Just out of interest...

[Roger]

Who will be buying P3D V2 later this month? It will still be 32 bit but will be Dx11 so should shift much of the work from cpu to gpu(s).
Personally I will keep FsX as it's working pretty well on my new rig with Dx10 activated but will probably get P3D too.

[Daveroo]

how much is it?....

[Montie]

I will wait to I see pricing on it, but most likely I will get it. I really like the features they have added. FSX stays on the system though.

[stovall]

Roger, I will be buying the new Prepar3d and will be keeping FSX as well. I find FSX much easier to test my new developing and being improved scenery files. Also checking paints as they develop is easier for me in FSX.

Hopefully L/M will give those that have previously purchased some kind of a break. I'm not counting on it but can still hope.

[fsafranek]

Will probably get it eventually but not right away. Need to upgrade PC first.

Does P3Dv2 require purchace of a new student license? Or does the one from v1.x still apply?

[insert old beer related icon here]

[falcon409]

Will probably get it eventually but not right away. Need to upgrade PC first.
Does P3Dv2 require purchace of a new student license? Or does the one from v1.x still apply?
[insert old beer related icon here]
Just from what I understand from reading the P3D Forum info, this latest version is an entirely new program and will require a new purchase. A discount for previous owners doesn't look like it's in the offing. I believe the price (Student/Educational) version will be the same. . .$49.00

[falcon409]

Who will be buying P3D V2 later this month? It will still be 32 bit but will be Dx11 so should shift much of the work from cpu to gpu(s).
Personally I will keep FsX as it's working pretty well on my new rig with Dx10 activated but will probably get P3D too.
Roger, if it had been 64bit I would most likely have purchased it but as long as the development process is for subsequent upgrades/new versions. . .I'll stay with FSX and see where I am in two more years, lol.

[fsafranek]

Just from what I understand from reading the P3D Forum info, this latest version is an entirely new program and will require a new purchase. A discount for previous owners doesn't look like it's in the offing. I believe the price (Student/Educational) version will be the same. . .$49.00
Thanks. That's still a very reasonable price.

[AussieMan]

I will be getting it but not for a couple of weeks.

[Daube]

I'm thinking about buying it, but I want first to wait and see the feedbacks about addon compatibility.
Accusim stuff might work, but TacPack stuff will probably not, and that's a huge show stopper...
That being said, if the performance of that new DX11 graphic engine is really better than FSX, then I might buy P3D v2 as soon as possible.

[MCDesigns]

I will be there on release day!! I love FSX and have had really no issues with it on 3 different systems since release day. The only thing I need from it is a little more performance headroom since that alone keeps me from flying places/aircraft I would like to fly. From all I have seen and read about P3Dv2, there are more than enough small and big changes that lead me to believe that it will be a step up from FSX with no steps backwards, so I would be an idiot to not give it a shot

[andersel]

I've been thinking about it for a while. I had been under the impression that it might be upgraded to 64 bit. I'll probably add it to my rig, but only after I hear about how it is working. I never buy any tech products right out of the gate. I guess we'll see what we'll see.

LA

[greenie]

I will be getting it , sooner or later . I'm waiting for some feedback first . I also heard that maybe the licence to the students will last for four years then its all over . Not sure if this is the case or not . I'll wait and see with interest .

[Daveroo]

i was wondering..does FSUIPC work with P3D?...or does it have a good program to setup the controllers?

[falcon409]

i was wondering..does FSUIPC work with P3D?...or does it have a good program to setup the controllers?
I believe there is a version adapted for P3D.

[DaveWG]

I expect I'll get it on day 1, depending on price / license.
I'm sure not everything will be totally compatable, but installing P3d won't stop FSX from working, so I can still enjoy all my aircraft etc.

[roger-wilco-66]

Ditto here, I'm going to get V2 as soon as it enters the market!
I'm with P3D almost from the beginning, and I think there are more than enough changes and improvements in the product that justify a step like that, including spending money for a new V2 license.
From a scenery developers standpoint I seriously look forward to the graphic improvements, like ground tesselation and lighting features. I see some amazing possibilities coming up.
From a customer standpoint I'm extremely glad that LM picked up ESP for further development and enhancement, so supporting this by investing small money (I think the prices are fair) is my share to make sure this will continue into the future.

For me the 64bit issue is secondary. On my rig P3D runs well with or without it. It'll come sooner or later. It is better to release a 64bit version when it is sound and bug free than throw it prematurely on the market.

Cheers,
Mark

[MarkH]

Of course! I have never, ever had satisfactory performance from FSX so that's the driver for me. The drag factor for me will be addons - I don't know if FS-Recorder and TrackIR work properly with P3D yet, but they are essentials. And I hope the Elite yoke driver works (it did on 1.2 so I am hopeful). We know Orbx stuff will work, and many/most aircraft, so everything else is a bonus.

[P38man]

Ditto....is there some place to get info on what planes, sceneries and hardware (esp 3 Saitek panels and trackir) will work with P3D?

I am glad they picked it up and will purchase to support as well.....that's a great idea!

Just want to know so I don't waste massive time tweaking and troubleshooting!

Perhaps just install one thing at a time??

[Naismith]

It'll be the new year for me I'm afraid, Grandkids etc taking priority. :02.47-tranquillity:

[Adrian Petford]

I was an early adopter of 1.x but dropped my monthly subscription earlier in the year in anticipation of 2.0. Hopefully I'll be getting 2.0 on day 1, but if not I'll wait a short while for some feedback on features and performance.

I'm planning to run 2.0 in its default state for a few months to test its performance and compatibility with addons. This will be alongside FSX as I had before.

If everything works, the next time I do a reinstall I may drop FSX in favour of P3D as my primary sim. This will be a big decision as it will take several months to fully rebuild my sim with addons.

That said, I've been getting unequalled performance from FSX since I added Kosta's tweaks, so a replacement is less of a priority than it was two years ago.

[big-mike]

For me the most interesting question is,if all my addons will run in this version.
If yes,i will buy it for sure.
Mike

[adi518]

What's great is that you can install p3d alongside fsx and use junctions to link your content from fsx. I currently use junctions a lot to manage content between the ssd and the mechanic.

[big-mike]

What's great is that you can install p3d alongside fsx and use junctions to link your content from fsx. I currently use junctions a lot to manage content between the ssd and the mechanic.

Good to know,but i will buy 2new HDD`s because i`m running out of free space.
So the new version will be a good time for a complete new setup.
Mike

[Javis]

It is obvious that if one wants to get the most out of FSX today certain 'environmental' add-ons are deffinately needed. REX, UTX, UT2 (or other AI add-on), FTXGlobal, to name a few important ones.


Can any P3D user confirm that these add-ons work with P3D too ?... Or is it like P3D is graphically that more advanced compared to FSX that it doesn't really need these particular add-ons ? ( or... if that's not the case with the current P3D version, will it possibly be with v2 ? )


What about P3D ATC ? Is it still the same as default FSX ?


Thanks for any info!


Cheers,
Jan

[Adrian Petford]

It is obvious that if one wants to get the most out of FSX today certain 'environmental' add-ons are deffinately needed. REX, UTX, UT2 (or other AI add-on), FTXGlobal, to name a few important ones.

Hi Jan,

Very little is known yet about compatibility for 2.0 but both REX and FTX Global were fully compatible with 1.4. For REX you needed to buy a (cheap) additional licence to unlock the P3D compatibility.

Personally, I found the P3D 1.4 default textures a big improvement over default FSX. Water, clouds, buildings and landclass textures were all much improved, plus LM added a few additional modelled airports of their own.

I expect the new version will build further on this and as it's DX11 should be a huge leap forward visually.

[Javis]

Thanks Adrian !


The P3D site isn't exactly overwhelming with screenshots but i do like the water texture and 'volumetric fog' screenies on the developer blog. Very nice indeed !


Good to know that REX and FTXG work with 1.4.


I figure P3D ATC (atleast with 1.4) is still the same as default FSX ?


Thanks again!


Cheers,
Jan

[Bjoern]

I think I'll pass.

[Tim-HH]

P3D V2 looks great, no question. But it seems to me that most of the changes are in the eye candy sector. I mean where are the features that will raise the simulation to a higher level? Like improved aerodynamics, a new weather system with cloud formations and weather fronts, a better ATC, a deeper simulation of the aircraft systems etc. These are the things that would really interest me.

So for now I think I will stick with FSX :)

Greetings
Tim

[Christoph_T]

I'll buy it on day one!!
If its true what all the beta testers told us so far, and if Lockheed confirms this in the next few days, their is no reason, not to buy this one.
It gives us the step forward, that we all want to have!
Hopefully the TackPack from VRS will be available soon for P3D course this is the only argument for me to keep fsx on my computer.

[Javis]

P3D V2 looks great, no question. But it seems to me that most of the changes are in the eye candy sector. I mean where are the features that will raise the simulation to a higher level? Like improved aerodynamics, a new weather system with cloud formations and weather fronts, a better ATC, a deeper simulation of the aircraft systems etc. These are the things that would really interest me.

So for now I think I will stick with FSX :)

Greetings
Tim

Good points,Tim ! ( maybe with exception of 'deeper aircraft systems'... PMDG and A2A Accusim sure's deep enough for me... :) (although it seems PMDG won't look into P3D compatibility ever... big mistake ??... )


I'd probabely stay with FSX too if it wasn't for the fact that i have big trouble with DX10 all of a sudden. Possibly need a full reinstall of FSX. Therefor P3D v2 might be the better choice..


Cheers,
Jan

[limjack]

Pass for me as well. Need a new rig, then I will think about it. Will be watching with wide eyes and hoping for jawdropping results.

Jim

[delta558]

To answer 2 of the questions posted so far;
TrackIR works perfectly with P3Dv2, no need for any workarounds.
FSUIPC is working fine with it - there's been a new version for each of the beta versions so far.

My computer is Win7 64bit, i7 (2600), ATI Radeon 5570, 8GB DDR3 RAM. Not a high-spec system really, but it copes with FSX. P3D runs comfortably on it. I haven't had a chance to try out much in the way of addons though, so it's been basic P3D.

318

[PRB]

I suppose not. Since P3D = FSX - (weather + various planes that don't work), and, I have enough headaches keeping FSX and FS9 up to speed, just don't see the attraction.

[falcon409]

I suppose not. Since P3D = FSX - (weather + various planes that don't work), and, I have enough headaches keeping FSX and FS9 up to speed, just don't see the attraction.
My initial reaction as well PRB, especially when I purchased ver1.4 and found that it looked basically the same as FSX. I didn't see any increase in FPS, like some had claimed. . .ground textures were no different, stutters were still there, despite claims that P3D eliminated that as well. When talking with Lionheart he said that if you already have FSX running smoothly and you're happy with it. . .then it's best to stay where you are. On the other hand if you are having problems with FSX, if it's unstable and fps is a problem, then go ahead and purchase P3D. The only real draw at this point would have been if the whisperings that it might include a 64bit engine were true, I would have bought this next version. Since it doesn't I have to conclude from what I've seen and a few others here have eluded to, is that the differences might be eye-candy related. I don't want to downplay the fog and shadowing, etc, that looks terrific, but that's not what will get people to move from FSX to P3d. It will take a major leap in performance, stability, improved aircraft dynamics and aircraft systems improvements/functionality. IMHO, that is, lol.

[Sundog]

I'll probably end up on it eventually, but alot of it is going to depend on what kind of system you need to run it and how much upgrades would cost for my current rig. I'm definitely following it closely though. Plus, all of my Orbx stuff will be compatible with it, which I can only think will look that much more amazing.

[greenie]

Just seen this ...DX11 and Milviz , apparently. Tremendous stuff !

http://airdailyx.blogspot.com.au/2013/11/adx-trivia-is-this-real-or-fs.html

[vora]

In the long run MSFS is a dead end street IMHO. It runs with Win8, but will it with Win9, Win10, DX13, DX14 etc.?

Also, FS is a single thread application that does only scale with CPU frequency which in turn won't be raised much in the foreseeable future. So, also a dead end street performance wise.

With REX, A2A, Carenado, OrbX and Aerosoft already committed to P3Dv2 I see no reason not to change to a DX11, multi-threaded, GPU-scaling FS version that does have a future.

[dhazelgrove]

In the long run MSFS is a dead end street IMHO. It runs with Win8, but will it with Win9, Win10, DX13, DX14 etc.?

Also, FS is a single thread application that does only scale with CPU frequency which in turn won't be raised much in the foreseeable future. So, also a dead end street performance wise.

With REX, A2A, Carenado, OrbX and Aerosoft already committed to P3Dv2 I see no reason not to change to a DX11, multi-threaded, GPU-scaling FS version that does have a future.

All good points.

I am surprised that there's no 64-bit engine, though. That would have been a major selling point - although we all know that P3D's license terms do not include personal enjoyment, don't we?

Dave

[big-mike]

All good points.

I am surprised that there's no 64-bit engine, though. That would have been a major selling point.

Dave

Just noticed this----i`m out.
Mike

[Sieggie]

With the downfall of XP in January, the 32bit world will start to fade away. I think 32bit apps will go the way of 16bit apps in the not to distant future. If LM wants to continue to sell to government entities, I think 64bit is going to be a prerequisite.

Dave

[vora]

Backward compatibility or 64bit... seems like you can't have both at the same time. I'm pretty sure that backward compability is way more important for most users at this point. That may change in time for a P3Dv3...

Being a GA guy my last OOM was about a year ago :beguiled:

[Dino Cattaneo]

Yes, P3D2 is a 32 bit application. And the most striking changes are cosmetic. But I highly suggest to anyone to give it a try.
I am testing the Beta 4, and it is pretty good - the engine is much more modern and efficient than FSX - and after flying with P3D2, switching back to FSX is kind of a letdown. This is quickly becoming my preferred simulation platform.

[big-mike]

That may change in time for a P3Dv3...
:beguiled:

And therefore you may pay again the full price.
Mike

[Alan_A]

I'm in. Impressed by what I'm hearing from developers - Flightbeam, for example - about range of features, smoothness and overall improved feel. A smoother-running FSX with an active development team in play sounds to me like a good prospect.

[Roger]

Thanks guys, very interesting reading:ernaehrung004:...keep 'em coming.

[vora]

And therefore you may pay again the full price.
Mike

Hmmm... did you get any rebates on FS8, FS9 or FSX? I didn't.

[big-mike]

Hmmm... did you get any rebates on FS8, FS9 or FSX? I didn't.

Lol---okay,that`s right,1point for you.:ernaehrung004:
Mike

[Navy Chief]

Paying full price won't stop me. Flight Simulation is an addiction! I can't help myself! NC

[vora]

For the people who still think there are only "cosmetic changes" I'll give a rough rundown on what's new "under the hood" (feel free to correct me):

- single core, single thread -> multi core, multi thread
or in other words: my quadcore hyperthreading CPU will not freeze himself to death while performing FS calculations. The Intel generations in the last years from Nehalem to Ivy Bridge to Haswell did not increase the processor frequency by any means. Moore's Law is broken for several years now. I guess it's because of Heisenberg (the physicist, not the chem teacher!). FSX won't get any faster with only a single thread.

- All on CPU -> CPU + GPU
The graphics calculations are now where they belong: on the GPU. The GPU still has a lot more performance potential than CPUs simply by adding shader units or improving the DirectX depending microcode. The performance boost between GPU generations is still impressive. Also, direct calculations on the GPU don't use up precious VAS... so less OOMs even in 32bit.

- dx9 -> dx11 (incl. volumetric fog, new lighting, dynamic shadowing, tesselation, object instancing)
A little reminder: The step from FS9 to FSX was DX9 to DX9 + totally bugged "DX10 preview". I just spent a lot of money for ironing out the "DX10" bugs.... GNAAAAH! :frown-new:

- flight modeling can be made externally
Because of backward compatibility the limited flight model of FSX is here to stay. So they opened up the model for injection of external flight models. My understanding is that this was what A2A accomplished with FSX all by themselves. I maybe wrong, feel free to correct me.

- 64bit modeling tools in the free SDK
You better ask Bill about it... LM uses his quote as advertisment here: http://www.prepar3d.com/news/2013/05/4320/

- new mission system "Sim Director"
Completely new scenario editor. We'll see how it goes. See http://www.prepar3d.com/news/2013/10/4561/

- new multiplayer code
Read something about it, but can't remember nor find it, so :bull_head:


IMHO the step from FSX to P3Dv2 is anything but "just cosmetic". For me it is the step to FSXI that never came.

[DaveWG]

- 64bit modeling tools in the free SDK
You better ask Bill about it... LM uses his quote as advertisment here: http://www.prepar3d.com/news/2013/05/4320/


Of course that's great if you can afford a copy of 3DS MAX 2012+

[Meshman]

It takes a bit for me to say "Oh, wow!", but seeing the pics here gave me one of those moments; http://drzewiecki-design.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=264&sid=6c0c29ddc80234f937df9c3b475922fa


Small airfield, scattered amongst the trees, layered in some fog or low clouds... I probably won't be saying "Oh, wow!" but more along the lines of "Oh, ...", well, you know.

[big-mike]

WOW----stunning pics!
Mike

[hairyspin]

Of course that's great if you can afford a copy of 3DS MAX 2012+

...which is why I'm waiting to see which modelling tools are supported by the new SDK. Word so far is models built with the existing SDK will work with P3D v2, but I can't afford to upgrade from Max 2008.

[PRB]

vora, you have made some persuasive points. My interest is increasing.... :)

[SkippyBing]

With the downfall of XP in January, the 32bit world will start to fade away. I think 32bit apps will go the way of 16bit apps in the not to distant future. If LM wants to continue to sell to government entities, I think 64bit is going to be a prerequisite.

Dave


You're kidding right, the government entity I work for only just got rid of IE6 a few months ago and I suspect the Win 7 update we're due to get before the end of XP probably won't be 64 bit either. Even then, it's not as if you can't run 32 bit programmes on a 64 bit OS so that's kind of a red herring.
I also suspect with the less open ended scenarios you use in a training environment that OOM issues would be less of a problem.
That's not to say I'd turn down a 64 bit sim engine, I just don't see it being a major change in the way offloading stuff to the GPU should be, so it's probably not a #1 priority for LM.

[Bjoern]

In the long run MSFS is a dead end street IMHO.

Kind of. The community is going to dissolve into legacy MSFS titles, X-Plane and P3D. This probably means less add-ons for everyone.


My call will be a multiplatform title, i.e. X-Plane (with a win in the lottery) or FlightGear (with a lot of time for contributing).
Linux...:love_heart:



Because of backward compatibility the limited flight model of FSX is here to stay. So they opened up the model for injection of external flight models. My understanding is that this was what A2A accomplished with FSX all by themselves. I maybe wrong, feel free to correct me.

Don't forget Majestic. They've tied in YASIM* through SimConnect.


*Open source and also used by FlightGear. (Maybe also X-Plane.)


- 64bit modeling tools in the free SDK
You better ask Bill about it... LM uses his quote as advertisment here: http://www.prepar3d.com/news/2013/05/4320/

I honestly fail to see the big thing there. An exporter for Max 2012 was necessary because Max 7 and 9, for which FSX/ESP's exporters were written, are not available anymore. The "64k polygon limit" per object was more of a bug (as FSX' exporter did not have it) and the only thing worth of significance is the lifted 64k polygon limit per material plus any other potential internal changes regarding compilation speed.






Has anything changed regarding AI behaviour and ATC?

[Chris Sykes]

Im going to say im really interested in the 64 bit vers when it comes, im also liking the screenies of V2 also! The only thing holding me back would be tacpack.

[Chris Sykes]

Seriously no replies since my last post? Anyway LM have updated their site! http://www.prepar3d.com/news/2013/11/4648/ Pro is $199.99, Academic is $59.95 and $2300 for the Pro Plus!

[Daube]

If I understood correctly, VRS has officially announced that they didn't exclude a TacPack migration to P3D.
2300$ is a high price. And if it's like TacPAck, you'll need planes specially built with for these military features of the sim.
With such a price, I don't think anybody is going to create any of these planes, freewares or paywares.

[zswobbie1]

so its Academic or Pro for us.
I just do not see a problem at all.
I'm sure the majority will go for Academic... we will have enough to keep us busy. Pro Plus for the corporate/mil training sector.
Actually, thinking about it, it's a great business model from LM. We can choose, & they are catering for pro's, semi pro's, & us guys.

[roger-wilco-66]

Regarding weapon capabilites and associated damage modeling, this was announced for P3D v2 several times, but there's not much information to find about it. I hope this function is not exclusively reserved for the professional version ($2300).

Cheers,
Mark

[hairyspin]

I see it's DX11 only, so I'll need a new video card to run v2.

[Chris Sykes]

I see it's DX11 only, so I'll need a new video card to run v2.

Depends on what card you have?

Nvidia Cards ; http://www.geforce.co.uk/hardware/technology/dx11/supported-gpus

Cant find AMD/ATI list

[MCDesigns]

Regarding weapon capabilites and associated damage modeling, this was announced for P3D v2 several times, but there's not much information to find about it. I hope this function is not exclusively reserved for the professional version ($2300).

Cheers,
Mark

My thoughts exactly Mark, but it's not looking good.

[Spad54]

I have V 1.4 subscribing monthly for a developers license. My plan is to purchase a month of 2.0 and if its acceptable switch subscriptions. We kind of have to have both FSX and P3D for testing, although I fly FSX for the most part. Gil is totally P3D. I'm most interested to see how the new dynamic shading engine works.

[Sieggie]

You're kidding right, the government entity I work for only just got rid of IE6 a few months ago and I suspect the Win 7 update we're due to get before the end of XP probably won't be 64 bit either. Even then, it's not as if you can't run 32 bit programmes on a 64 bit OS so that's kind of a red herring.
I also suspect with the less open ended scenarios you use in a training environment that OOM issues would be less of a problem.
That's not to say I'd turn down a 64 bit sim engine, I just don't see it being a major change in the way offloading stuff to the GPU should be, so it's probably not a #1 priority for LM.

The market will force what it wants. The company I work for has an XP based product that we sell to state and local radio shops. Most of the radio shops are in the process of being taken over by the IT departments because radio communication is a network, so IT must be in charge of it. Most of these have specified that XP based products no longer are allowed to be connected to their systems. Good for us as we get a chunk of money to upgrade our older fielded product to W7. Old 16bit apps would run on XP but those same old apps no longer work on W7. In fact you would have a hard time even finding an app that was a 16bit app. I would bet that M$ will at W9 or W10 no longer support 32bits just like they don't support 16bits any longer. It helps them to sell new development software and operating systems. It is one of those "time will tell" things, five years from now we can look back to see who was right :)

Dave

[hairyspin]

Depends on what card you have?

Nvidia Cards ; http://www.geforce.co.uk/hardware/technology/dx11/supported-gpus


Thanks Chris, but my 9800GT ain't there, bother!


Regarding weapon capabilites and associated damage modeling, this was announced for P3D v2 several times, but there's not much information to find about it. I hope this function is not exclusively reserved for the professional version ($2300).


As for the Professional Plus (military) version, see Dino's observations here (http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/showthread.php?83405-P3D-V2-Details-Pricing&p=848431&viewfull=1#post848431)

[Meshman]

I believe it's fairly obvious and has been mentioned at the L-M site, but to run v2.0 you will need a DX11 video card AND a DX11 operating system. That means Windows 7 or above. Vista or XP users need not consider the upcoming release of P3D 2.0.

[MCDesigns]

I believe it's fairly obvious and has been mentioned at the L-M site, but to run v2.0 you will need a DX11 video card AND a DX11 operating system. That means Windows 7 or above. Vista or XP users need not consider the upcoming release of P3D 2.0.

Interesting as an up to date Vista has Dx11

[Daube]

Interesting as an up to date Vista has Dx11

Yep, just checked on my laptop with Vista 32b. DXDIAG says I have DirectX11. I didn't even know...

[Meshman]

What the workings are inside the OS I do not have a clue about, but here's the link to Win7 and up requirement;

http://www.prepar3d.com/forum-5/?mingleforumaction=viewtopic&t=3736

[falcon409]

Looks as though having dx11 may be important but not as much as having Win7. Appears that V2 will not run on vista, period.