Milviz stops developping FSX airplanes
Contribute Now
Goal amount for this year: 10000 USD, Received: 7,725.00 USD (77%)
Welcome Back, Unregistered     Today's Date:       Current Time: 

Please Support the SOH "2019 Charter Membership Drive"




Accepted Payment Types

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 78

Thread: Milviz stops developping FSX airplanes

  1. #1

    Milviz stops developping FSX airplanes

    Hi,

    You surely saw this news : Milviz will stop FSX products. They will concentrate on 64bit P3D... Well OK.

    I'm happy they developped products till today.

    However I'm wondering how many does still use FSX as we can see here so many add-ons added regulary for FSX, even FS2004 and CFS2 ?

    Cheers

    Daniel
    (Stick on FSX!)

  2. #2
    I think this was inevitable with the release of the 64bit platform. Both P3D and X-Plane11 are there and the advantages for many will outweigh the desire to stay with older versions. There will always be those within a certain Sim (FSX, FS9, CFS and so on) that will continue for any number of reasons. However the Developers will go where the technology takes them. New techniques only available with 64Bit will allow developers to increase the realism of their aircraft, both in appearance and systems. . .something that has been user driven for years. There will probably be freeware developers who will continue to produce aircraft for FSX or FS9. . .but it just makes sense for the Payware folks to move with the times.
    USAF Retired, 301st Fighter Wing, Carswell AFB, Texas
    My SOH Uploads: http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforum...erid=83&sort=d

    Current System Specs:
    X-Plane 11.26 and FSX/Accel | Windows10 64bit
    Motherboard: MSI760GM-E51(MS-7596)
    CPU: 3.9GHz AMD FX-4300 Quad-Core | RAM: 16GB DDR3 1333
    GPU: NVidia GTX 970 (4GB GDDR5)

  3. #3
    For me no problem. Its a big problem for developer to support all versions in the same time. In different versions bugs are present or not.
    FSX corner is popular still, but the FSX its the title from ... 2007 .
    Now on my disc I havent FSX from years, just new versions of P3D to the 4.4 and soon 4.5 (and this year or next maybe - P3D 5.0 with new engine).
    FSX to P3D it was big jump.

    Btw.


    https://download.navigraph.com/docs/...2018-final.pdf
    Webmaster of yoyosims.pl.

    Win 10 64, i9 9900k, RTX 2080 Ti 11Gb, RAM32Gb Corsair Vengeance LPX OC@3000MHz, 3xSSD+2xSSD M.2 NVMe, Predator XB271HU res.2560x1440 27'' G-sync, Sound Blaster Z + 5.1, TrackIR 5, TH Warthog, Throtlle Quadrant CH, MFG Rudder, Go Flight GF-P8, Saitek: Pro Flight Radio Panel, Pro Flight Switch Panel, Pro Flight Multi Panel, FiP and BiP, iPad2 for maps [P3Dv4.4, DCS, RoF, Condor, IL-2 CoD/BoS/BoM/BoK/BoB]

  4. #4
    This seems to be the trend nowadays. I can't fault developers for discontinuing FSX development, since we're ultimately talking about a nearly 13 year old platform that's been surpassed by newer tech. I'm still solidly in the FSX camp for the time being, as it suits my needs and runs reliably and relatively smoothly on my aging system. Like many others, I also hesitate to changeover due to the amount of time and money I've invested in FSX addons.

    I'm actually contemplating reinstalling FS2004 on my machine, as there are a few FS9 planes that were never fully compatible with FSX that I sorely miss (Dreamfleet 727 and AFG Caravelles). I'm moving in the wrong direction, I suppose!
    -Mark

  5. #5
    too bad.

    I have spent too much money on FSX to let it go and start over. I had a hard time justifying the expense once - it just isn't feasible to do it all over again.
    From my perspective, most of the Milviz product needed the 64bit overhead just to function properly. I refuse to spend that kind of money on something that won't function smoothly on my hardware.
    For those who can afford to keep pushing more hardware and software purchases through their homes year after year I congratulate you. Well Done.
    FSX in 32bit works well enough for me and will have to do until I win the lottery or leave the table.

    Maybe when Lockheed can upgrade their versions without breaking things, or when some developers stop charging extra to those who bought for FSX to switch to P3D versions...
    My hope is that future hardware will make enough of a difference that 3rd party developers who also love FSX and are in the same boat as me will carry on - like they have with FS2004
    I can always justify new hardware.
    enter..the Sandman

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by heywooood View Post
    too bad.

    I have spent too much money on FSX to let it go and start over. I had a hard time justifying the expense once - it just isn't feasible to do it all over again.
    From my perspective, most of the Milviz product needed the 64bit overhead just to function properly. I refuse to spend that kind of money on something that won't function smoothly on my hardware.
    For those who can afford to keep pushing more hardware and software purchases through their homes year after year I congratulate you. Well Done.
    FSX in 32bit works well enough for me and will have to do until I win the lottery or leave the table.

    Maybe when Lockheed can upgrade their versions without breaking things, or when some developers stop charging extra to those who bought for FSX to switch to P3D versions...
    My hope is that future hardware will make enough of a difference that 3rd party developers who also love FSX and are in the same boat as me will carry on - like they have with FS2004
    I can always justify new hardware.
    100% agree. Plus we already have dozens and dozens of aircraft in FSX, most of which don't get flown.
    Be yourself. Everyone else is already taken.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by heywooood View Post
    too bad.

    I have spent too much money on FSX to let it go and start over. I had a hard time justifying the expense once - it just isn't feasible to do it all over again.
    From my perspective, most of the Milviz product needed the 64bit overhead just to function properly. I refuse to spend that kind of money on something that won't function smoothly on my hardware.
    For those who can afford to keep pushing more hardware and software purchases through their homes year after year I congratulate you. Well Done.
    FSX in 32bit works well enough for me and will have to do until I win the lottery or leave the table.

    Maybe when Lockheed can upgrade their versions without breaking things, or when some developers stop charging extra to those who bought for FSX to switch to P3D versions...
    My hope is that future hardware will make enough of a difference that 3rd party developers who also love FSX and are in the same boat as me will carry on - like they have with FS2004
    I can always justify new hardware.

    My sentiments exactly...

  8. #8
    Dang and Blast!
    What does that mean for the F105 they had in the works?
    I've been waiting patiently for that one for eons....and would pay serious money for it.

  9. #9
    SOH-CM-2019 WarHorse47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Great Pacific Northwest
    Age
    72
    Posts
    3,256
    Quote Originally Posted by dggoofy View Post
    Hi,

    You surely saw this news : Milviz will stop FSX products. They will concentrate on 64bit P3D... Well OK.

    I'm happy they developped products till today.

    However I'm wondering how many does still use FSX as we can see here so many add-ons added regulary for FSX, even FS2004 and CFS2 ?

    Cheers

    Daniel
    (Stick on FSX!)
    Not unexpected. Other developers like Dino are rolling out products that are P3D only.

    I'm sticking with FSX for many of the reasons stated, but also because I have no intention on spending hours setting up a new flight sim and tuning things to work properly. I've already done that with FSXA and am pleased with the results. I prefer to enjoy the hobby (flying), and not spend time being a technician and tweaking things all the time. I may change my mind if and only if I replace my current hardware with something more powerful down the road, but for now its FSXA.
    -- WH

    If at first you don't succeed, try, try,try again. ... or go read the manual.

  10. #10
    Charter Member 2017 srgalahad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    CYYC or MMSD (GMT -7)
    Posts
    4,725
    Quote Originally Posted by WarHorse47 View Post
    I'm sticking with FSX for many of the reasons stated, but also because I have no intention on spending hours setting up a new flight sim and tuning things to work properly. I've already done that with FSXA and am pleased with the results. I prefer to enjoy the hobby (flying), and not spend time being a technician and tweaking things all the time. I may change my mind if and only if I replace my current hardware with something more powerful down the road, but for now its FSXA.
    AMEN!

    "To some the sky is the limit. To others it is home" anon.
    “Anyone who has never made a mistake has never tried anything new.” -Albert Einstein


  11. #11

    Very Limited Budget Plus A Whole Lot

    I am in the FSX/A crowd because of the hardware. I bought my current box version and the SP's when they came out. For the longest time I still flew FS9 until the XP computer quit and I had to replace both the laptop AND the "desktop" so I opted and bought for me a very capable Windows 7 laptop. It does a superb job I think even running ORBX. I would consider LM P3D V4x except according to their checkup of my system it will only run P3D V2 perfectly and V3 OK. I have watched videos of V2 and V3 and they're still 32bit so for my money my FSX/A is just as good so I don't need to spend the money especially since P3D "tolerates" my FSX stuff I read. With all the freeware and payware aircraft and scenery I have; all the freeware scenery and aircraft that are still out there it will probably be a long time until I switch. I can't afford to buy a new system and pay alimony LOL! GAS or Dino's recent releases which are FSX are fantastic. Or how about the gorgeous N30 scenery Falcon409 just did. There are still enough freeware AND payware developers I think that can find more than enough customers for FSX products and if two versions can be made within their development budget for the project, twice the customer base to present it to.

  12. #12
    Same old tune FS9 users were saying. FSX-SE needs no tweaks. Load up and fly!

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Jafo View Post
    Dang and Blast!
    What does that mean for the F105 they had in the works?
    I've been waiting patiently for that one for eons....and would pay serious money for it.
    Me too Jafo, me too. Maybe since it was started before the announcement it will be Milviz's final hurrah on FSX?

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Jafo View Post
    Dang and Blast!
    What does that mean for the F105 they had in the works?
    I've been waiting patiently for that one for eons....and would pay serious money for it.
    . . . not to mention the King Air

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Jafo View Post
    Dang and Blast!
    What does that mean for the F105 they had in the works?
    I've been waiting patiently for that one for eons....and would pay serious money for it.
    I would expect to see all of the Century series fighters in DCS before too long..
    enter..the Sandman

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by heywooood View Post
    I would expect to see all of the Century series fighters in DCS before too long..
    Seems to be where the money trail leads.
    "Illegitimum non carborundum".

    Corsair Obsidian 900D Full Tower. MSI X99A XPOWER GAMING TITANIUM. Intel Core i7 Extreme Edition 5960X Haswell-E LGA2011-3 8 Core @ 4.8GHz. Thermaltake Water 3 Riing RGB Cooler Premium Edition 6 x Riing 12 fans. ASUS ROG Strix GeForce RTX 2080 Ti OC Edition, 11GBx2 in SLI.
    Corsair Dominator Platinum 32G 2800MHz DDR4 Kit. LG BH16NS40 BluRay Reader/Writer. Corsair CMPSU-HX1000i FM 1000Watt x2.
    Samsung 850 EVO 500GB SSD x 3. Samsung 850 EVO 1TB SSD x1.
    Western Digital WD Gold 4TB Datacenter HDD.
    Acer Predator X34P 34inch IPS LED Curved Gaming Monitor 3440x1440 120Hz

  17. #17
    From my chair:

    All of the above comments are valid and indicative of a common dilemma. Technology and markets are always moving forward.
    If I may, I'd like to add one or two additional observations.

    I find myself in a situation where I am more or less forced to build a completely new system, with very limited resources. I am, of course, in need of a system that is capable of not only running a 64bit simulation platform, but also effectively managing resource intensive art, video & 3D modeling software. After some concentrated research I find that I will be able to pull off my rebuild for less than I had originally forecast, and move up to a Generation 9 system. Am I making sacrifices to make it happen? Sure.

    For those who are comfortable in FSX 32bit that's a great thing. Add-ons are plentiful and very well developed. If your concerns about moving into P3D 64bit center on the cost of upgrading systems, let me offer some good news.

    The price of processing, video cards, memory and storage have become very favorable for building extremely capable systems at a modest cost. Tech has advanced so quickly in the last two years, what used to be considered expensive has become quite affordable. Memory, SSD, CPU, GPU and motherboards only one generation old have come down dramatically. Realistically, one can build a very fast and capable system for a few hundred dollars. I would do some serious price shopping and find out exactly what it would cost to build a system that would suit your needs. You may be pleasantly surprised. I was.

    That said, I'd like to make a point about P3Dv4 64bit/PBR in its current version, and V5 which will most likely be full PBR...from the developers standpoint.

    PREPAR3D is coming very, very close to a stage of development that rivals, or even surpasses DCS. Bear in mind that P3D is a global simulator, that will very likely make full use of Physically Based Rendering and eventually ray tracing. The impact of that cannot be understated, especially as it applies to the simulation environment. My ongoing PBR development, including side by side comparison of DCS and P3Dv4 PBR have shown me, conclusively, that the two are becoming virtually indistinguishable. This brings me to the point of the developers.

    When developers begin to focus on modeling for P3D using the same tools and techniques that DCS developers have been exploring for quite some time, the improvements in that simulation will be dramatic. This comes at a cost. Speaking from my own experience working with PBR modeling, particle rendering, ray tracing and their applications in the simulator, it is logical that developers must choose carefully where they wish to place their R&D energies.

    The differences between FSX modeling and 64bit PBR modeling will very shortly require that any developer who wishes to offer products for both will be required to maintain two separate and dedicated development modalities. This will require twice the energy and expense. The learning curve alone is prohibitively expensive and the investments in software can be staggering. Most developers are small or mid sized operations. Some are individuals. Amortizing the cost of moving into the main stream "gaming" world are simply unrealistic when attempting to maintain two work flows, art programs, marketing, support...etc.

    Our community is facing a kind of crossroads. The good thing is that everyone can make their own choice and remain very comfortable with their decisions. I support the developers who choose to move forward as the technology moves upward on the exponential. I also encourage any and all interested in developing for FSX to learn the process. The software is inexpensive, some of it is even free i.3. GMAX or Gimp. Those are fine platforms and can be utilized very well.

    I have enjoyed Milviz projects, including the King Air in it's various stages of development, for years now. I'll be quite content to wait for that airplane and all future releases. I absolutely can't wait to see what comes out of their labs for V5. I congratulate them for their commitment to a fine product line over the years, and for the courage to make a tough decision.

    Kudos, and good luck gentlemen.
    He who knows nothing is closer to the truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods and errors.
    Thomas Jefferson

    Intel Core i9-9900K Coffee Lake | Cooler MasterAir Maker 8 CPU Thermal Cooler | ASUS ROG Strix Z390-E LGA 1151 | CORSAIR Vengeance RGB Pro 32GB 288-Pin DDR4/3200 | EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti 11GB | SAMSUNG 860 EVO Series M.2 1TB SSD | Mushkin Chronos 240GB 2.5 SSD | WD Black 2TB 7200 RPM |WD Black 5TB 7200 RPM | CORSAIR HX Series HX1200 PSU | Windows 10 HP 64-bit

  18. #18
    Yes well to be clear - I have no problem upgrading my hardware and laying out some dollars to do so.
    That is all money well spent. I think your assertion that developing for so many various flight sims is expensive is unassailable. And that building virtual models for the 64bit sims is exceedingly difficult making developers even more vulnerable to market ‘failure’ when a product release falls far short of sales expectations. This to my mind makes ongoing FSX development a bit MORE attractive to indivdual and small house developers who want to make money without the overhead.
    Again - I dont mind buying new hardware when there is a quantum leap in CPU / GPU technology - thats money well spent. What I refuse to do at this point is buy things like libraries of scenery and aircraft I ALREADY OWN. I expect that while the 32bit will continue to be a bottleneck I am hoping advances in hardware will eventually provide me such a huge bottle it wont matter.
    enter..the Sandman

  19. #19

    To P3D or not to P3D-That is the Question

    Thanks Heywooood, Gman5250, and all. Though I think it is inevitable that eventually I may have to upgrade, I started off with FS9 and then on to FSX with which I am totally happy. My main concern is like Heywooood states, all the earlier models that I have would be extremely expensive to replace. Most developers now offer a choice, e.g. Carenado with its tick the box: FSX, FSX Steam, P3D etc. I have opened accounts with most of the payware developers I use, so I believe that hopefully, should I go to P3D in the future, that those models I have already purchased, could be re-downloaded through "My Account" to P3D. It would still mean a lot of work, but at least the money has already been spent. Milviz products have always been excellent, at last count I have 8, and I would hate to lose them should I not be able to download to P3D. In the meantime, I'll stick with FSX for as long as possible.

  20. #20
    I dont mind buying new hardware when there is a quantum leap in CPU / GPU technology - thats money well spent. What I refuse to do at this point is buy things like libraries of scenery and aircraft I ALREADY OWN. I expect that while the 32bit will continue to be a bottleneck I am hoping advances in hardware will eventually provide me such a huge bottle it wont matter.


    P3D 64 bit is the quantum leap. I believe some on this thread explaining why they are sticking to FSX may be short changing themselves and perhaps are being - unnecessarily - defeatist, due to a misapprehension of P3D v 4+. I built my rig seven years ago strictly to run FSX. I haven't changed a thing since jumping to P3D when they went to 64 bit. People here may correct me - I have not researched the specs in a while - but my understanding has been the whole rationale of 64 bit was to if anything reduce the demand on available cpu/gpu and memory so that - in my case at least - my FPS actually doubled going from FSX to P3D with the same hardware. As gman5250 says, a lot of hardware upgrades can be done today on a tight budget (though Fx cards at least a year ago were very pricey due to bitcoin mining but not sure where they are today).

    As far as backward compatibility and potential paying twice for addons, that is really more the exception than the rule in my experience. Firstly, most if not all native FSX aircraft models can be copied and pasted into P3D4. Conversions of older models (e.g., Milton's Howard, CalClassics DC-6B) are increasing more than ever and it's a joy to fly these again in P3D. Second, Orbx has wisely and helpfully allowed owners of FTX global to upgrade to P3D4 at no cost. I have to say, if you just add Active Sky (payware) and tomatoshade (freeware) the look of the sim is absolutely breathtaking and silky smooth with 40-60 FPS. The cost of buying P3D itself can be half of the cost of a single payware aircraft add on.

    I moved quite late to FSX and hesitated a little before moving to P3D - and now regret not moving earlier in both cases. Part of this is the very human trait of liking to stay in one's comfort zone. FSX is now 12 years old. I fully respect individuals' budgets, preferences and choices. My point is that with fairly modest means - and an open mind - people may be able to enjoy a massively improved experience that they may be missing out on unnecessarily.
    Well I've been to one World Fair a picnic and a rodeo and that's the stupidest thing I've ever heard come over a set of earphones.

  21. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Catboat View Post
    Thanks Heywooood, Gman5250, and all. Though I think it is inevitable that eventually I may have to upgrade, I started off with FS9 and then on to FSX with which I am totally happy. My main concern is like Heywooood states, all the earlier models that I have would be extremely expensive to replace. Most developers now offer a choice, e.g. Carenado with its tick the box: FSX, FSX Steam, P3D etc. I have opened accounts with most of the payware developers I use, so I believe that hopefully, should I go to P3D in the future, that those models I have already purchased, could be re-downloaded through "My Account" to P3D. It would still mean a lot of work, but at least the money has already been spent. Milviz products have always been excellent, at last count I have 8, and I would hate to lose them should I not be able to download to P3D. In the meantime, I'll stick with FSX for as long as possible.
    Out of the last 18 years of simming the last two have been my happiest with a new Coffee Lake PC and associated ancilliaries running FSX:SE beautifully. Also as FSX and flight simming in general appears to be losing its appeal ebay has been an absolute paradise for cheap boxed scenery and planes. It seems a shame that so many people struggled for years to make FSX perfect and gave up just as the home computer and Steam came to fruition.

  22. #22
    SOH-CM-2017 BendyFlyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Country New South Wales Australia
    Posts
    647
    I can also understand why anybody in this business commercially would shift to say P3D and 64 bit development, if your in the computer game you simply have no other choice. Legacy software work is a very narrow niche indeed. I can also understand a lot of peoples view about the cost of a new rig or alternatively upgrading current sim models etc for P3D. I guess you would have to say if your going to make that change a developer are you moving into a diminishing market, after all FSX has been declining steadily in terms of users which is why MS booted it off shore to LM in the first place.

    I fall into the camp of having spent years working on FSX and a myriad of supporting programming and other development tools I now have so customised my FSX that I have neither the energy or the inclination to go and do that all over again in a 64 bit environment. My FSX has become a time capsule in more ways than one, I have customised the scenery etc to an earlier period (Basically pre 1960) and I am still at it doing different places about the world as my interest shifts with a variety of historical aircraft and where they were operated. I just would not do all that work again in for P3D and more especially like others I have a 64 bit PC and it is more than adequate for anything else I do, yes it is ageing but when if falls over I am backed up and will merely keep the same going again.

    I also prepared to tolerate the limitations of the 32 bit FSX because simply there are very many models that just made it to FSX via port overs or remodelling to FSX not to mention even Milviz finally did renditions of aircraft that I really wanted the DHC2 and DHC3 for example. Others like the Capt Sim B707 and 727 do not look likely to get redone for P3D and I just cannot see many other developers who are really one man shows making the change either, they may or they may not we have already seen how many fine builders and developers bailed out when FSX came along. I guess on lots of levels my aircraft collection is complete and there are no new versions of anything I would get and the few that I would like brought back from the 2004 era will probably never be done in P3D either. Now I do my own scenery I can keep that process going for ever probably well nearly.

    I was the end of the road some time ago for FSX that is true but now there are two competitors for those keen to move up and modernise P3D and XPlane and I have to say I prefer the latter for lots of reasons.

    Interesting anyway because MILVIZ and others still need to make a dollar but a simmer like me is unlikely to help them keep afloat, now there is a real challenge.

  23. #23
    Just to give a programmer's perspective (and one from Milviz at that), my dll gauges are getting kinda big. Takes a while to compile. Now if I have to do that 6 times for each installer (eval, commercial, entertainment for x86 and x64), it can get painful, especially when I am trying to manage at least 4 different projects and do R&D to keep up.

    Secondly, P3D v4 makes it super easy to do what I always dreamed of, namely genuine IR FLIR/LANTIRN, A-G radar patchmaps, and a TFR E-scope with genuine raw video.

    Third, LM opened the interface to DX11 render to texture functions, and while I could do something similar in FSX (We caused a stir with our DX11 cockpit lighting in FSX back in the day), it was painful and hard to do. Now it is much easier to do it without hurting framerates.

    And finally, LM also opened the interface to completely stop the sim from fighting back on our external flight models, which is good news because our external flight model guy on the T-38C and F-15C and F-16C already puts out flight models that rival if not exceed DCS quality.
    -JB

  24. #24

    Historic Realism

    I understand what you are saying and where you are going as a developer. In a different venue I had a commercial hobby business for 30 years. I can only speak from my corner that I won't be able to maybe ever experience these improvements because at least for the near future there is no new computer or LM in my future. I wish you much success truly and that the LM V4 community support all your efforts. This is closed for me. Back to my FSX/A.

  25. #25
    Senior Administrator huub vink's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Noordwijk, The Netherlands (EHVB)
    Age
    60
    Posts
    7,133
    Thanks for uploading this graph YoYo. It really makes me feel special, as I'm part of a small minority and in the near future I will be even more special .
    And being special has its price. So I can easily accept Milviz will not longer develop for me....

    Cheers,
    Huub


    Quote Originally Posted by YoYo View Post
    For me no problem. Its a big problem for developer to support all versions in the same time. In different versions bugs are present or not.
    FSX corner is popular still, but the FSX its the title from ... 2007 .
    Now on my disc I havent FSX from years, just new versions of P3D to the 4.4 and soon 4.5 (and this year or next maybe - P3D 5.0 with new engine).
    FSX to P3D it was big jump.

    Btw.


    https://download.navigraph.com/docs/...2018-final.pdf

Members who have read this thread: 486

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •