Question of Milviz about TacPack (Poll)

[YoYo]

I found the new Topic (poll) of Colin about TacPack. If You want put Your vote.

http://www.milviz.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3820

For sure it concerns only Military virtual pilots.


Maybe to same idea here with this kind of Poll? Its a good or bad ; ) info for developers.

[Chris Sykes]

Done both here and there...

[Daveroo]

doesnt have an answer for me..id say i was a GA pilot,who likes to play now and then.but now that i understand it,and have the A10,and some of Dinos planes...i maybe using it more and more.

[Daube]

I'm using it as well.
I rarely blow up anything but I appreciate a lot being able to use the military systems of a plane, especially since they added the working laser targetting screen in the virtual cockpit.

The bad thing is that I use P3D more and more, and TacPack laser targetting doesn't work in DX11 yet... (and I don't know if they plan to make it work at all....)

[Chris Sykes]

Same here, using more P3D now than ever. Where did you find about the DX11 issue?

[spatialpro]

I gave the 2nd answer, but only because I use P3D v2.2. I no longer use FSX. I'd like to see TacPack for P3D.

[YoYo]

I gave the 2nd answer, but only because I use P3D v2.2. I no longer use FSX. I'd like to see TacPack for P3D.

Yep, but its a FSX section, not P3D . :wavey:
I hope one day TP will be work for P3D too and FSX in DX10 too.

[Chuck_Jodry-VJPL]

Tack Pack licences for P3D cost something like $1000 , its unlikely to be very popular with the casual user and or the devs within that platform .

[YoYo]

Tack Pack licences for P3D cost something like $1000 , its unlikely to be very popular with the casual user and or the devs within that platform .

Because it is only offer for companies, we are waiting update for usual customers.

[odourboy]

Here's what they told me:

"The fundamental issue is that Microsoft never finished the support for it.
That's why it's called "preview mode". The TacPack will work fine with DX-10
preview, but the FLIR imagery will not, and never will.

Regards,

Jon Blum
Vertical Reality Simulations
www.vrsimulations.com"

[YoYo]

Here's what they told me:

"The fundamental issue is that Microsoft never finished the support for it.
That's why it's called "preview mode". The TacPack will work fine with DX-10
preview, but the FLIR imagery will not, and never will.

Regards,

Jon Blum
Vertical Reality Simulations
www.vrsimulations.com (http://www.vrsimulations.com)"

Do You know why?

[Daube]

I believe that TacPack uses a similar DirectX9 hack than the ENB bloom to 'paint' the FLIR imagery on the MFD.
That's why it doesn't work in DirectX10.
Of course, all the other systems do work properly: weapons, radar A/A - A/G, etc... but that FLIR was one of the major steps forward...

That being said, it seems to me that the P3D engine brings in some new tools based on DirectX11. Didn't we see some video of real reflecting mirrors some time ago ?
If you can display a view in the mirrors, then you can display a FLIR imagery in the MFD, can't you ?
Just theory, of course.

EDIT: no videos, it was a discussion with Dino talking about the "render to texture" features. Which means that yes, a MFD is possible in P3D v2 :)

[IanP]

There's also the simple fact that TacPack is a consumer entertainment, product (insert blah de licensing blah de blah here) and Prepar3D v2 contains much of the same functionality itself, through the "Professional Plus" packages.

http://www.prepar3d.com/product-overview/prepar3d-license-comparison/

L-M are aiming P3D at a professional military market and therefore have developed their own tools to work within it. Yes, $1000 per license is half the cost of a P3D Pro Plus license, but the simple fact that the core package contains content developed by a real-world military hardware manufacturer, versus a package developed by a consumer entertainment programming team, will hold a lot of weight with the target audience.

Ian P.

[Varmint]

There's also the simple fact that TacPack is a consumer entertainment, product (insert blah de licensing blah de blah here) and Prepar3D v2 contains much of the same functionality itself, through the "Professional Plus" packages.

http://www.prepar3d.com/product-overview/prepar3d-license-comparison/

L-M are aiming P3D at a professional military market and therefore have developed their own tools to work within it. Yes, $1000 per license is half the cost of a P3D Pro Plus license, but the simple fact that the core package contains content developed by a real-world military hardware manufacturer, versus a package developed by a consumer entertainment programming team, will hold a lot of weight with the target audience.

Ian P.

It's true Ian, that does hold a lot of weight. It's a David and Goliath thing to begin with, but nothing short of education can combat ignorance. LM sells military hardware, LM is huge, and LM has unlimited resources. However LM does not put those unlimited resources into P3D, much less focus them on the "combat" systems. Most of the people working on P3D were formerly working on FSX projects (and I'm not even talking about former ACES team members), with no background in military hardware applications, or even military aircraft simulations. Fortunately for us, many potential commercial customers do some basic research before they commit to the wrong solution. It took LM 3 (4?) years to put any emphasis at all on the one aspect (ya know, guns n' stuff) of the platform that even makes sense as a LM product, and they still managed to screw it up in so many ways.

First a little background for the uninitiated: There are no actual functioning weapon systems in the Pro+ package. There are placeholders, or Lego blocks if you will, for data which a developer can populate with "real" data, assuming they even have assess to it, but it is most certainly not provided by LM in any form remotely resembling realistic, and never will be for obvious reasons. The Pro+ SDK provides a container that has not been filled, and it's up to you to fill it using your own research, programmers and paychecks. Talented people with lots of resources and/or time could end up with some impressive accomplishments using those little Lego blocks LM provides, but it would take a whole lot more time and money than a comparable TacPack solution, and they'd have to write their own high-level integration systems all by their lonesome, because LM didn't do any of that either. Add to that the fact that Pro+ cannot simulate EO-guidance, laser guidance, or anti-radiation in its current state, and you've got the makings of a fine boat anchor.

And if these potential customers did a little more research, they'd quickly discover that oh, BTW, it doesn't work in multiplayer either! It's not a bug, it's a complete omission! LM must have made a boo boo when they forgot to advertise that fact on the Pro+ product sheet, but you'll note that they don't actually say anywhere in the specs that it IS multi-player compatible. Oh well, what's a little lie of omission here and there; It's only a $2500 product that can't be used to shoot anyone. I supposed they'd tell you if you asked, assuming somebody in their forums would actually answer the question, which is debatable based on the umber of hanging threads. It is therefore a very expensive single-player "solution" which is currently good for nothing more then sending even more commercial business our way.

BTW, the TacPack is not "$1000, not even close. Let's just say it starts significantly higher than that, and scales with the number of seats. However in the long run, it's a whole lot cheaper than paying a programmer or two to try to mold P3D into something that resembles a viable [single-player] combat system solution. Pro+'s $2500 initial outlay is only the tip of iceberg in long-term development costs. Couple that with lack of comparable functionality, and perhaps you'll understand why we continue to acquire commercial customers that either had no intention of going that route, or have already abandoned ship when they approach us.

We could not defeat the giant if it was awake, however it's clearly got a hangover and I couldn't be happier.

[Varmint]

For those of you who are wondering and haven't heard, yes, we are planning to release a consumer version of the TP for P3D 2.2 or possible 2.3, and no, it obviously won't have commercial pricing. However there have been a significant number of severe bugs in P3D since 2.0 and we need to be sure were starting from a stable platform. In addition, certain experimental features such as FLIR video need to mature under DX11 before we'll be good to go.

[Dino Cattaneo]

Well,

I can confirm that, from an aicraft developer perspective, the Tacpack implementation is way better and more complete than Prepar3D Professional (well...basically it is a different thing).
The biggest limitation of the Tacpack, IMHO, in its current state, is that weaponry is USN-centric... but I am sure it will extend over time.

Then, actually, with Prepar3D it should be possible to implement sensors like EOTS / FLIR / TFLIR / DAS imagery and terrain-mapping radar functions in a native way... although this requires mods to the aicrafts of course.

[Christoph_T]

Nice to read this "official" statement from you Varmint.
I am in the same ditch like many others.
I realy like the functions you gave us with the Tackpack, but on the other hand I want to go on with P3Dv2.
The message, that you are planning a P3D version for the average customer makes me very happy and put some headache away from me!!
Looking forward to a nice future for us:wiggle:

[Chris Sykes]

For those of you who are wondering and haven't heard, yes, we are planning to release a consumer version of the TP for P3D 2.2 or possible 2.3, and no, it obviously won't have commercial pricing. However there have been a significant number of severe bugs in P3D since 2.0 and we need to be sure were starting from a stable platform. In addition, certain experimental features such as FLIR video need to mature under DX11 before we'll be good to go.

Excellent! That is wonderful news, im sure some of us would be happy to be kind of beta testers under P3D if the oopportunity come up!

[JimmyRFR]

For those of you who are wondering and haven't heard, yes, we are planning to release a consumer version of the TP for P3D 2.2 or possible 2.3, and no, it obviously won't have commercial pricing. However there have been a significant number of severe bugs in P3D since 2.0 and we need to be sure were starting from a stable platform. In addition, certain experimental features such as FLIR video need to mature under DX11 before we'll be good to go.

Greatest thing I've read all morning. It's early, my coffee is still too hot to drink, but I doubt I'll read anything else today that could possibly make me more cheerful!

Of course, the educational aspect of the post regarding P3D Pro+ was pretty interesting too...

[spatialpro]

I'm also over the moon TacPack is coming to P3D!!! :applause:



The biggest limitation of the Tacpack, IMHO, in its current state, is that weaponry is USN-centric... but I am sure it will extend over time.


I totally agree with this. I'd like to see more weaponry from around the world. I'd also like to see older (retro) weaponry.