers9 said:

Thanks for sharing your experience. I think that like you P3D v5.3 is a great place to be stuck lol. We may get lucky and get a bit of clean up on weather and atmosphere. I am a GA guy and find that the old Lionheart Kodiak with a Reality Xp 750 gives me just about all I need. Fly around at 200 miles per hour and land about anywhere. When I feel froggy and want to zip around the clouds then the Legacy by Real Air does the trick for me.

You've got some company Sam; I lasted two weeks with the other sim and don't mind being stuck at 5.3 at all.

I'm running around in the Milviz Beaver with ORBX TE West Coast installed. Great fun.
Took a while to get the Kap140 straightened out, and find the primer handle but all's well now.

Cheers,
Mark

[Patco Lch 1,465]

1 hour ago, newtie said:

You've got some company Sam; I lasted two weeks with the other sim and don't mind being stuck at 5.3 at all.

I'm running around in the Milviz Beaver with ORBX TE West Coast installed. Great fun.
Took a while to get the Kap140 straightened out, and find the primer handle but all's well now.

Cheers,
Mark

HI Mark, you have the MV Beaver working in version five? I have the Otter but never got it to work. Only in V4.

[newtie 533]

Hop over to the MV support forum and you’ll find a V5 installer there for the Otter.

[Sabre57 46]

Would it be possible, if not probable, that the UE engine would only be there for visuals and that most V5 compatible addons would still be compatible?  It would definitely depend on how entwined the visuals are with everything else in the sim.  Just a thought. 

[Patco Lch 1,465]

16 hours ago, newtie said:

Hop over to the MV support forum and you’ll find a V5 installer there for the Otter.

By cricket it does work. Thanks. I pretty much had given up so haven't been to the MV site in many months.  

[newtie 533]

You can credit coastaldriver for that win.
He's the one who told me about it (the Beaver). 😃

[coastaldriver 919]

On 12/8/2022 at 2:26 AM, Ray Proudfoot said:

Logically this discussion should be in neutral territory but I suspect if it was it would be swamped with advice about where the future lies.

So this seems the better option.

Exactly no pros or cons it was merely to politely raise the problem that everybody one way or another (for some aspect of their sim preference) constantly gripe about - lack of developer support for P3D and XP. Now I will state right up that because of the capacity for running legacy products in P3D I have reconfigured, improved and added to P3D to the point there is no more I can do with it or the models. You cannot help but notice as time as gone by that various software people no longer support or fix their products for P3D (some as well in XP). I am done with patching, fixing and tweaking stuff but I have to admit I have sure learnt a lot about a lot of stuff applicable to programming, texture manipulation etc etc over time but P3D is mature for me and also represents probably the sum of nearly 15 years plus of accumulated wisdom and model collecting and tweaking. 

The observation was not that nobody was doing anything in P3D or XP on the contrary XP12 is a brand new iteration of XP - and yes I have it installed and now run both sims. My XP world is developing but it is a steep learning curve because the underlying approach is not one that fits Microsoft's approach (To understand why you need to appreciate the significant differences between Apple Macs and Unix or Linux etc etc. What I am finding is simple stuff that did work lets use TOGO's Enshade as an example - it stopped working for some reason (I suspect a Windows update did it) and fails to reinstall - no response from the developers so I had to remove it! Apart from Pilot's I have not seen a single upgrade, patch or fix to P3D stuff from anybody else! We all know who has abandoned P3D and XP they get bollocked here in the P3D forum all the time!

So really my point and assessment was simple, these are now three different software systems running different coding and requiring different skill sets. So I can see why people in the business of addon development and manufacture have stopped supporting or making for other platforms other than MSFS - it makes commercial sense - do you want to sell 100 units on one platform or 1000 units on the other! The other thing is that life in non sim world is a bit up and down at the moment for anybody in commerce or manufacturing you name it, post Covid things are getting very messy and uncertain. Observation that is all.

Answer - I have no idea but I am now keeping a foot in both camps LM-P3D and Laminar-XP. Simple!

[jon b 2,047]

On 12/7/2022 at 5:21 PM, sdirand said:

For exemple we have no news from Quality Wings for months so do we really expect them to update their 787?

The 787 or rather lack of one is to me really indicative of the stagnation in development. This has become one of , if not the most popular long haul jets of the current era, and yet in the study level simulation the wind is blowing the tumbleweed.

This aircraft perhaps more than any before it is the most like a flight simulator, running on powerful computers downstairs known as CCRs , common computer resources,with back driven force feedback controls, it just happens to sit inside a real world carbon fibre fuselage, my point is most of its entire existence and interaction is software based.

When I look at the PMDG 747-8 they’ve incorporated many of the 787’s features already like the IAN (integrated approach navigation) in the avionics. Then with their 777 they have completely modelled the electronic checklists which are common to the 787, and the systems. Although there is much difference from the 777 with the 787s all electric architecture the systems are designed to present as very similar and therefore require much less development time, just a tweaking of the base systems already developed for their 777.

Now, I have absolutely no knowledge of PMDG’s previous plans but to me the most logical and economical product to produce for the reasons above would have been a P3D 787. However even if that was in their plan it certainly isn’t now.

As you say, we are now left with the QW 787 but all has gone quiet , both on the updating of the P3D and on the announced MSFS version.

Thats a real shame as the QW 78 has a very solid foundation on which to build further. Many things it does really well but it is often let down, overall I really like it but attempt more advanced work with it and you quickly find its limits. There is no failure modelling or non normal checklist, try doing a single engine go around for example and you’ll find yourself literally  going sideways in a 60kt side slip towards the live engine..I’m not exaggerating.

Two years since the release of MSFS and there’s no sign of anything other than a mod for the default 787-10 for that platform,even though we do have the rather excellent thrustmaster 787 yoke available which surely points to how the 787 should really be at the forefront of simulation right now, not languishing in its current unloved state due the the stagnation of development across platforms.

Edited December 9, 2022 by jon b

[SAS443 1,723]

The absence of a true high fidelity 787 (that is well maintained, feature rich and active roadmap) is truly an oddball. A whole segment is up for grabs.
Sure we do have the MSFS 787-10 mod + X-plane Magknight 787, but neither realy qualifies as a pinnacle 787 system sim.

This also holds true for the A350. I'd pay an arm and a leg for a proper A350.

Edited December 9, 2022 by SAS443

[birdguy 3,943]

I have P3Dv5 for the Orbx scenery and the only addon aircraft is the Lionheart Quest Kodiak.

I have P3Dv3 installed for the aircraft collection.  Lots of FSX aircraft fly fine on it.

Noel