Is This The End?

[Daube]

FSW is clearly not the end of FSX.
P3D v4 though...

[xpelekis]

P3D v4 ?... well... :



Ha, ha !... Are they kidding ?... I'll stick with FSX DX10 for at least 2 years...
Based on videos alone, FSW "wins" by far for me... but still ^^^

[StormILM]

LM has clearly stated they are not going to change anything regarding payware/freeware addon access in their P3Dv4 announcement and already, the major developers are offering both free and low fee upgrades to existing P3D users when v4 comes out (or shortly following release). I hope DTG is paying attention.

[AusWilko]

All I am seeing is the splitting of the community and the money they represent.

[crashaz]

You all crack me up....we went thru this with CFS2 back in the 2007 time frame when it was apparent that Aces was gone and there would be no more CFS series.... CFS2 is still one of the biggest forums here.

[Rami]

You all crack me up....we went thru this with CFS2 back in the 2007 time frame when it was apparent that Aces was gone and there would be no more CFS series.... CFS2 is still one of the biggest forums here.

Crashaz,

That's just because we're stubborn SOBs who don't know how to quit.

[txnetcop]

Heck I remember the stubbornness exhibited when FSX came out and so resource hungry...the arguments continue LOL!
Ted

[Navy Chief]

As mentioned in another thread (Flight Sim World), I had messaged with Aimee Sanjari just yesterday about FSX-SE support. They are NOT going to drop FSX-SE period! NC

[Bjoern]

Any 64 bit sim will require 64 bit .dlls. Which means that developers have to update their gauges and modules for their add-ons to work. Which on the other hand also means that stuff made by retired/out of business devs can not be used in FSW and P3Dv4.

So don't ask about EULAs, dig up your address book and ask devs if they can at least update their .dlls.

[IanP]

Just to add to Bjoern's statement above, it's worth remembering that any gauge coded in C++ (as oppose to XML) is also a .dll - so they'll need recoding, too, not just things that have ".dll" on the end!

Ian P.

[n4gix]

Any 64 bit sim will require 64 bit .dlls. Which means that developers have to update their gauges and modules for their add-ons to work. Which on the other hand also means that stuff made by retired/out of business devs can not be used in FSW and P3Dv4.

While that will work for P3Dv4, FSW not so much...

...since FSW has apparently dropped support for all C/C++ gauge .dll's.

[Naismith]

While that will work for P3Dv4, FSW not so much...

...since FSW has apparently dropped support for all C/C++ gauge .dll's.

Another reason to take the P3D route.

[GypsyBaron]

After reading a post in Pete Dowson's FSUIPC forum I can categorically say that when the time comes for me to abandon FSX, it will be a move to P3D x64.

There is absolutely NO way I will move to DTG FSW. The post I read referred to a DTG twitch broadcast in which they said they will NOT entertain the use of FSUIPC and the likes and that everything that interfaces with FSW must use simconnect.

That is a deal breaker for me as I have hundreds of hours invested in customization of my FSX install using FSUIPC4 and lua scripts.
An just on an emotional level, I resent any provider of any service that blocks control or customization by the user.

The DTG twitch broadcast is here

Paul

[xpelekis]

A. P3D v4 is offered as a completed sim. It is what it is.
If you like it, you buy it.
But the "core" sim experience is no different from P3Dv3 or FSX.
Even the improved performance due to 64bits doesn't seem to be
optimized yet, from what I read for a finished product.

On the other hand, FSW is an open beta, still in development & progress
with a community channel opened for criticism and discussion for
forming up the final product, tailored to the community wishes (in the
degree that this can be achieved since it's FSX based).
But already, FSW comes with a refreshing experience and feel of something
"new" just out of the "box" compared to P3D :
- Far better modeled default (legacy) planes out of the box
- Enhanced virtual environment (ORBX)
- Enhanced flight model (Accufeel)
- Rain - bad weather flying
So, the "core" sim experience seems somewhat changed, improved and refreshing to me
compared to P3Dv4.

B. On another note, many people have criticised the marketing model of DTG,
that we don't actually know about that yet. Two points here :
- FSW world costs 20$ while P3D v4 costs ?...
- Why buy now P3D v4 and not P3D v5 after 8 months or so ?... Or even better,
why not buy P3D V6 after 1.5 year ?...
I mean LM's marketing model seems no better to me. At least, FSW will be just
one and only sim (I guess).

In conclusion, potential & future is with DTG (as opposed of a sim under development
compared to a finished product) and it's totally up to them how this bet will turn out in favor for them or not.

[MarkH]

I resent any provider of any service that blocks control or customization by the user.

I don't think that's what is happening, it seems more like a technical decision to formalise the use of the legitimate API. We might speculate that the confusion of back-door interfacing methods is one the things that has made FSX so unreliable, so I don't think we should write this off as anything sinister. From what I have read Pete has said he will not develop a new FSUIPC from scratch, not that he has been denied the opportunity. I too will miss the powerful Lua scripting but that's probably all. Other vendors are building tools to interface to FSW. SPAD.neXt is reportedly in beta, for example, and with the exception of the Lua engine (so far) it is shaping up to be a powerful FSUIPC stand-in.

[Daube]

B. On another note, many people have criticised the marketing model of DTG,
that we don't actually know about that yet. Two points here :
- FSW world costs 20$ while P3D v4 costs ?...

Most likely 60 dollars/euros, just like the previous versions.

- Why buy now P3D v4 and not P3D v5 after 8 months or so ?... Or even better,
why not buy P3D V6 after 1.5 year ?...

Let's not exagerate. P3Dv3 appeared in September/October 2015, not 8 months ago.

I mean LM's marketing model seems no better to me. At least, FSW will be just
one and only sim (I guess).

No better ? Certainly much better for the addon makers, at least. Let's not forget how concerned the addon makers are about DTG. Not about the possibility to release their products out of Steam, but more about prices and licences. This is a huge problem which might lead FSW in the same direction as MS Flight: early death.

In conclusion, potential & future is with DTG (as opposed of a sim under development
compared to a finished product) and it's totally up to them how this bet will turn out in favor for them or not.

I agree with you that FSW has a potentially interesting future, depending on what DTG is able to implement inside, and depending on what kind of policy they apply to the addon makers.
But for the moment, it doesn't look like it has a bright future at all.
Just look at the reactions from both the community and the addon makers.

[blanston12]

A. P3D v4 is offered as a completed sim. It is what it is.
If you like it, you buy it.
But the "core" sim experience is no different from P3Dv3 or FSX.
Even the improved performance due to 64bits doesn't seem to be
optimized yet, from what I read for a finished product.

On the other hand, FSW is an open beta, still in development & progress
with a community channel opened for criticism and discussion for
forming up the final product, tailored to the community wishes (in the
degree that this can be achieved since it's FSX based).
But already, FSW comes with a refreshing experience and feel of something
"new" just out of the "box" compared to P3D :
- Far better modeled default (legacy) planes out of the box
- Enhanced virtual environment (ORBX)
- Enhanced flight model (Accufeel)
- Rain - bad weather flying
So, the "core" sim experience seems somewhat changed, improved and refreshing to me
compared to P3Dv4.

B. On another note, many people have criticised the marketing model of DTG,
that we don't actually know about that yet. Two points here :
- FSW world costs 20$ while P3D v4 costs ?...
- Why buy now P3D v4 and not P3D v5 after 8 months or so ?... Or even better,
why not buy P3D V6 after 1.5 year ?...
I mean LM's marketing model seems no better to me. At least, FSW will be just
one and only sim (I guess).

In conclusion, potential & future is with DTG (as opposed of a sim under development
compared to a finished product) and it's totally up to them how this bet will turn out in favor for them or not.

I don't think I can agree with your conclusions. You seem to think that because FSW is still in 'beta' its potential is limitless while since P3D has had previous releases is static. I have the FSW beta, its really not that different from FSX. P3D has been in continuous development since they acquired it from Microsoft , and since LM hired most of the keep people from MS you could say its been in continuous development since 1982. And its now being run by a company that only has a few years experince in the aviation industry (since 1912 in fact). What aviation experience does DTG have?

But if you look at their business models, I think I would trust LM more, yes every 2+ years they come out with a new version, we buy it and that is the revenue stream that keeps them going, they don't charge extra for you to use a third party product and they have put almost no restrictions on who can create products for it. And yes we do know the price, its the same as they have been using for years.

DTG on the other hand is going to charge you once and then you get lifetime updates? Not likely, not unless they are getting money from some other source, like charging a fee on very thing you add to it, and no freeware btw, there has been much discussion about there very strict licensing required they are imposing on DTG.

Sure there default AC look nice, but there are only 7 of them, only GA. they are including some third party add ons as part of the default, which is nice but that's not revolutionary, I have the ORBX global base installed in my P3D V3 and it still looks better to me that what I see in FSW. LM has announced that they have a new New 3D Rain/Snow system, and its being released with a total of 140 aircraft and avatars. Including the Lockheed Martin F-16 and the Lockheed Electra.

Your comments remind me of posts by others who have commented that P3D is not a 'commercial product' and therefore our only choices are FSW and X-Plane, which is nonsense. I am not counting out FSW, they will have a marketing edge by having it on steam, and I hope they treat it for what it is, a 64 bit evolution of FSX and keep it as open as FSX was. I will keep an open mind to both, but right now I think the betting is favoring P3D as the future platform.

See more about the upcoming P3D release here;
http://www.prepar3d.com/forum/viewto...=6305&t=124599

[Bjoern]

While that will work for P3Dv4, FSW not so much...

...since FSW has apparently dropped support for all C/C++ gauge .dll's.

I'll believe it when I hear it straight from the horse's mouth.

[xpelekis]

I'm not an addon maker, I'm an end user. Nor I think P3D is not for fun either.
Flight simming with no fun, doesn't worth it, for me.
I just added 2 points I haven't seen mentioned.
Apart of the 64bit upgrade, in P3D I see no much new elements. It doesn't impress me
enough, thus not motivating me for just another migration... Future will tell anyway.

[GypsyBaron]

-SNIP-
I too will miss the powerful Lua scripting but that's probably all. Other vendors are building tools to interface to FSW. SPAD.neXt is reportedly in beta, for example, and with the exception of the Lua engine (so far) it is shaping up to be a powerful FSUIPC stand-in.

I have 7259 lines in my current FSUIPC4.ini file and 40 Lua files, most containing multiple functions, and I am not looking forward to anything that will essentially erase hundreds of hours of customization. I don't think SPAD can do the sort of things that FSUIPC4 allows out of the box. Multiple levels of conditional assignments. My 10 switches on dual throttle quads control as many as 100 different operations for each of
the aircraft I fly. In many instances activation of 1 switch causes 3,4 or more operations to take place.

As long as there is an option for the use of FSUIPC in a sim, I'm there. Otherwise it is a pass. The power of FSUIPC4 and the embedded Lua capabilities are essential fo my flight sim experience.

Paul

[TuFun]

There will be an FSUIPC5 for P3D4. When will be the question.

http://forum.simflight.com/topic/827...comment=503252

[GypsyBaron]

There will be an FSUIPC5 for P3D4. When will be the question.

http://forum.simflight.com/topic/827...comment=503252

I am aware of that and looking forward to it when Pete finishes the new version. I need to ask him
about the inclusion of Lua capability as well.

. Paul

[MarkH]

I don't think SPAD can do the sort of things that FSUIPC4 allows out of the box. Multiple levels of conditional assignments. My 10 switches on dual throttle quads control as many as 100 different operations for each of the aircraft I fly. In many instances activation of 1 switch causes 3,4 or more operations to take place.

I think it can do these things, but I can't deny that you will have to put a lot of effort into re-coding your assignments.

[mal998]

Here's a screenie from the game. Although it looks different from FSX it's starting to grow on me. Hopefully they'll get all the bits and pieces together so we can get a more accurate picture of what the game will have to offer. Having said that, getting 3rd party aircraft into this sim is a real pain in the arse and requires several changes to the aircraft.cfg and texture files.


Not a very good screenshot. The game looks a lot better than this. I need to find a better way to post screenshots.

[IanP]

Simconnect is already the only way to communicate with FSX and P3D. FSUIPC provides an interface and additional functionality, which is then injected in... through Simconnect (which Pete helped write...)

Pete has said he wants to retire from developing FSUIPC for years now and said ages ago that he didn't intend to create or support any more versions after FSUIPC4, so obviously something convinced him not to quit again, which is nice.

Ian P.