Tuesday, November 19, 2013

Lockheed Martin Prepar3D V2.0 imminent!

P3D. Ahh finally! It's what I have been waiting for! P3D 2.0! According to Lockheed Martin, V2.0 is now due for imminent release! How soon? Well according to Wesley Bard, head of development, release is positively slated for this month! And yes, it will take full advantage of all 4 cores plus it will utilize resources from your GPU! This is is my opinion, THE next flight simulation platform. But hey, we will personally know for sure soon enough in the coming weeks!


Here is the link to the LM forum post denoting P3D will be released this month per WBard:

Also confirmed by Razbam and FlightBeam Studios

According to Ron from Razbam:
"Some pics of our Helldiver in P3DV2.0...FYI with P3DV2.0 Professional Plus you get weapons (guided/unguided) FLIR systems, ECM pods, countermeasures etc (obviously all should be created by 3rd party devs), it´s going to be awesome."

According to Some1:
"One of the benefits of the new lighting system is that all aircraft now have nice, smooth VC shadows, without the need to make changes to the MDL file like we have to in FSX. This means all FSX aircraft running in P3D have shadows like that out of the box."

According to Amir FlightBeam:
"Now that some restrictions have been lifted, we can safely tell you Flightbeam has been participating with Lockheed Martin's Prepar3d V2 BETA, for two reasons

1. Make P3D v2 better by providing feedback to LM
2. Make our products 100% compatible. 

First off, this needs to be said about some crazy rumors I've been reading...
The folks over at LM are closely listening to FSX customers. I can assure you that the wild rumors about LM chasing out single end-user customers are untrue. 

Now on to exciting things... this IS the FSX replacement. Everything said here comes from first hand experience and testing. Just from our screenshot attached, you will see several things already. Dynamic cockpit shadows, native bloom (no performance penalty), and volumetric fog. This is just the tip of the iceberg, LM has extensively optimized the engine and it runs much more efficiently than FSX. ALL your CPU cores will be used. Your GPU/Video card will finally take a beating (I know mine has). LM Engineers have also modified code to better optimize memory management, which also means less OOM. And did I already mention, its now a DirectX 11 engine?

And what better news than this: All our products are compatible now, and LM is expected to release V2 THIS MONTH."

One thing is for sure, AirDailyX will have P3D 2.0 on day 1 of release so stay tuned for my impressions! Great news indeed! Stay tuned!!

_______________________________________________
Check us out daily and like us on Facebook!
Go fly! We'll take care of the rest! Nobody has your back like AirDailyX. 
daily news | reviews | first looks | billboard | interviews | comics | live broadcasts

97 comments:

ggi said...

Sounds great!! I'm using photoscenery in FSX and FTX type scenery in P3D, so there will be a space for FSX on my hard drive. However, if this v2.0 is as good as they claim, maybe FSX will be retired early. The thought of a clean install with P3D v2 is also quite daunting! (but no bad thing either...)

James Goggi said...

P3D? No PMDG, no use...

LHSimulations said...

You can count on LHSimulations too :)


Sándor

Alcides Segovia said...

Can't wait. LM TAKE MY MONEY

Jack said...

It needs an entertainment license before FSX is cast aside by the community.

Kevin Firth said...

No, it really doesn't. I won't be entertained, but I will get a lot out of the simulation.... :)

777pilot said...

+1

LHSimulations said...

What is the heck at PMDG? I'm not 100% up to date with all sim news. Why PMDG refusing P3D?

DAndre Newman said...

Because PMDG products are for entertainment purposes and the P3D EULA is very specific that P3D is not meant for entertainment.

But there are also rumors that given the relationship between PMDG and Boeing, PMDG will not allow their products work in a simulator of a competing aerospace company.

Personally, I think this is why PMDG purposefully ensured the 777 would not work in P3D. They have nothing to loose if people wish to use their own tools to make it work...

Anyway, maybe someone else can explain it better...

Dave Nicoll said...

Well said Kevin..Just wish people would actually read what LM have said and the wording they use...

Tubeflyer said...

Maybe it's time to start forcing there hand. If many simmers jump on board with P3D V2, then they will have no choice...

DAndre Newman said...

I agree with you guys. This is the official replacement of FSX as far as I am concerned. If there are any developers that refuse to get on board with it, I just won't use their products. Nuff said.

People were heavily on my ass for sticking with FS9 for so many years and not switching to FSX because FS9 was out dated, now the shoe is on the other foot.

mike said...

means less OOM ?

how about NO OOM this time...
what a joke.

Dario said...

I agree! PMDG will follow the market...

Sean McFadden said...

I'm so tired of the idiotic entertainment use discussion, LM clearly states that their Academic License can be used for "Learning":

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

Def. of Learning:

learning
noun

: the activity or process of gaining knowledge or skill by studying, practicing, being taught, or experiencing something : the activity of someone who learns

With Prepar3D obviously advertised as not being a gaming platform, I just find it so ironic that some of the most hardcore FS software (PMDG 777 & 737 NGX) out there is disabled purposely so as to work only in FSX.

I would have never ever thought that one day developers would actually invest time and money in preventing their software to run outside of FSX. :Face Palm:

Regulate said...

It's less OOM because V2 is still not 64 bit. Rumors are that is for the next upgrade, which will be an even more significant amount of work to recode the sim. If P3DV2 works great with photoscenery and AI addon traffic like FAIB, AIA, and TFS, them I'm in!

DMac10121 said...

This looks great! Do we have any idea on the price point yet?

DAndre Newman said...

I agree. Can I not use the PMDG777 to learn how to fly the 777? Yeah, I may never actually fly the real thing, but seems a waste of time to make it just like the real thing ans operate just like the real thing, yet not allow it to be used for people to train themselves in an academic platform. It's not all entertainment.

Look at Majestic. They are totally happy about theit Q400 being use to train or entertainment. Same with Airline2Sim who is using real world pilots to train.

I can say this, if I chose to learn how to fully operate the PMDG777 perfectly as it is meant to be used, it sure as shit would not be entertainment any more than if I were at an airline learning it.

Too many take this hobby way too seriously to consider it entertainment all the time.

Fixing addons so people cant use them with P3D is beyond me. So fucking beyond me. sorry for the language...

Stefan Schwarz said...

I guess this means it's the end of the road for Flight1 and PMDG then. Every sane developer is going to be supporting P3D v2 and those that don't, clearly won't have a market big enough to turn a profit anymore.

I can't imagine that PMDG will have much volume in future FSX sales, I for one won't be buying another FSX only product from them, they missed their window of opportunity for their 777 expansion pack too, I no longer have an interest in that now that the P3D v2 release is around the corner.

Flight1 and PMDG will forever be in my hall of shame for crippling their products to not work in P3D, what a joke.


flynw said...

Learning and entertainment are not mutually exclusive as some people (and companies) think. I love learning about certain things so I see no reason that a lack of an entertainment license should stop any company from providing their products

Mike said...

yup.

Kevin Firth said...

Capt RR has some expensive and no doubt very clever lawyers working on behalf of PMDG. If they are clever enough to find ways to say things can't be done, they are most probably clever enough to find ways things CAN be done as well, otherwise they aren't great lawyers IMHO! PMDG clearly have the far more lucrative professional training market in their sights, and we humble simmers just provide spin off pennies in their pockets to help subsidise the production costs of their products. As far as I am concerned, I'm glad I haven't bought the 777, because it will be a big bye bye from me to PMDG in a month. A real crying shame but let's move on. There is now a gap in the P3D market and someone will no doubt move to fill it, even if it isn't clear yet who that might be :)

High Plains Flyer said...

It sounds like someone at both PMDG and Flight1 dropped a turd in the punchbowl. (This is a common phrase when an attorney, accountant or other bean counter unnecessarily poisons a deal.)

It is entirely reasonable to believe that LM has an entirely different approach to what is entertainment and what is not. I absolutely believe that they do not want to be in the video game business.

But on the other hand, I do believe that they want to promote aviation. Consider what their real business is: making high tech military equipment for the U.S. (and other) militaries. When they go to Congress for a new project, they would like to have the public backing them up. Also, much of their work serves to promote military recruitment. I am actually rather surprised that they are not giving away the sorfware in schools or to anyone who wants it.

Thad Wheeler said...

I can only wonder about the speculation of PMDG's relationship with Boeing and P3D being a competitor product. It gives little reason to why the B1900, JS41, and to a certain extent the MD11 have not been modified or supported with P3D installers. Although the MD11 is under Boeings ownership with the purchase of McDonnell Douglas, Boeing never produced them and very few remain in service outside cargo operators. The 777 and even possibly the 737 may fall under this speculation, but in my opinion, not the others. Since PMDG's other aircraft have not been even remotely offered to P3D users, I can only speculate that other forces may be at play with PMDG's decision to not support their products within Prepar3D.

Thad Wheeler said...

Kevin is correct. Prepar3D will never, and can not ever run under an entertainment license. It would put the software under a "game" definition which would have serious consequences on how 3rd party company's could implement the software in ways L.M. does not want to see it used. There's more going on with the licensing than the majority of banter that has ruled in the forums.

Thad Wheeler said...

The greatest hypocrisy *IS* PMDG's very own EULA. Ironically it states that their products are not to be used for "familiarization" and "procedural training", yet the material they provide you is the same material Boeing uses to train pilots for, you guessed it!, familiarization and procedural training. The minute you stuff their recent products into FSX and use their source material you are in breach of PMDG's EULA through no fault of your own. To further stuff things up, their EULA also states the product can be used for "educational purposes"!
Funny thing is, the very customer they cater to is also the very same customer who will be using Prepar3D, it most likely won't be the Abacus crowd...
I too have to agree, that PMDG's marriage with FSX is nothing more than a stepping stone to the much bigger meat and potatoes, the professional commercial market. Current users of their latest material are likely nothing more than the proving grounds for that transition. I don't have much use for companies that dangle big carrots on a stick with one hand whilst hiding a metal pipe behind their back with the other. I recall an old post RR had made stating very similar concerns in regard with Lockheed Martin's Prepar3D and it's users. Wouldn't it be ironic...

Alcides Segovia said...

If PMDG does not get on board with then then I'll just be forced to start flying AXE A320 and just like that the Boeing Airbus competition becomes simulated as well. The reason that I fly these simulators so excessively is to prepare for the future. I practice for my PPL and I learn procedures. The entertainment part keeps the dream going. I cannot deny that FSX forms a part of my life and the truth is I cannot see any other platform be as simple to hop into as the current FSX platform which contributes to live in P3D 2

Nick said...

PMDG won't allow their stuff to be used in P3D because of a fear of litigation.

Up until now PMDG have marketed their aircraft as *entertainment* products for use in an *entertainment* platform - FSX. With the widespread availability of P3D the line between entertainment and training software is becoming very blurred.

Imagine of it emerged the Asiana 777 pilot who crashed at KSFO had been using the PMDG 777 in P3D as an unofficial training or learning aid - PMDG would be wide open to pretty massive litigation.

*This* is what PMDG are thinking about. Look back and you'll see they stated their decision to not support P3D was after taking legal advice, and RSR has said himself it would only take one incident for the litigation to start rolling in.

ALX WNT said...

I dont know you guys, but i will not stick to 10 years old simulation just because PMDG wont support a next-gen one. PMDG can go and do nasty things to their addons on ancient FSX. I will go with P3D V2 with less-OOM, more stable, graphically enhanced simulation. I dont care if i wont have 737 or 747 of PMDG. Someone will come and do the stuff PMDG dont want to.

Who cares really ? PMDG does exist because we created that demand. We simply demand something else, and if they do it, someone will come up.

This is the basic rule of business, developer listens demand/customer. Customers do not obey what developer do.

William Pierce said...

Everybody is talking about PMDG like the big bad grinch trying to sabotage their P3D dreams. Don't you think if they could make money on P3D customers they'd be all over it? Does anybody remember the fact that Boeing almost sued them when they released their first Boeing sim? Imagine getting a call from a Boeing lawyer. Messing with Boeing trademarks and rights is not a joke, they have the legal budget to vaporize PMDG if they wanted. And since most of PMDG's popular products are Boeing planes (that promote themselves as being officially licensed products) they aren't going to bite the hand that feeds them. PMDG doesn't make the 777 or 737, Boeing does, and PMDG will always respect that relationship (and the limitations are terms of it). If you guys really want PMDG planes supported in P3D, don't lean on PMDG, lean on Boeing - and good luck with that!

ALX WNT said...

LOL. PMDG is the one who is complaining about EULA, not Boeing. Also;

''Don't you think if they could make money on P3D customers they'd be all over it?''

So you think P3D will be a failure and people will stick with FSX ? Or if PMDG does something for a new simulator no one will buy it because we love to be tortured, get OOMs, get fatal errors and CTDs and we love to spend our precious time with tweaks for flying 10 minutes ?

Another LOL material here.

Td Avart said...

All this on-going PMDG drama makes me glad I didn't fork over a bundle of cash for it. Not that crazy about the visuals anyway. On topic, I feel a little better about making the switch with the assurance about single users. One thing I wonder about is how this will affect AI traffic. I have a big collection and took a hit with my FS9 models in X (no, won't buy UT2, etc). I hope the FS9 models will still work, it's important to me so I will sacrifice fps for it.

ggi said...

So we have a choice - FSX with PMDG or P3D without PMDG. P3D will provide more value for money for me and thats where I will put my money. Instead of looking at trying to fit a 777 into a place it doesnt want to go, why not try flying something different instead? We have a wonderful range of GA aircraft available so why not head up to the Pacific Northwest or try Scotland or New Zealand instead? I like PMDG products, I understand the PMDG/Boeing involvement - and I suspect non-alignment with P3D was not a PMDG idea, however that's their business choice and we have to make our own decision as to what FS we go for. ~
p.s. P3D will be cheaper to buy than the 777 is.

Stefan Schwarz said...

Exactly, as if Boeing could give a rat's ass how we use PMDG's 777 or 737, hardly. I think they have way more important things such as 787 battery issues to worry about than us using P3D with PMDG's 777 or 737.

Either way, PMDG better reinvent themselves for a P3D product lineup or they will be history.

William Pierce said...

Boeing would never comment on this publicly, its not their bread and butter, its PMDG's. But if you think Boeing has no position on P3D, or never spoke about it to PMDG, you are being naive. Boeing licensed the planes to PMDG for entertainment purposes and putting aside the semantics of the term "entertainment", neither PMDG nor Boeing is interested in opening themselves up to software license violations or liability suits, especially Boeing who has deep pockets and could become a target for litigation.

And when did I say P3D would be a failure? You are twisting the context of my sentence, and inventing your own meaning from thin air. My point was every business is driven by available marketshare. PMDG wouldn't give up P3D marketshare unless they had other things to consider (like getting sued into bankruptcy).

As far as your OOM and CTD issues, I'm not sure what to say. You sound pretty bitter. I guess I can see where it comes from, FSX sure has some flaws, but my flights range from 1 hour up to 18 hours and I am not plagued by OOMs or CTDs, even with complex addons. I am excited about P3D (the volumetric fog and water textures look pretty cool) but I am not bitter about FSX either and I don't plan on abandoning it or PMDG anytime soon.

Sean McFadden said...

PMDG have had FSX users eating out of their hands for far too long and got way too cocky by actively disabling P3D compatibility in their 777.

I can remember a time when Motorola, Nokia, and Blackberry were very dominant too in the mobile phone sector, but their fortunes have changed and so too will they change for PMDG unless they move to support P3D.

I already predict that their 777-300 extension pack will suffer a massive revenue hit because P3D v2 is about to be released.

Thad Wheeler said...

I understand your point Nick, but as a commercial pilot myself and a former certified flight instructor, that risk you mention has always existed since the inception of home based flight simulation. Take my word, if the pilot at KFSO had stated the accident resulted from his use of the PMDG 777, he would be laughed at, so much so that any pilot worth his wings would never even consider contemplating such a defense. It would be akin to you having a car accident and claiming to law enforcement that driving Need for Speed made you do it, and caused the mishap. Would you follow this logic? One never crashed in Grand Theft Auto, so one has no idea why it didn't work in real life. I believe you get my point. The laws regarding flight training and approved devices under qualified supervision make your argument pointless. I spent several years in flight training including the level of Chief Flight Instructor, and I can tell you the scenario you give is very much out of touch with reality, and I mean this as no offense to you as you would not understand the complexities of your argument to be true. Nothing a pilot does on their free time absolves them of the responsibilities they are expected to carry out in real world day to day operation. Like any air accident or incident, it is a major chain of events that occur over time that remain unchallenged that lead to the fatal flaw, not something as simple as I used PMDG's XXXX aircraft and it made me do it. Truth is, if the PMDG aircraft was used in an approved training device with an accredited flight training Captain the same proper procedures would be followed as per the companies SOP's meaning, no such accident would occur. KFSO happened because there were problems with how the company trained and qualified their pilots, no flight simulator involved would have changed that fact. Do you believe that achieving a high ranking in Battlefield 4 entitles you to high level entry into the military? We understand the answer to that would be no. The complexities of air accidents and incidences extend well beyond the use of any simulator and how it's used, I can assure you that. Unfortunately good lawyers are not carrier pilots, and only look at the rule of law and exposure of risk, not the actual practicality of it. Ask any experienced professional lawyer if something you do may come back to bite you in the ass and they will almost always say yes, and they are right, even if the probability is 0.001%, because you can never eliminate the "what if". It's the "what's likely" that counts the most and is what business is based on.

Todd said...

PMDG would be open to massive litigation if the same scenario occurred using FSX. The sim platform doesn't create the issue. It's the realistic Boeing 777 created by PMDG, complete with Boeing manuals, that is the issue. If PMDG didn't want to be open to lawsuit, they should have created 'lite' versions of their airliners, not full system replicas.

Todd said...

So true.

Thad Wheeler said...

I understand your point Mr. Pierce, but there are some problems with your point. It doesn't explain the existence of the Ariane Boeing 737NG which is near PMDG level and usable within P3D. You have also failed to explain the exemption of the B1900 and JS41 in Prepar3D. If indeed PMDG received help from Boeing in producing the 737 and were almost sued there may have been grounds for the litigation. No one outside of PMDG would have any understanding of why that may have occurred. It is possible that PMDG made a theoretical deal with the Devil that puts them in between a rock and a hard place. Perhaps the price one pays to get the level of realism they have created without figuring it out themselves has put them in a compromised situation. If so, then it really does suck to be them. Oddly though RSR who has for the most part been fairly transparent about what they can and can't do, has never said your theory is the case. Discussion would come to a quick close if he had. PMDG would not be viewed lesser if he stated Boeing will not allow the products they helped them make be used in P3D. I believe the majority of users would find this plausible and accept it full heartedly and move on accordingly. The fact this has never been declared leaves far too much to be read between the lines, even to the extreme point that maybe RSR doesn't want PMDG products to be used in P3D simply because he just simply doesn't like L.M.. They are ALL plausible given the current or lack thereof of information available, and that is something only PMDG themselves can address, not the community, which further feeds the speculation.
I only address this issue not because I care what or how PMDG wishes to carry out their roadmap to success, but only because of how it pertains to P3D. I made a statement to RSR that I was concerned about the position they were taking in regards to P3D, that they may have a large influence in regards to adoption of the new platform. This was back when P3D was at the v1.2 stage. RSR seemed to have much pent up anger with regards to the platform. I'm not saying he did, but rather that that's how his message came across. His reply as responded to me was that he wished he had that much authority over the community as I had indicated (that so goes PMDG, so goes the community). Given the current circumstances and the discussions I have read in various forums, I believe I was not far from the truth of the situation. I believe the term I used was "the tail wagging the dog" to RSR. I don't care if PMDG simply does not want or simply can't allow any of their products to be used in P3D, I just wish they would come clean to the community so that it can move on. At least if you're a loyal PMDG user (and that included me), you can know where you stand with regards to the future and your acceptance or reluctance toward P3D. I do believe PMDG does owe me who has purchase all of their aircraft and others who have done the same a crystal clear explanation of what the real issues are so we can all move on. The concept that Boeing won't allow it only serves to make Boeing look bad if this is not the case. If it is true, then Boeing should wear it, and not at the expense of PMDG.

Thad Wheeler said...

It is plausible that some of your AI aircraft may not work. As you have stated, you took a hit from FS9 to FSX, this was likely due to the DX9 texture issues. Because P3D v2.0 is DX11, it is possible you may have the same problems of AI aircraft appearing, but with no textures. UT2 is out of the question as Flight1 does not and will not allow it's use in Prepar3D, so your stance towards it is moot. I use My Traffic 3D for Prepar3D and it is supported, and I can only figure that it will be modified as required to ensure compatibility with v2.0, but I would confirm this with Burkhard who is the author of the software. I provide this info only as an option for you in case your FS9 native AI options tank.

Thad Wheeler said...

LOL, never mind GA, have you tried Quality Wings Bae146/Avro RJ series. These things rock on P3D and are VERY well done. No lite product here. They are supported in Prepar3D with native installers, and I have no doubt they will work flawlessly in v2.0. I truly love these planes which does not happen often for me.

Todd said...

PMDG made a deal with the devil when they got in bed with Boeing and now that deal is biting them in the ass. And don't think they don't know it. It's hypocritical to talk about LM's EULAS when you produce a 100% realistic simulation of the 737NG and 777. It's a joke, really. I still wonder how iFly was able to make it work, while PMDG is still stuck.

LM is not going to change their EULA or product licensing - EVER. The non-compete agreement they made with Microsoft when they purchased the ESP was indefinite, from what I have heard from multiple sources. When Microsoft 'Flight' completely flopped and Microsoft essentially threw in the towel on flight simulation, the field was wide open. That's when P3D product pricing and the licensing structure changed. If you think the Academic License was only meant for schools and such, you are kidding yourself. It was a stroke of legal brilliance that allowed LM to outflank the non-compete they had, and will continue to have, with Microsoft. I don't have to even mention all the major flight sim developers and certain journalists that were on the v2.0 beta team. People who can't get the EULA out of their heads fail to plainly see what's been happening since the Academic License was released. Pretty much very developer has moved their design platform to P3D. LM has actively engaged the flight sim community because they know we are the most experienced beta testers out there that will only make their product better. The line between flight sim entertainment and commercial use was blurred long before P3D became a household name. If you want the EULA changed to make yourself feel better, don't ask LM. Ask Microsoft. Of course, their too busy, along with PMDG, wondering what the hell just happened.

I am an enthusiastic, Academic Licensed user, of P3D and will continue to be with v2.0. FSX is yesterday's news. FS9 will always be dear to me, because that is the last Microsoft Flight Sim product I used, before jumping to P3D. FSX had a good run, but the future has solidly been, and will continue to be, P3D.

Todd said...

iFly obviously was able to convince Boeing, as their 737 is supported in P3D (and is labelled entertainment only by the way). Why can't PMDG? There is more to the story PMDG doesn't want to tell.

Todd said...

Rumor is pricing info will be revealed Monday, Nov. 18th.

Bryn said...

+1!

Peter Hobbs said...

Ifly make a good 737 for P3d,funny it is sold by P3d hating flight1 on their tech site, £10 more than the fsx vers ,but is identical,and also carries a disclaimer that it is not licensed for training purposes ,

Peter Hobbs said...

the interesting thing to me is when will the swing away from fsx be large enough to make the development of aircraft for a fsx only platform uneconomic,P3d has been very stable at 29.9fps for me with only 3 tweaks applied via Mr Kosta,when you realize that this level of stability cost me just £30 about the same as a decent aircraft add on,I would not willingly go back to fsx ,Flight1 and PMDG have been left behind in the airport lounge sitting on their arse,s drinking coffee and moaning about P3d

Balan22 said...

Hi guys, I've been thinking about the fact why we still didn't make a petition for PMDG to get rid of the "we don't support P3D because..." thing? In case if PMDG will not make their products work in P3D they wil have to face with decreasing popularity and because the PMDG is the leading top notch developer for simulators less purchase of their products

Fabrizio K said...

Well I think we are in a difficult situation right now, as far as I know PMDG is going to XPLANE. So, but many people are most likely going to move to P3D v2 where there is no PMDG 737/777. So the question is: Do the people follow the big fish and buy everything once again or do they stick with P3D V2 where around 90% is compatible from FSX? In my opinion P3D v2 is the future because not everyone has the money to buy all the things over again.
I really hope PMDG will find a solution here.

Anonymous said...

People should just start using Prepar3d no matter what PMDG's attitude is, eventually if they want to stay in business they have to join when sales for FSX start to drop.

It's not like they are the only good developer anyway.

Balan22 said...

I think many people will stick with P3D, that has bigger potential than XP ever gonna has. PMDG has to face the fact that if they can not get used to the changed situations they will figuratively die - this is the law of nature. I'll make a petition that will be posted here if I can. Stick together guys.

Kailiang Seah said...

Well not everything is PMDG if they are not going to support p3d their lost. Even its not for entertainment aerosoft still supports it. I dun see the reason why just fking support it

Sean McFadden said...

The future is bright, the future is orange, no actually it's Prepar3D v2.

PMDG have always been at the top of their game, simulation wise that is, business wise they have lost the plot in not supporting P3D. All the major developers have moved to P3D, Flight1 and PMDG are the only ones I know to have crippled their products to prevent them from being P3D compatible.

I will not be switching to X-Plane if PMDG makes an aircraft for that sim, I have invested in too many FSX add-ons that are going to all still be P3D v2 compatible for that to ever happen. X-Plane had a real chance to attract FSX users when v10 was released, but there were just too many things I disliked to make the switch in the end.

If you look at the quality of add-ons we're going to be getting from 29Palms, Aerosoft, Alabeo, Carenado, Drzewiecki Design, Flightbeam, FS Dreamteam, FSDG, HifiTech, LH Simulations, Lionheart, Milviz, Nemeth, Opus, Orbx, Pilot's, Qualitywings, Razbam, RealAir, REX, Sim720, Taxi2Gate, Tropicalsim, and Wilco, it makes no sense to stay with FSX or switch to X-Plane.

Unless RSR wants to see his business implode, he will have to support P3D, sooner or later.


Balan22 said...

+1

FS.Nerd said...

BUT -most of us will need a new PC!!! Its like the Time FSX came out and the most PC`s cant handle it. Exact this we get with P3D 2.0. As well if you got P3D already, the new V2.0 will have a BIG impact on your System -WITHOUT Addons.

Yes its Fantastic -realy it is-shadders from clouds or underwater ops. But most of will turn it off. New LOD, Clouds and for most the shadders will eat the most FPS.

Im not a Pirat btw. as we all know one of the beta get leaked.

If you run BF4 with all High-end perfectly, then your good. I think in 2 years this will be our new home, as last the PMDG 777 will work in 2.0.

Mark Batarina said...

Well, if pmdg isn't gonna make the switch, then I hope qwsim or aerosoft make a decent 777...

Balan22 said...

Don't expect any decent 777 from Aerosoft, even if they made one, that is not gonna be the PRO version.

Flyer said...

The majority of serious simmers have invested a small fortune in FSX as I did. And I think most might think the same way as I do.

I will not switch to another simulator platform where I have to buy everything again just to use a

PMDG 777 or an NGX again.

I hope they find a legal solution for the problem and I am also willing to buy all my PMDG aircraft addons again for P3D 2.0.

I will not invest in a completely new platform.

Td Avart said...

Thanks for the info Thad, but it's a non-native model issue, not textures. I use most of the same models UT2 has, some non-native. I've converted the textures to DXT1 which works very well, but haven't been very impressed with models in other traffic packages.

Michael Charles Hartnett said...

Hopefully Majestic Software's Dash 8 Q400 works on P3D 2.0. I'm not really bothered about companies that won't make the switch over, it's their loss at the end of the day. I've supported PMDG ever since I purchased the 747x, J41, NGX and 777, and it's a shame that they won't follow suit, but that's their decision at the end of the day.

Personally, i'm not to sure as to how i'll go about this, as i've invested thousands into FSX through both purchased downloads and purchased box sets (my room is literately filled with boxed FSX addons).

DAndre Newman said...

In a live Twitch event I did ask the team about this and they are very committed to P3D. You need not worry there. many of your addons should work unless they contain dll's that are not compatible. I have a feeling most developers will update their products though.

Thad Wheeler said...

I understand your position with regards to models of other packages. My Traffic 3D allows you to easily swap out aircraft as one chooses, just rename the folder to the one the application is looking for. Simple as that.
I hope sometime someone works on a more up to date AI package with regards to models. They would look good in P3D v2.0.

Thad Wheeler said...

I also forgot about the outstanding Majestic Q400 and the Aerosoft Twin Otter. Both in my belief are "must have" aircraft for P3D. No need to be stuck with just GA for drinking the L.M. CoolAid LOL.

Austin McCall said...

And to add to the hypocrisy, as I have stated before, the very idea of PMDG when it was started was in fact a violation of Microsoft's EULA. They made money off of a product they weren't supposed to; whether direct or indirect, it still wasn't allowed. What makes this any different? True, they have grown since then, but I don't see that as a valid argument. Even if LM were to pull the plug on 3rd party dev's, the only foreseeable consequence would be a Cease and Desist. So imo, better just to forget about them until they make the switch.

Kaman said...

PMDG and Majestic are the only real dev in the market for me. And i guess it is in many simmers head as well, cuz at the PMDG is always the reference. They provide tools that you can use for simulation and ifr practice ! I am a pilot myself and i know what im looking for when i buy a PMDG product. I do not disrespect other dev team but they just provide arcade games, want exemples ? Ok...: aerosoft a320, captainsim, wilco, carenado, etc

Kaman said...

Coolsky and A2A are great to! But if PMDG is fsx only, ill be a fsx only kinda guy, cuz im looking for realism in systems and ifr navigation. Im not looking for nice shadows effect flying an empty box... I know many people here bashing PMDG but those are the same people who will keep asking and looking eagerly for PMDG 747x and 777 variants either at PMDG website or at TPB. I have invested thousands of euros buying equipment, aircrafts, soft, sceneries....so PMDG has my support !

CaptainHaris744 said...

i would prefer accurate simulation of aircraft over dynamic shadows and volumetric fog. People who just like visuals would most likely go to P3D, and keep complaining about PMDG. People who take flight simulator as a training aid will stick to a platform that provides realism, thats what i am gonna do if PMDG dont port their products over to P3D, which wont be happening i assume.

CGaft said...

Why are everybody assuming people will switch to P3D v2.0 in a dime? Reality check...THEY WON'T !!!
I'm perfectly happy with my FSX as it is, no OOM's or performance issues...& I think many other's are too!
If something "revolutionary" comes out with P3D I'll consider it....but I ain't seeing that yet!

cowpatz said...

Well I think that this is the sim I have been waiting for that will move me from FS9 (just cant get into FSX at all). I will build a new PC just for it as well.
As for PMDG well they lost me when they went to total VC flight decks...not for me. The iFly 737NG is an excellent alternative and flies beautifully and can handle DME arcs and RNP approaches.

Harley Stone said...

As a dedicated FSX user and having a plethora of add-ons for FSX, this news is rather disturbing. I don't begrudge LM for acquiring P3D and developing it into what many state to be the best flight simulator but considering the terms of use from LM, you cannot use the simulator outside of a training or educational environment. This does not bode well for those "armchair pilots" who enjoy using a flight simulator but are not enrolled in school or are in an aviation profession. With the terms set by LM, they HAVE to know that there are many out there who want to use the simulator that are not students, educators or professionals, so all of the great features of P3D are forever hung in front of them like raw meat to a lion. the way I see it, the simulation community will become evenly divided, and for those who cannot benefit from P3D, will clamor over developers ambitions and decisions for only supporting one sim over another instead of either cross communicating or developing more than one version. For the issue over PMDG (whom I love), they're contract with Boeing seems solid, despite the latest news about P3D. Now, I did read somewhere about a petition to get Microsoft to release all licensing powers over FSX which could allow for either commercially licensed or third parties like ORBX to develop an overhauled version of FSX, which would be music to my ears and many others.

I guess the great debate will be in the hands of the developers in how they handle the two simulators. Some have already started to support both which from a business standpoint makes sense and if everyone else would do the same, then the disappointment can disappear.

Sean McFadden said...

YAWN!

How often and in how many ways can you describe the same thing...over and over again?

I'll say it again as you must have missed it:

I'm so tired of the idiotic entertainment use discussion, LM clearly states that their Academic License can be used for "Learning":

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

Def. of Learning:

learning
noun

: the activity or process of gaining knowledge or skill by studying, practicing, being taught, or experiencing something : the activity of someone who learns

There is no debate, you either decide for yourself to use it or not, it's as simple as that.

Mark Batarina said...

Speak for yourself, I'm done doing 5+ hour flights only to be slapped in the face with an OOM during final approach. What more do you want from P3D? The use of multicore is finally here, GPU usage is implemented and it's not a dead simulator, it's being worked on each day unlike FSX which is well dead.

Mark Batarina said...

I love reading discussions here on AirDailyX. No one tries to take you down just because you say the opposite of what everyone else is trying to say. *cough* avsim forums *cough*
You guys should make a forum. I'm done with Avsim. All I asked on there was if the PMDG will work on P3D and everyone got their nips caught onto a clothes pin and started throwing a fit at me.

DSP said...

After all these discussion about PMDG, I ask myself which developers are already known to create / port their products to P3D v2, does anyone have some infos on this?

ALX WNT said...

I's rather amusing to see people who's blaming LM or P3D itself on license thing. Since they have no straight fact or proof only thing they're doing is bashing LM for EULA.

Uhm hello ?

Aerosoft made addons for P3D you know right ?
Razbam too...
ORBX as well. They are the partner of LM, why would they make another simulation ? You think ORBX one will be better than P3D, which is re-developed by old ACES members and overhauled FSX SP2 ?

A big nope here.

Stop ridiculously bashing LM for a license which old big developers dont care about.

Developers dont care EULA, even if they care, they are developing their addons by knowing it and so far everything is good, LM is happy, developers are happy, we, simulation users are happy because we're getting a new simulation after almost 10 years, something which will use our hardware properly.

Just because you dont want to buy another addon, your beloved PMDG doesnt like P3D, this big community will not stay with a simulator from Ancient Rome.

Buy it, enjoy it, or dont and stick with your FSX like your PMDG.

In case you dont completely understand i am repeating;

Major developers know the EULA of P3D and they are still partnering with Lockheed and developing addons for it. While more than 10 company dont care about an EULA, iFLY is still working on P3D, even in Version 2...

Blame PMDG, not Lockheed Martin who's about to give us a simulation which is gonna replace good ol' FSX.

And like i said, you can always stick to FSX, I know people who's still using FS2002 because they like it, do the same, stick with your old simulation with old addons.

jake said...

PMDG don't want to let us use there products on P3D because they are planning to sell them to commercial operators to use on P3D and charge more money. I have a feeling they will be leaving the average flight simmer behind and only focusing on the more lucrative commercial side, which is sad. I hope they don't forget about us, but it seems they already have, since its been over 2 months without an update or word on a product that has a few issues. The NGX already had a few hotfixes and SP1 out by 2 months.

From:

Robert S. Randazzo coolcap.gif
Precision Manuals Development Group
http://www.precisionmanuals.com who says....

" We've covered this a couple times- but those threads are probably pretty buried by now...



We are not planning to support retail customers using Prepar3d as a home simming platform.



We do have some commercial operators who will be licensing PMDG products on that platform, but this is not something the general simmer will have access to...



This decision was made because Prepar3d is not a home entertainment product, and their EULA is very specific as to the purposes for which the platform may be employed. For liability purposes, we cannot support retail customers using a "retail only" PMDG product on a platform that is not licensed for retail use.



This topic tends to bring out emotional replies from folks who wish things were different- so I'm going to lock the thread- but I did want you to have an answer! "

Kevin Firth said...

If the problem is their 'retail' version of an aircraft being used in P3D, simply sell it instead as a home simulation/learning product for P3D only. Different tag line, different end use, different price, zero liability, easily sorted....

Kevin Firth said...

+1

3pd are very clearly on board and promoting the reality of the situation, which is home simulation users are welcomed!

LM fudged their legal restrictions with M$ brilliantly in the creation of their academic licensing, which through nothing other than the invention of language envelops us into the welcoming and fully legal embrace of P3D

The only thing that is stopping anyone taking full advantage of that glorious fudge is the erroneous and limiting belief that they are not learning when using P3D, whenever, wherever and howsoever that may be.

ALX WNT said...

So be it then. We got QW who's working on 787, iFLY for 737 for the moment (NGX still works on V2 and V1 if you dont update it) I'm sure others will be completed as well.

PMDG's leave from P3D/FSX (judging their statement above, pretty much they indeed want to earn more money from addons - though i sense an Ariane ending-) will create a market for Boeing products. I bet iFly will jump on it, might as well QW.

Thanks for the info Jake

CGaft said...

I've said it long time ago......it's Boeing's policy & lawyers that prevents PMDG from joining P3D!

Kailiang Seah said...

Just wasted $100 bucks

Mir - Flightbeam Studios said...

I just want to add a few notes here, because there's a lot of speculation and not enough facts.
I can tell you from BETA, a huge majority of top class FSX developers are in P3D v2 beta and actively developing for P3D. In a developmental viewpoint, FSX is a deadend for us.
With P3D, not only you get to KEEP the thousands of $$$ of investment in addons you made, but you get a familiar sim, with a beefed up, modernized engine. On top of all that, almost ALL your favorite developers are moving in the same direction. It's effectively a no-brainer. The engine is still not perfect, and it will remain a 32bit code engine, but they have managed to overhaul it extensively and we've been very impressed so far. There are even more amazing features to be added after 2.0, especially pertaining to memory management.

The licensing debate is rather ridiculous. The engineering and production team for P3D has embraced the general FSX population and listened to their feedback. They're very, very closely listening to our feedback, as a company who specifically makes products for the home user. As long as you utilize for LEARNING, which every simmer does, there is no issue. They simply don't want it to be labeled as a "game", so that they can also license this to the commericial realm. That is why you see legal lingo such as "not for entertainment".

As far as PMDG. They're a fantastic company, and we even cooperate together in a manner in which most users don't even know. If they want to move to X-Plane, that is perfectly ok! There is no need to mope, their space will fill very quickly in the P3D space especially considering the modernized development tools recently handed to us.

Geo said...

I think I may have to purchase this P3D. Videos look nice and no OOM. But I cant leave PMDG aircraft behind cuz there the reason I use FSX. What to do.

Scott Petty said...

Just to be clear, the PMDG 737 works quite well in P3D v1.4... only the 777 is completely shut out of Prepar3D...

Flyer said...

Still use FSX for PMDG aircraft. I am pretty sure that after one or two years they will have sorted out their problems and than go where the money lies.

High Plains Flyer said...

I have a hard time seeing where the problem is. Neither FSX nor Prepar3d take up a lot of disk space and they tend to share a lot of the add ons. I can keep BOTH on my computer and use FSX for PMDG and Fkight 1, and P3d for everything else.

That being said, PMDG is being incredibly foolish. First, the days of FSX are numbered. It perhaps is only a matter of time when one cannot purchase a copy of FSX, and more importantly activate it.

Also, PMDG clearly has positioned its product to function as a professional or semi-professional training device. Clearly, it is difficult to serve this role on an old and discontinued platform.

Dave said...

The majority ! Only the minority are choosing to stay behind and continue to lock us into an old and outdated platform.

Edward Boyte said...

Prepar3D V2 Beta: Dynamic 3D Waves.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9f_Vo-JukmQ

Austin McCall said...

+1. Couldn't have said it better myself.

Austin McCall said...

That's one way to approach it, but you'd have to get several thousand signatures for them to even consider. And even then, good luck. At this point, only the numbers and profit loss will tell.

Kujo said...

HI

Are there only optical improvements?

Will the ATC also be updated?

Frank van der Werff said...

That is just freakingly awesome! I've never had or used P3D, but version 2.0 will be a definite buy-at-release-day purchase.
Looking at the systemspecs of the maker of this movie, makes me hopefull P3D v2.0 will infact perform a lot better than FSX.

Concerning PMDG; I'm convinced if they see the majority of their customers addopting P3D, they will at least reconsider their point of view.
If not; screw them. The NGX seems to work in P3D (and I will not install any update for it anymore) and I don't need the 777 (don't have it now.... way to expensive for the use I have for it).

Todd said...

Well-articulated, Thad.

Flyer said...

I guess all the addon ATC programs will run without any problem.

CngDelta757 said...

I'm extremely excited for this, not so much for PMDG's foolish decision in not supporting P3D to the common simmer. People use the debate that P3D is for professional use only. Well really? When your investing in engine overhauls and improved graphics really thats gonna attract attention from FSX users. You never see Fully fledged flight sims at airlines or flight schools with state of the art graphics and visuals, the point is to TRAIN, not deliver eye candy. Now what P3D is doing is increasing performance and delivering more eyecandy (such as Dynamic waves, WAY ahead of competition). So no doubt there will be normal users buying this product. Just my ramblings on this.

Kujo said...

I don`t mean add on ATC programs. I mean the default ATC.

Post a Comment

Comments are now deactivated. Please visit our new website: AirDailyX.net

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.