Jump to content

CaptBmckay

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    87

  • Donations

    $0.00 

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by CaptBmckay

  1. Posted

    4 minutes ago, SmokeDiddy said:

    This thread is definitely entertaining to read.  I figure I'll add my misc ramblings to the cause.  I am an old school casual simmer.  Am I crazy that I kind of like where I'm at as far as P3Dv4? I get in my RealAir DukeB60 v2 or my F1 BN-2 Islander and fly from point a to point b, yeah, I see things that look strange, but I also see things that look somewhat real - a tree, a house, a road, clouds, sun and stars, rain, snow, etc.  I see lights at night and I see great freeware airports, great payware airports and even some photoreal stuff here and about that I've acquired throughout the years.  Yes, my system will make stutter or two occasionally or I'll have a crash sometimes, I reboot and hit it again for days and weeks on end with no issues and everything is hunky dory in my world.  I like everything about my current set-up to include all my payware/freeware aircraft and sceneries that very talented people developed and shared with this hobby. The only eye candy I care about in my sim is what I can see in the VC and when I taxi about to take-off or park.  Everything else I could care less about - although I like the weather stuff too.  A functioning aircraft that has good sound and flight dynamics (to which I'm no expert and I most likely wouldn't know the difference if it smacked me in the grill) and lots of buttons to click and handles to pull.  Anyway, my point is, I'm old and set in my ways and I like flying in P3D, I like flying in XP11 also.  I'm glad MS is trying to get to get us to that next level, but quite frankly, they gonna have to pry my cheapass yoke from my cold dead hands if they're gonna go to real time streaming and pay to play whatever.  I went out and bought another scenery today in celebration of my resistance to change on this.  I think I will go buy a new airplane to tootle around in and enjoy what I have while I can, because, one-day, all this stuff is gonna be gone.  Again, don't get me wrong, I'm glad we see the rumblings of a possible the next gen sim, but as for me and mine, I'm gonna keep supporting these cool devs that keep us in our sim seats day in and day out, until the worms come to eat my carcass from the depths of the dirt.  Diddy

    As will I. I’ll purchase MSFS 2020 but I’ll continue to use my P3D and Xplane with VATSIM. My current set up is great and I, like you, will continue to support third party dev’s. 

    • Like 4

  2. Posted

    3 hours ago, ca_metal said:

    Yeah Microsoft must know that also. What I'm criticizing is Randazzo's attitude saying they want it their way or they are out. They aren't open for negotiation. That says a lot to me.

    I'm not totally disagreeing with you, both Microsoft and 3rd need parties each other, but it's not good when you start saying you want your way or the highway. They did the "same" with Dovetail back in 2016. If Microsoft needs the partners to be on their store, why not negociate the terms? They don't even know the terms as they were not contacted and he is already demanding a totally open SDK enviroment.

    I think Microsoft has the right to choose their partners, the same way PMDG has to choose theirs. 

    When did RSR say it’s his way or the highway? I’m grateful for the products PMDG has developed. I think his stance is sound and business savvy. I read his entire response and what I gather is, he is simply waiting for more information. 

    • Like 1

  4. Posted

    14 minutes ago, tonywob said:

    Indeed, I'm really fascinated on how it looks outside of the cities.. e.g. In the middle of nowhere in the US or central Europe.  Whilst cities look great, simmers tend to fly between them and not just hang around city centres. Despite all that,  I really hope they allow third parties to create scenery and aircraft and is pretty open, otherwise it suddenly loses quite a lot of appeal to me.

    Agreed. I believe leaving it open sourced creates businesses for others and allows for even greater immersion. There are incredible people out there who have taken our hobbies to the next level with their forward thinking. I do think the basics should be covered in house, thus allowing greater expandability of the product. 

    • Like 2
    • Upvote 2

  5. Posted

    2 hours ago, adi518 said:

    As far as performance goes, I'm sure if Aerofly figured it out, then so have Microsoft. P3D is outdated and nothing will really change that. The fundamentals are just bad. I was really surprised to find out Orbx has nothing to do with this. I also find it hard to believe MS is going to deliver complex aircraft with full systems, as we know how much time these things take to develop. Now, I also think I saw some mentions over collaborating with add-on creators. I believe FlyTampa and Flightbeam are involved, but I might be wrong. It's fun to speculate, but let's see what happens.

    Nah, Mir said in this thread, he had no idea.

  6. Posted

    2 minutes ago, shivers9 said:

    My theory at this point is that in some way MS and LM have always had an agreement to work together and at some point bring the Flight Sim world to this point. It could be that Prepar3d Version 5.0 will be compatible with the basic coding that has been developed for this new MS product. Best of both worlds. MS take care of the younger gaming types and LM takes care of those of us so called "simmers" with a product that goes much deeper. Just a theory.

    This would be marvelous, if indeed this was true...

  7. Posted

    1 hour ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

    Without an SDK and the ability to fly without an internet connection it’s a non-starter for me. Outright purchase too. No subscription. It will take years for 3rd party developers to produce the quality aircraft we currently have in P3D even assuming there’s an SDK.

    I will stay loyal to L-M. They will respond to this announcement and it could well speed up improvements.

     

    I too am loyal to LM, I think P3D will make an announcement soon and I'll be on board. 

  9. Posted

    2 hours ago, JYW said:

     

    JR read my mind - I would wager 100% that if the AP is not engaging, it is because of one of these three requirements. The Yaw Damper buttons on the pedestal give no visual cue on the buttons themselves, as to whether the Yaw Damper is active. However, if the Yaw Damper is not engaged after engine start, you'll see two yellow messages on the EICAS notifying of this. Similarly the stab trim system buttons also don't light up when pressed, so make sure they are pressed and the message for those is also extinguished in the EICAS.     The Mach Trim is a little easier as the button itself lights up when the system is NOT active, so press it to extinguish this light.  (It can sometimes take a couple of cycles of the button to get it to extinguish).

    They just posted an update yesterday that was supposed to address the AP engagement issue. They said it was possbily related to Trim inputs from the control column during climb out.  I installed it and it works for the most part. 

  13. Posted

    5 hours ago, FalconAF said:

    OK, I'll watch.  But they are gonna have to either make P3D "psychic" as to what scenery should go where in the "priority" of things, or give the user back control to move the stuff around itself without having to know how to "write code" like an XML file.  That "solution" is one of the most arcane things I have ever heard or seen in my 30 years of flight simming.

    With only TWO developers using the new method right now, it doesn't even work.  Example?

    I installed all my FSDT and Flightbeam airports.  THEN installed the two Drzewiecki Design sceneries that are much LARGER than any individual airports...New York X and Washington X.  All of them used the XML install method.  Guess what order they were placed in the Scenery Library list, with no way for me to change the priority of them using the GUI.  All the smaller airports BELOW the much, much larger geographic scenery area.  Well...at least ORBX's installers don't do that, or it would be a major fiasco with the sceneries.

    I'll stay hopeful.  But right now it doesn't even work with only TWO developers using the XML addon system, depending on which order the customer installs the addons.  So I simply moved the Drzewiecki Design sceneries out of the default folders the installers put them in, deleted the XML file entries that got created, then manually added the sceneries back into the sim using the Scenery Library GUI.  Worked fine, and I could move them BELOW all those other airports, where they should be.

    Here's a question...seriously...I'm not trying to be "funny" or anything.  Who's going to be "The Enforcer" to MAKE every developer use the new XML install method?  Will there eventually be a "forum lynching" for any developer who chooses not to do it?  As was mentioned, it was already available for P3Dv3, and most (all?) developers weren't doing it. So are we supposed to "Blacklist" any developers who choose not to do it for P3Dv4?

    Or would it just make more sense to give the OPTION back to customers who have 30 years of experience managing there flight sims to do it using the DEFAULT Scenery Library GUI if they wanted to? (Yes, this is a question I'm aiming at LM, and not any particular third-party developer here.  Is LM going to now "blacklist" developers who don't use the XML install method for P3Dv4?).

    I'm all for progress and new features.  But I simply cannot figure out the "why" of this.  IF the idea was to QUIT using the Scenery Library GUI because ALL developers would be using XML installers, why was the Scenery Library GUI even left IN the simulator?  Nobody would be able to do anything with it, other than just look at a convoluted list of greyed-out scenery addons that couldn't be edited, moved, etc.  THAT is what makes me want to slap my forehead and go "DUH!! What were they thinking???", because THAT is exactly what we will have IF all developers use(d) the XML install method.

    Yes, there are people now supplying somewhat workable "work-around utilities" for the above already (but still beta in nature, so I'm a paying customer for P3D and now a beta tester for a utility to make it work right).  Thanks for the utility efforts...they ARE appreciated.  But it doesn't solve the DEFAULT problem contained in the P3Dv4 (and now v3) product itself.

     

    And please...nobody was "warned" about what the P3Dv4 installers were going to do to P3Dv3 installations.  That's a pure rationalization of what happened.  You said it yourself...NOBODY was using the XML install method with P3Dv3.  So why in the heck would anybody EXPECT a v4 installer to "go back" and change a v3 installation?  That's like saying there has been a law in place for 100 years making it a crime to spit on the sidewalk, but it was never enforced.  Until yesterday, when the local police decided to start arresting people who did it without telling them they were going to start enforcing it.

     

    I agree. I noticed that too. I fixed the situation myself. I don't care for the XML add-on feature. Since New York X is a city scape, I like to have my scenery library in a special order. Like you, I just deleted the Add on XML file in the folder and manually added Washington X and New York X so I can control the scenery library order. I did this with all of my P3dV4 add-ons. I moved all of my add ons to a folder out side of P3d and manually added them all the scenery library. So far I've had no hiccups. 

  15. Posted

    3 hours ago, romangeber said:

    Positive feedback here. The installation went through without issues. Nice job on caching the liveries already downloaded through the PMDG Center. Saved a ton of time.

    The plane works just fine for me. Tested with very high settings, FTX global, FlyTampa EHAM, 4K textures, etc. No problems with the 747. Looking forward to my first regular flight soon.

    Again, thank you so much. It's incredible how well prepared (no pun intended) PMDG and other high end developers have been for this transition.The 64 bit apocalypse sure didn't happen and we're already flying a PMDG jet in this new work of endless memory.

    cu
    Roman

    + 1

  16. Posted

    17 minutes ago, captain_adf said:

    Robert,

    Stop working, I figured it all out! I did some reading on how to convert 32 bit code to 64 bit and I found the answer for you:

    "In the drop-down for “Type or select the new platform”, select “x64”. If x64 does not exist, you will need to install the Visual Studio 2008 64-bit extensions, as shown in step 1."

    Just do that and everything will work swell.

    In all seriousness, I'd better stop and let the experts do their job :)

    lol

  18. Posted

    17 minutes ago, rlashier said:

    The similarities of the P3dv4 engine to FSX are both a blessing and a curse. Yes, the default scenery, ATC, and flight models are a bit aged, as they are part of FSX's lineage. We can hope for incremental improvements perhaps in these components over time, as the LM developers seem very able and they do deliver the goods.

    On the blessing side, I can't imagine that we would have much of a stable of add-ons in short order if LM had developed the new sim from scratch with all new coding. But because Prepar3dv.4 does descend from FSX, the vast selection of great add-ons we have come to know and love will likely be adapted and made available from 3rd party developers in a matter of weeks. And the release of v4 without the VAS constraints of 32-bit opens up all sorts of incredible possibilities for even more complex and beautiful scenery and aircraft models to appear on the scene. I'm thrilled.

    I don't really get the argument some make that v4 is not worth the $60 investment. Heck, we have paid that and more for many individual add-ons, and this new v4 base will leverage so many enhancements in the add-ons that come to market. With 32-bit sims, there was really no point to owning much more than a mid-level video card. Now, the GPU becomes much more vital, and investments here will have a big pay-off in performance and the enjoyment of new levels of eye candy you could only dream about in the past.

    The long awaited 64-bit v4 is here. Rejoice and be glad!

    Rich

    Agreed. I am

    very happy with the new features. V3 was great and I am loving V4. I am very thankful for the performance increase and the 64bit possibilities :-)

  23. Posted

    Ive found so far that all of the T2G, Latinvfr, drzweicki and megascenery Earth sceneries work. I just copied the respective folder to P3Dv4 addon folder and added to the scenery library manually. For the megascenery, I just linked each scenery folder to the scenery library in P3D. Works great. The performance is incredible for the dense city areas too. I never had that in P3Dv3. 

×
×
  • Create New...