P3D vs. non P3D aircraft

[donnybalonny]

Over the last decade, flightsimming has gone extremely commercial, so the flightsim business is just the same as the rest of the world. Its ok to cheat and lie if you dont get caught.

[donnybalonny]

As a parallel to what has been discussed in the second part of this thread:

Does anyone know of someone who´s been able to install the FSX version of the Flight1 GTN750 gps into P3Dv2.5
(there´s a reason why I ask this way, this means that you dont have to answer personally. Mr./Miss/Mrs. someone can be whoever)

I have FSX-SE and P3Dv2.5 running
Flight 1 charges 50,-$ for the FSX version which I can accept, but I cant accept that I have to pay an EXTRA 70,-$ to install it in P3D as well. Its completely far out business policy and thats why I dont have the GPS. I havent found a 10 - 20$ extra upgrade to P3D if you have the FSX version.

[Mach3DS]

Can you point me to a native P3dv2 model to try in FSX please.

I believe any of Dino's F-35s latest versions were compiled via p3d. same with the aermacchi. Maybe Dino can confirm this.

[DaveWG]

I do have my own models compiled as P3dv2 native, but I was hoping fsxar177 could supply / direct me to one that works in both P3dv2 and FSX, as none of the ones I've tried so far do.

[falcon409]

Flight 1 charges 50,-$ for the FSX version which I can accept, but I cant accept that I have to pay an EXTRA 70,-$ to install it in P3D as well. Its completely far out business policy and thats why I dont have the GPS. I havent found a 10 - 20$ extra upgrade to P3D if you have the FSX version.

I looked at that also when I got Bill's Lear Jet and again when Flysimware released their MU-2. I read it as two separate costs. . .$50 for the FSX version and $70 for the P3D version. Flight1 had stated back when P3D first came on the scene that due to licensing it would not sell anything related to P3D (or something to that effect). However there is a Training/Commercial aspect to the license which would allow Flight1 to sell to that segment, as a "Professional Addon" and it's that side that the P3D version is directed to, hence the difference in pricing. I could be completely out in left field on that, but that's the way I saw it. Personally, I don't care how fancy a GPS is it ain't worth $70 bucks.

[donnybalonny]

IMHO, what Flight1 and others do is being greedy, which is a capital sin....

[fsxar177]

I do have my own models compiled as P3dv2 native, but I was hoping fsxar177 could supply / direct me to one that works in both P3dv2 and FSX, as none of the ones I've tried so far do.

Ohh hand Dave, I'm sorry, I don't recall which developers have stepped up to the 64-bit xtomdl. My projects are either under strict NDA, or personal in nature, so sorry, can't share those..

Might I ask.. What happens when you try?

- Joseph

[DaveWG]

FSX pops up with a "Cannot display visual model" ( or words to that effect).

Could you not just quickly export & compile a box just to see?

[fsxar177]

Yeah.. I could do something like that.

I'm curious what your pipeline is...

For me,

Blender - xtomdl - FSX

[T Square]

I got Bill's Lear Jet and again when Flysimware released their MU-2. I read it as two separate costs. . .$50 for the FSX version and $70 for the P3D version. Flight1 had stated back when P3D first came on the scene that due to licensing it would not sell anything related to P3D (or something to that effect). However there is a Training/Commercial aspect to the license which would allow Flight1 to sell to that segment, as a "Professional Addon" and it's that side that the P3D version is directed to, hence the difference in pricing. I could be completely out in left field on that, but that's the way I saw it. Personally, I don't care how fancy a GPS is it ain't worth $70 bucks.

Even worse Falcon, I have been told time and again that with the exception of price and an on screen "watermark" there is no difference between the standard and professional versions of P3D. Why then our certain venders charging a 10 to 20 dollar difference for the same aircraft bundle. Only difference is one is bundled for "Standard P3D" and the other is Bundled for "Professional P3D" and supposedly there is no difference between the two

[DaveWG]

Yeah.. I could do something like that.

I'm curious what your pipeline is...

For me,

Blender - xtomdl - FSX

The origin is irrelevant, it's the format of the XtoMDL output that is of interest.

[Daube]

Even worse Falcon, I have been told time and again that with the exception of price and an on screen "watermark" there is no difference between the standard and professional versions of P3D. Why then our certain venders charging a 10 to 20 dollar difference for the same aircraft bundle. Only difference is one is bundled for "Standard P3D" and the other is Bundled for "Professional P3D" and supposedly there is no difference between the two

The thing is, the professional version lets you make money with it (by using it to sell services, like trainings etc.... for which you get paid).
The Academic version does not allow any revenue-generator activity.
If you're going to earn money with the product of a company, this company will charge you more for that product.
If you don't plan to use your product in a professional way, then you don't need the professional licence.

[SpaceWeevil]

Even worse Falcon, I have been told time and again that with the exception of price and an on screen "watermark" there is no difference between the standard and professional versions of P3D. Why then our certain venders charging a 10 to 20 dollar difference for the same aircraft bundle. Only difference is one is bundled for "Standard P3D" and the other is Bundled for "Professional P3D" and supposedly there is no difference between the two

There's also no difference between, say, the student and other versions of MS Office except how much it costs and who they say can use it.

I'm only surprised that ANY of this comes as a surprise - Lockheed Martin is a massive global arms and technology business, and Prepar3d is their professional training simulation platform. The pricing disparity you mention for add-ons reflects that they expect professionals and devs, who may be making money from it, to pay more than students.

The bottom line is that if we don't like LM's business model there's no compulsion to buy into it, but I don't think anyone could accuse them of being unclear about the direction they intended for P3D.

(Sorry, Daube beat me to it by 4 minutes...)

[SkippyBing]

FSX pops up with a "Cannot display visual model" ( or words to that effect).

Could you not just quickly export & compile a box just to see?

I get that too, pretty sure I'm using the 2.4 SDK, if that's pertinent. I think there's something about texture changes in the SDK? Certainly the cockpit won't work in FSX as it's got a working mirror.

[DaveWG]

To quote from the SDK

Prepar3D v2 File Format

With the release of Prepar3D v2 several changes were made to the model file format as well as materials. These changes include utilizing 32-bit indices instead of 16-bit, addition of material z-biasing, as well as some additions to MouseRect's for ISimObjects. Due to these changes, models exported with the Prepar3D v2 SDK will not be compatible with Prepar3D 1.X.

[T Square]

I understand what's going on from LM's perspective . What I don't understand is a developer who creates one aircraft model and then distributes the that model as an FSX model for one price, tacks 10 to 20 dollars more for a P3D standard model, and then hikes the price again and labels that a P3D professional model, when in fact the only difference in the model is where the installer directs the model to be installed. Correct me if I am totally out in left field, and I'm not trying to piss anyone off, but this would seem to be the case.

[fsxar177]

T Square, you are exactly right..

Dave, I'll work up something for you regarding the xtomdl.

- Joseph

[jmig]

I understand what's going on from LM's perspective . What I don't understand is a developer who creates one aircraft model and then distributes the that model as an FSX model for one price, tacks 10 to 20 dollars more for a P3D standard model, and then hikes the price again and labels that a P3D professional model, when in fact the only difference in the model is where the installer directs the model to be installed. Correct me if I am totally out in left field, and I'm not trying to piss anyone off, but this would seem to be the case.

T-Square, I don't know if I am correct here (Maybe Bill or another dev. can tell us) however, the additional charges may have to do with the licencing agreements with LM? I have know Scott Gentile with A2A for many flight sim years. I have always found him to be straight, up front , and honest. I know A2A is one of the companies that charges more for the different versions of PD3. VRS will not sell the inexpensive TACPAC version to Professional and Devs. I know, I had Professional 2.4 and when I upgraded to 2.5, I bought the Academic version just so I could fly the F-18 and use the TACPAC. VRS has said that they can't be sure an owner of Professional PD3 won't use the inexpensive TACPAC to make money. So, they only allow it to be used with Academic.

When you consider the pervasiveness of piracy among flight sim consumers, is it any wonder the developers are concerned. I have been a beta tester for several companies over the years. I have seen the complexity and time to develop an aircraft go from months to years. The Milviz F-4 took over two years to develop. That is a lot of time and money Milviz needs to recoup. Milviz charges more for the combination FSX/PD3 version of their aircraft. You get two aircraft for only a few dollars more.

Considering the higher experience of PD3, I don't mind the devs. getting another $10 or so. I suspect when the 64 bit version comes out, we may be re-buying a lot of add-ons.

[T Square]

John

If I am wrong please correct my thinking and I truly hope I am incorrect. I know it takes the developer/artist, a lot of work and time to design a model, and they also deserve to be paid for that effort. However if I am correct and what I am saying is true, then this type of behavior not only will eventually destroy the hobby, but promotes piracy ?

[jmig]

John

If I am wrong please correct my thinking and I truly hope I am incorrect. I know it takes the developer/artist, a lot of work and time to design a model, and they also deserve to be paid for that effort. However if I am correct and what I am saying is true, then this type of behavior not only will eventually destroy the hobby, but promotes piracy ?

T, I can't argue with anything you just wrote. Hopefully, no one will abuse the exchange.

[fsxar177]

First The P3D SDK is free ... (It's basically just the MS SDK with a few little tweaks and upgrades)

And the P3D Dev. License is only $9.95/Month for TWO copies. So that's about $60 per year for a developer, if you share with a partner or friend. I would rather the developer raised his price because he had to buy fuel for the aircraft being studied.... But charging a large percentage extra, PER DOWNLOAD, and then simply lying about the compatibility.. That is just flat-out false advertising, and frankly I don't care how honest or upstanding the person or company appears to be. It's still false advertising.

Please people go look at P3D's list of featured developers.

Now .. ask yourself.. How many of those guys are making a big markup on their P3D compatible add-ons? Also - How many are once size fits all price? There's your honest companies, and your dishonest. Simple.

It used to be we would read consumer reports, then go make a purchase.. In the FS realm, we're dropping $50-$100 on stuff all the time.. Do your homework guys.

Now remember, I'm mostly speaking of aircraft.. I know the weather guys, and some scenery devs, face a different set of obstacles. That is a whole different story... I understand that aspect.

- Joseph

[bazzar]

Joseph, if you read the partner developer details, you will see that the developer subscription allows for "complementary" add-ons (in my book that is freeware) and if you wish to make commercial offerings you need to buy a commercial license.

This little line: * Note that development licenses are for internal development use only. Deployed systems will require a full commercial license.

is the one that matters.

[donnybalonny]

John

If I am wrong please correct my thinking and I truly hope I am incorrect. I know it takes the developer/artist, a lot of work and time to design a model, and they also deserve to be paid for that effort. However if I am correct and what I am saying is true, then this type of behavior not only will eventually destroy the hobby, but promotes piracy ?

I completely agree with what you are writing. (also this about the hobby and piracy) But for me its very easy to understand even though I dont agree and dont like with how things are being done.

The flightsim addon world is just a mirror of the rest of the world. Moral ans ethics is something from a romantic past. What there is now is consumerism and if you can sell a product for x-money then its ok and allowed. There are no rules. If you dont like it dont buy it. Unfortunately that is what there is.
I make and sell a product myself and putting a price on it is very complicated. You can find the same kind of product which implies the same materials and the same amount of work but which cost twice and you can find again the same materials and workhours that cost half my price. Its the law of the jungle and nothing else. There´s nothing correct or incorrect, there´s only chaos and we the consumers accept or dont.
Personally, I buy most of my addons on sale and I look for freeware scenery. There´s a lot of very good freeware scenery out there. And at the same time I tell myself that i dont need everything in order to be happy.

[Paul Domingue]

A savvy entrepreneur sets price by one rule, what the market can stand. Knowing this takes a lot of homework. Since we live in a capitalist society we can't fault this. As far as setting two different prices for the same product we have been living with that for a long time. Case in point, Ford Motor Co. had been selling the Crown Victoria for one price then with cosmetic changes selling it for more under the name Mercury Grand Marque, the Lincoln Towncar was just a Crown Victoria with a different body. This may be considered lying by omission but it's what the market can stand.

[n4gix]

The latest p3d .mdl compilers ARE REVERSE COMPATIBLE WITH FSX.

Sorry, but that is simply not factually accurate.
The Header tag on a native P3Dv2.x model is:
RIFFmŒ‘ PV20MDLH

The Header tag on a native FSX mode is:
RIFF‹n„ MDLXMDLH

When FSX reads the Header and sees PV20MDLH it will refuse to load with a "Model Format Unsupported" message.