ORBX.

[G-RFRY 1,744]

23 hours ago, gaab said:

They've already received numerous complaints about Central and V6, and now they're disabling v6 recognition!

Very inconsistent behavior
- June 2023: "we won't forget P3D V6 users"...
- October 2023: we're working on Central for V6
- some V6 elements appear but point to "error messages", then disappear in Global, (following user complaints)
- then, latter, V6 is no longer recognized ("we're testing...")

I'm afraid they don't have a clear vision of what to do - and many former executives have resigned...

 

 

This.

 

[dave2013 1,158]

On 5/9/2024 at 11:07 AM, newtie said:

I think the installer, from their point of view, is only part of the problem. Some unknown change in V6 could really mess up their scenery and they don't want to be on the hook for fixing it. I get that.

I've simply pointed v6 to the ORBX libraries I had installed from v5 and then copied over v5's terrain.cfg file and everything works fine, so I don't understand what the problem is.

All they have to do is update the installer to recognize P3Dv6 to make it easier for people to install.  It's not rocket science.  They could attach a disclaimer that everything may not work 100% perfectly and they take no responsibility for that.

If, on the other hand, they want to update their textures and objects to utilize some v6 features, like the PBR stuff, then that's another matter and will take some time and effort.

The CEO said they were working on it and I take her at her word - for now.

Dave

[Rogen 1,104]

On 5/10/2024 at 1:49 AM, G-RFRY said:

To do this you need P3Dv6 users to post on the ORBX forum. More may get the message home.

Actually I believe they are collecting info on how many P3D users have v6 via Central itself.

I noticed whenever Central is run it performs a check for P3D v6 as the 2 x log snips show.

• [Simfinder] Coundn't find regval \SOFTWARE\Lockheed Martin\Prepar3D v6
• 2024-05-10T22:28:41.384Z [INFO] [Central::AnalyticsService] - Sending installed product analytics.

So Orbx won't be swayed on hearsay given they do collect actual installed data for any potential business case.

In anycase Orbx are still rebuilding since MSFS's unexpected market entry hit that halted practical income for almost all ESP based sim addon producers.

Here's a report.

https://www.bomboragroup.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Bombora-Quarterly-Report-March-2023.pdf

Cheers

Edited May 10 by Rogen

[G-RFRY 1,744]

1 hour ago, Rogen said:

 anycase Orbx are still rebuilding since MSFS's unexpected market entry hit that halted practical income for almost all ESP based sim addon producers.

From day one in the Seattle interview with ASBO. The press asked did you start from scratch. ASBO no that would have added years to the development and there is nothing wrong with MS FSX base code.

And ORBX is looking to branch out, away from flight simulator products, in the report. 

Edited May 10 by G-RFRY

[Rogen 1,104]

On 5/11/2024 at 9:53 AM, G-RFRY said:

From day one in the Seattle interview with ASBO. The press asked did you start from scratch. ASBO no that would have added years to the development and there is nothing wrong with MS FSX base code.

And ORBX is looking to branch out, away from flight simulator products, in the report. 

Not quite understanding the first paragraph's relevance, but yeah the second paragraph where Orbx is looking to branch out with a B2B focus would be targeting commercial use and licensing, assuming all opportunities to make $$, e.g. P3D and their existing ESP based catalogue (given P3D's commercial & business license status) and in building objects for businesses directly like the DC map and items for ASBO.

Time will tell if their pivoting is successful enough.

Cheers

 

[G-RFRY 1,744]

Both P3D and MSFS are based on the same MS code. that`s how some have been updated with very little work to V6. Even ORBX would take very little work to update, and ORBX was built on supporting P3D 64bit.

[Patco Lch 1,486]

6 hours ago, G-RFRY said:

Both P3D and MSFS are based on the same MS code

This is very interesting. I didn’t know that.

[Daube 374]

54 minutes ago, Patco Lch said:

This is very interesting. I didn’t know that.

Asobo did say they started from the FSX code, and developed from there.  However, in some interview they also said something like "we basically had to rebuild everything". In the end, there are just a few FSX elements which were kept, but maybe not in their original shape. A part of the flight model, named "legacy mode" for example, is still there, although nobody uses it anymore (fortunately).

In comparison, P3D is still mostly ESP with some additional features.

 

 

 

 

[G-RFRY 1,744]

ORBX OLC + Airports

https://www.flickr.com/photos/154944674@N05/53718490073/in/dateposted-public

https://www.flickr.com/photos/154944674@N05/53718489123/in/dateposted-public

https://www.flickr.com/photos/154944674@N05/53718280231/in/dateposted-public

https://www.flickr.com/photos/154944674@N05/53718708955/in/dateposted-public

 

[gaab 111]

9 hours ago, Daube said:

In comparison, P3D is still mostly ESP with some additional features.

Not really true. This had been developed already several times by knowledgeble people...

[jcomm 6,068]

18 hours ago, G-RFRY said:

Both P3D and MSFS are based on the same MS code. that`s how some have been updated with very little work to V6. Even ORBX would take very little work to update, and ORBX was built on supporting P3D 64bit.

Some aspects of airport BGL structure have apparently changed dramatically with V6 so it's probably not that linear to port as it would appear...

[Rogen 1,104]

15 hours ago, Daube said:

In comparison, P3D is still mostly ESP with some additional features.

I would hardly say that... given the sim is 64 bit, DX12, with volumetric clouds, dynamic lighting and a PDK providing very low level programming access for those commercal and military developers who need that sort of low level programming access.

If I was to apply the same logic MSFS would be nothing more than FSX with some pretty scenery and shiny planes.

Cheers

[Daube 374]

8 hours ago, gaab said:

Not really true. This had been developed already several times by knowledgeble people...

 

2 hours ago, Rogen said:

I would hardly say that... given the sim is 64 bit, DX12, with volumetric clouds, dynamic lighting and a PDK providing very low level programming access for those commercal and military developers who need that sort of low level programming access.

If I was to apply the same logic MSFS would be nothing more than FSX with some pretty scenery and shiny planes.

Cheers

Yes, hence the "additional features" in my sentence, but all of the ESP stuff is still there under. They built on top. MSFS seems to have branched out much more, it doesn't even "look' like ESP anymore. The physics, the graphics, the weather, the terrain, the multiplayer, all of these systems and a few other basics are very different to what they used to be in ESP. And *in comparison to that* P3D is much closer to the original ESP platform, with some (not a few) additional features and improvements. This was an answer to the original statement telling that both P3D and MSFS were based on ESP. While this is very valid for P3D, it's not very valid for MSFS.

 

[G-RFRY 1,744]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/154944674@N05/53720276561/in/dateposted-public

https://www.flickr.com/photos/154944674@N05/53719374392/in/dateposted-public

https://www.flickr.com/photos/154944674@N05/53720615004/in/dateposted-public

https://www.flickr.com/photos/154944674@N05/53719379282/in/dateposted-public

 

[jcomm 6,068]

55 minutes ago, G-RFRY said:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/154944674@N05/53720276561/in/dateposted-public

https://www.flickr.com/photos/154944674@N05/53719374392/in/dateposted-public

https://www.flickr.com/photos/154944674@N05/53720615004/in/dateposted-public

https://www.flickr.com/photos/154944674@N05/53719379282/in/dateposted-public

 

Gorgeous !!!