New Entry on p3d main site.

[Patco Lch 1,480]

Looking on their web site at the space given developers I get the impression addon developers hold an important place at the LM P3D table. Seems a goodly number not yet abandoned for greener pastures. IMHO I have the impression they really don't want to break completely with backward compatibility. Let's hope.   

[GCBraun 2,420]

9 minutes ago, Bob Scott said:

Anyway, we're here in the P3D forum to discuss P3D, where landclass scenery, an optional update regimen at a measured pace, historical and accurately-repeatable weather configuration, and network-independent reliability still work for us. 

I thought the goal of the topic was to discuss a *future* P3D version. 

[Bob Scott 7,750]

Just now, GCBraun said:

I thought the goal of the topic was to discuss a *future* P3D version. 

"Future" is not synonymous with "completely different".  The historical progression of P3D has been one of incremental improvement with attention to backwards-compatibility and reliability.  The commercial customers that are LMs primary target group don't want "disruptive."  They have work to do--they need continuity and reliability.  So do we.

[GCBraun 2,420]

1 hour ago, Bob Scott said:

"Future" is not synonymous with "completely different".  The historical progression of P3D has been one of incremental improvement with attention to backwards-compatibility and reliability.  The commercial customers that are LMs primary target group don't want "disruptive."  They have work to do--they need continuity and reliability.  So do we.

Having adopted P3D in 2012/2013, I still remember how hardcore FSX users would promptly dismiss it. Therefore, I have the same right as anyone else here to express my opinions about how the sim should (or not) evolve.

One thing is certain: a P3Dv6 that is perhaps a 5.3 with minor improvements won’t bring users or add-on developers back. Just look at this forum…some years ago a topic like this would be booming. 

[Ray Proudfoot 9,041]

I prefer the quiet and stable life of P3D. There’s never any big problems to resolve. Just the occasional small ones, easily solved.

Switching to any other sim would cost a lot of money to acquire the same airports and aircraft assuming they were available. Two I fly currently aren’t.

I’d spend hours programming my GoFlight units for the new sim.

I’d spend a lot of time learning how the camera system could be configured to work like ChasePlane.

All the work on integrating Cartayna’s jetways would be lost. More time getting those back even if possible.

In short, the disadvantages of switching away from P3D outweigh any advantages by a very large margin.

[shivers9 1,174]

4 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

I prefer the quiet and stable life of P3D. There’s never any big problems to resolve. Just the occasional small ones, easily solved.

I am with you all the way Ray! In the early days after the MS thingy was released, this hobby was making me crazy. At first I found out that I live about 2 blocks north of a fast internet connection. Next came all the MS promise marketing about sending a couple of French guys to airplane school and someday all would be wonderful. That is about when I waved the BS flag and starting getting my little home cockpit set up and starting upgrading my computer to the latest and greatest to run Prepar3d. I have never looked back and I know there are a lot of other folks just like you and I. I am pretty sure the LM will continue at much the same pace we have become use to over the years and that is just fine with me.

[Juliett Alfa Romeo 560]

Frankly, I'd rather some MSFS users stay where they are (we definitely are different targets/publics). As for the developers, it's their choice... as I will have my options by continuing on the platform or who knows the day I switch to MSFS... it's just that, for me, certain developers have simply died.

[Ray Proudfoot 9,041]

2 hours ago, Juliet Alpha said:

As for the developers, it's their choice... as I will have my options by continuing on the platform or who knows the day I switch to MSFS... it's just that, for me, certain developers have simply died.

Let's not forget there's a huge number of airports available for P3D, many available at discount prices.

Bob Scott has said he has a couple of hundred. Many are still compatible with v5 even though they were released for earlier versions. UK2000 being a classic example.

Other than Manchester currently undergoing a huge rebuild I wouldn't know or care if the sim version of an airport was any different to the actual one.

 

[ttbq1 350]

I think that you guys are actually the reason why LM really doesn't want to invest in a new sim, and the reason most developers have abandoned the ship...you are so happy with what you currently have then why do you want and update?

[d.tsakiris 420]

56 minutes ago, ttbq1 said:

LM really doesn't want to invest in a new sim

What gives you that idea?

57 minutes ago, ttbq1 said:

you are so happy with what you currently have then why do you want and update?

No one is saying that P3D is perfect and can't be improved on. If LM can further advance P3D and keep backward compatibility, I'm certainly getting the new version.

[neilhewitt 494]

1 hour ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Other than Manchester currently undergoing a huge rebuild I wouldn't know or care if the sim version of an airport was any different to the actual one.

I do strongly care about EGLC, which is almost a completely different airport in terms of layout and facilities than it was a few years back. But literally no-one seems to have any interest in updating their sceneries for these major changes. The commercial versions available in P3D are by UK2000 - which has stopped making P3D scenery at all - and ORBX, who answered my question about an update with 'we'll probably update it but it'll probably be years before we get around to it'. Shame such a major (for London) airport gets no love.

1 hour ago, ttbq1 said:

I think that you guys are actually the reason why LM really doesn't want to invest in a new sim, and the reason most developers have abandoned the ship...you are so happy with what you currently have then why do you want and update?

I think that's an exaggeration. It's simply a question of risk vs reward. There are 10 million MSFS players (that's Microsoft's stat, so take it with a pinch of salt, but it's definitely in the millions). Even if only 0.1% of those buy your add-on, that's still 10000 copies vs a P3D market which was never anywhere close to the same scale. Yes, the early chorus of 'I'm not buying any more P3D add-ons, I will wait for MSFS' in 2020 undoubtedly set a negative tone, but that's no longer relevant now.

[shivers9 1,174]

1 hour ago, ttbq1 said:

I think that you guys are actually the reason why LM really doesn't want to invest in a new sim, and the reason most developers have abandoned the ship...you are so happy with what you currently have then why do you want and update?

Well thanks for that. I had no idea that us “crazy old P3d guys” have so much pull with a multi-billion dollar company. I think you may be giving us a little too much credit but just is case I am going to call LM today and tell them about a couple of changes that I have in mind for their proposed Mars station. I will let you know how that turns out. Lol

[Ray Proudfoot 9,041]

27 minutes ago, neilhewitt said:

I do strongly care about EGLC, which is almost a completely different airport in terms of layout and facilities than it was a few years back. But literally no-one seems to have any interest in updating their sceneries for these major changes. The commercial versions available in P3D are by UK2000 - which has stopped making P3D scenery at all - and ORBX, who answered my question about an update with 'we'll probably update it but it'll probably be years before we get around to it'. Shame such a major (for London) airport gets no love.

Not forgetting the 7 degree glideslope. 😁 I hope you have a BAe146 for those flights.

ORBX are very disappointing. But try to ignore any differences between real world and sim and just enjoy the experience.

[Christopher Low 5,393]

A new version of EGLC would be most welcome, considering that it now has a full length taxiway. That would instantly solve the problem of AI planes having to taxi up the runway whilst other planes are attempting to land.

[ttbq1 350]

59 minutes ago, shivers9 said:

Well thanks for that. I had no idea that us “crazy old P3d guys” have so much pull with a multi-billion dollar company. I think you may be giving us a little too much credit but just is case I am going to call LM today and tell them about a couple of changes that I have in mind for their proposed Mars station. I will let you know how that turns out. Lol

well the hard true reality is that LM hasn't touch P3D in a long time, and let's better keep the add-ons developers out of the conversation.

BTW, there is still people using FS9 and FSX...