abandoned account

I have a weird issue with runway lights. When they get close to the a/c, they change color and/or shape. See screenshot: http://fsfiles.org/flightsimshotsv2/image/Gmp5 It occurs on all runways all around the world that I've tried, stock and add-on sceneries. This is P3D 3.3.5 and I have all the common addons like REX and the ORBX stuff. Unfortunately I can't remember if this happened from day one without the addons. I've tried any and all settings I could think, disabling/enabling sceneries, tried the orbx 3d lights configuration tool, and so on. Switching runway lights within REX changes the lights as expected but the behaviour still remains. Setting HDR lighting to off seem to make the center lights behave this way instead. On the above screenshot, it's set to on. Any ideas why this happens?

Yes, an there are still people out there who thinks that all memory issues will be eliminated just by moving to 64-bit.

Some people might say that choosing a topic that reflects the actual content is key to getting good answers. Some people might say that "Elaine, I could use your help again" is not such a topic. Some people might even say that it should be nominated as one of the worst topics ever.

I think you're missing an important point. What happened from P3D v3.2 to V3.3 was NOT something new and surprising that could not have been forseen by the 3rd party developers. It happend because they use a FIFTEEN year old SDK. This can obviously not be pointed out enough. This way of programming should not exist if you label it P3Dv3.2 compatible, not P3Dv2, not P3Dv1 and heck not even FSX or FS2004. We're talking FS2002. The 3rd party developers have been told for years and years that they should stop doing this. All this whining from developers that P3D is a moving target is ridiculous. Having to change a few lines of code every 15 years... well that's not a moving taget. That's just lazyness from the 3rd party developers who want the most money for the least effort.

Frankly I'm not sure what you're talking about. FSX and P3D compatibility isn't really what we're talking about here. We're talking about addons that use a FIFTEEN year old SDK. FS2002 was released in 2001. The SDK was obsolete a few years after that. People who use really old addons and demand that they should be continue working forever... well, you're holding us back! It's time to let go. If you buy a new door for your house and the door doesn't fit, you don't rebuild the entire house. This is what you guys are demanding. It's time to let go. The fact that LM had to revert this change in the upcoming hotfix is a clear sign that a lot of 3rd party developers are really spoiled and lazy. And the fact that companies like Aerosoft are trying to make even more money out if this situation is starting to smell like a scam.

Instead of taking responsibility for their poorly coded addons that use a 15 year old SDK, they are actually taking the opportunity to take even more money from their customers. I see that a lot of people are annoyed and worried about having to buy the same addon twice or more because of compatiblity issues. Remember that this is completely and 100% the fault of the 3rd party developer and their sales models. LM is in no way responsible for this. They are moving forward. Companies like Aerosoft need to wake up and smell the reality. They charge a lot of money for their addons. Whining about P3D being a moving target just shows how spoiled and lazy they are. The software business doesn't work that way. It's time to wake up and realize that the FSX times are gone.

Remember that the right thing to do is to put some well deserved pressure on the developers of these sceneries instead of just stop upgrading P3D versions. Developers/resellers like Aerosoft are really spoiled when it comes to not having to release any updates ever. If they whink that they can still handle P3D as they handled FSX, i.e. release an addon and never update it, they are dead wrong. They are the ones that should lose money because of this. LM is moving forward, they are doing the right thing. it's time for the 3rd party developers to wake up if they still want to get our money.

Well, "wasn't told" is not really true now, is it?. They where all told many, many, many years ago that it's time to move forward, when new SDK versions appeared. They didn't, and many, many, many years later LM finally decided that enough is enough. This is no sudden move in P3D v3.3 that LM failed to tell the 3rd party developers. If you develop against an SDK that is 15 years old, this is simply your own fault. If you demand support for 15 year old addons and at the same time want a high performance simulator without stuttering, autogen popping, VAS problems... then dream on.

...then blame the 3rd party developers, not LM. Sorry guys but blaming LM for this issue is simply wrong and ignorant. 3rd party developers who still code for FS2002 should be ashamed of themselves if they claim that their software is anywhere near P3D compatible. Come on guys, it's been 15 years. That's fifteen. You really expect P3D to move forward and at the same time keep compatibility with 3rd party software that is developed for a 15 year old SDK? Either the 3rd party developer should tell you "sorry, no P3D support". Or, they fix their broken stuff. Yes, it's their stuff that's broken, not LM. If a scenery/addon isn't developed anymore, you can't expect it to continue working forever. It's about time that LM removes the legacy junk and put some pressure on the 3rd party developers who still code like it's year 2001. I mean, every other topic on every flight simulator forum is about VAS usage, stuttering, autogen popping, blurry textures and so on. Have you ever wondered why that is? I can give you the answer: a lot of legacy code to achieve compatibility with 3rd party addons that is written against an SDK that is older than some of the poeple running the simulator. Think about that the next time you have issues with VAS/textures/stuttering/performance, and at the same time demand that your 15 year old addon should run just as it did year 2001 even though noone cared to update it. If you don't want your simulator software to evolve, then stick to FSX or FS2002 or whatever you prefer.

I fail to see how this is the fault of LM. Developers who still code like it's 2001 is to blame, not LM. Thank you LM for moving forward.

I still have problems with some of the runway lights turning on and off during approach, on both stock and addon airports. Some extreme building flickering on some airport buildings but this may be limited to old FSX airport addons.

I still wonder why so many people keep asking questions like "will setting X work". Some people will always respond with "you will get your FPS hammered", some people will anser "no problem". It depends on so many other things, like all your other settings. So I wonder - instead of asking, why not simply try for yourself? Trying different settings and starting a few flights to see if it looks good and if your FPS gets hammered in heavy clouds (for example) will probably take less time than it takes to ask on a forum if heavy clouds will get your FPS hammered. And the answer will be more accurate. I still think that the only person who can answer the original question of "is it overkill?" is the creator of this very thread.

The only person who can answer this is... well, you. It depends on so many other variables, including your personal preference. I'm not sure what we're supposed to say really?

Same thing with P3D v3 here. I'm using REX4 and ORBX but I'm not really sure where the problem is. All kinds of runway/taxi lights are changing looks depending on the distance and viewing angle. Sometimes they go back and forth from small to large. It happens at all airports, stock and addons.

By old I didn't necessarily mean the physical age. I ment the lack of interest in improving and moving forward. If you've decided that FS9 or FSX or anything else for that matter is the ultimate solution and your mission is to always point out everything that is wrong with other solutions even though you really have no clue what's going on, you will not evolve. Any correlation with physical age is of course coincidental. If you're happy with what you have, that's perfect. If you however for example claim that you stay with FS9 because the lowres tetris shaped looking clouds look better than the highdef hardware accelerated clouds in P3D, I find it hard to take you seriously.