d.tsakiris

You can't know that, so you are again stating your opinion as a fact, but aside from that: Yes, there seem to be much more add-ons being released for MSFS at the moment. But don't forget those add-ons are already available for P3D. I don't have that impression. P3D definitely has a future, it is a professional product that is still in active development. The "bright" part is in the eye of the beholder. Me, and others here, are looking forward to the next version, that will most probably bring small, but significant improvements, while keeping backward compatibility. Exactly what we want.

That is your opinion, not a fact, even though you are trying to sell it (and a lot of other opinions) as such. From your posts it really sounds like MSFS is more suited to your needs. Others here, including me, have different wishes for P3Ds future. Small steps, reliable performance, preserving what we have. Edit: I do think "we" are in the minority with that, and that, at least for the moment, MSFS is where most of the add-on action is. But, as already stated here, "we" have hundreds and hundreds of great add-ons to choose from.

I seriously doubt that's "a fact"...

Why wouldn't it be released?

I agree with everything this man said ☝️

Like I said, I think a big portion of that "base" was already rewritten. I'm not going to go through all of LM's release notes here, but suffice it to say the lists were pretty long each time. Even MSFS isn't 100 % new, as far as I know... With V5, LM updated the mesh. For some older add-ons, that would certainly be a problem. But not for all add-ons, and the affected ones can be corrected, by the developer or even by the customer.

Which registry hacks are you referring to? I don't think I use a single hack. But actually, "ungodly" amounts of legacy code are the exact definition of "solid ground". That said: I think most of this legacy code has been reworked by now, mostly keeping backward compatibility.

So, I looked again and found the .ini file for GSX. It was sort of hidden in the scenery subfolder, along with two effect files. I copied them to their correct locations, and then (after unpausing the sim) the jetways appeared. Thanks again, drobinho!

I disagree. Backward compatibility is one of the main advantages of P3D. For me, and I suspect strongly also for LM's “important customers“. That said: I do think a significant step forward can be made (concerning mainly graphics) without breaking that compatibility. I hope that is what LM are aiming for here.

I really don't think you have to feel sorry for him...

Thanks, I will check that!

There is the Aerosoft Schempp-Hirth Discus ("DISCUS K GLIDER X FSX P3D"). While officially only P3D V4 compatible, I do have it installed into V5 HF2.

I have the same problem. I also emailed the developer, but never got an answer. If I remember correctly, I checked the SODE .ini file for obvious errors, but couldn't find any. Maybe I overlooked something.

I believe I saw something like this sometime last week. It crashed a few times, then "gave up". The FSDT stuff (GSX, sceneries) was then missing, of course. Haven't used the sim since then.

Hi, I sometimes also have this problem. What was your callsign?

So, I'm on version 4.3c. Other items I have found not to work: Windshield heat, altitude and anti-skid.

My installation also needs ca. 15 mins to present the scenario screen. Running everything on SSDs, but SATA, not NVMe. All AIG flightplans installed, plus hundreds of scenery add-ons. I use P4AO to deactivate those I don't need, but I suspect P3D scans the xml files anyway. Without any add-ons, it's under a minute for me also.

Hi, I'm having problems with Flysimware's Learjet 35A. It seems MCE can't "see" or set a number of parameters. Going through the checklist, the FO always raises issues with the settings of the thrust reversers, and I then have to skip those checks. He also can't set the heading bug. There's probably more, but those are the things I've noticed. Officially, the 35A is supported, hence this thread 🙂 Kind regards, Dimitrios

I expect most stuff will work, especially scenery add-ons. But I agree that add-ons that don't work are sadly increasingly unlikely to be updated. But it's impossible to quantify all that.

If that is your definition of "touch", then yes, it's been more that a year. But their silence (meaning: no updates) does not mean that they are not working on (touching) a new version in the background. In fact, as already stated here (and elsewhere many times), an upcoming version 6 was leaked a while back in form of a logon page for authorized people.

I realize English might not be your native language, but what you said was not expressing your opinion.

What gives you that idea? 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.

In this hypothetical: Use the existing add-ons, because they're still compatible.

I agree, but there is still a minority that has similar wishes as those of LM's primary customers. I expect development on P3d won't change much, with priority given to backward compatibility and stability, and a small trickle of new add-ons. That's fine with me.

I don't think LM and their primary customers care much about the add-on developers we're talking about - they have their own. I'd say they want the stability of a mature software that changes in increments, and only if they want it to.