FSX/P3D. This baby is getting close to release! Personally, I am troubled that the Flight1 B200 will not initially offer compatibility with Prepar3D. There are concerns between Flight1 and Lockheed Martin's EULA regarding products developed for P3D. But at the end of the day, Jim Rhoads has a point, it's your loss if you do not wish to operate such a well detailed systems aircraft in FSX... doesn't change the fact that i am disappointed though... check out the latest shots!
Much more here:
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10151025919370742.445039.92543550741&type=3
_______________________________________
AirDailyX -We do things differently!
30 comments:
D'André, ask yourself this question:
What exactly is Jim Rhoads valid concern regarding the Prepar3D EULA if they are able to release the iFly 737NG for Prepar3D?
fhttp://www.flight1tech.com/Products/AircraftSimulations/737NGforPrepar3D.aspx
I can accept a decision if it makes sense, but this decision of Flight1 to not offer Prepar3D support for their King Air B200 makes no sense whatsoever.
itchin for the tablet based FMC
No P3D? Shame. I hope someone will try anyway and report back because this looks very promising
Well iFLY was only an indipendent developer using Flight1 as a publishing source in the same way many developers use Simmarket, Aerosoft, or JustFlight as sources to publish their products. In the case if the B200, this aircraft is being developed exclusively for Flight1.
Heck even Carenado's own P3D based B200 is sold by Flight1. Another thing here is there are still developers that dont develop for P3D but their products are still compatable with P3D nonetheless.
Many developers are simply confused about P3D's EULA and just havent bothered with it. Besides this, i think some developers havent even purchased P3D and fear more work to make it compatable.
Maybe it's a comfort zone.. Who knows. But I am personally confident its the lead developers choice to either develop or not to develop a product for P3D.
The Flight1 version is almost double the cost of the Carenado version, yet has no P3D compatibility, what a joke, what a rip-off!
I wish as a community we could all boycott this product until they release P3D compatibility. Flight1 need to wake up.
I'll also add that I honestly think many developers are underestimating how popular P3D has become. That is also likely a factor inthe decision making process.
Are the terrain graphics on the real units giant blocky pixels like in these screen shots?
Geezus, give it a rest you guys.
Instead of mindlessly ranting about P3D, have a think about it - if high-end aircraft developers such as PMDG are balking at transferring over to P3D, do you think there might be a little more to it than meets the eye? Aside from any technical hurdles to overcome, perhaps there are licensing issues to consider, for exactly the same reason that many default (Boeing, and other) aircraft and other features did not ship with P3D.
Seriously, if you don't have something intelligent to say, shut the f&*% up.
It's easy to rant and rave about the P3D EULA if you don't have anything to lose. If your entire livelihood is at risk due to the possibility of misconstruing a confusingly written legal document, you might be a bit more cautious.
Hopefully MigrationTool will do the work.
with ref to ifly 737 that is a strange story ,I purchased the p3d update ,and when checking for the latest update I read somewhere that my £10 update only had a temporary license .which seems to have expired (still works)what the hell is that about! ,flight1 now sell ifly 737 at £15 more than the fsx version on their pro website 'with a disclaimer stating it cannot be used for training ,eh pro site why? ,flight1 have taken a funny stand against P3d so much so I will not purchase ANYTHING off flight1
these guys from flight1 were at one time verbally attacking contributors around most flightsim site with ref to installing their products in p3d ,they have a phobia over p3d and are painting themselves as the Luddites os the flightsim world! my humble advice do not buy boys
Peter, you have hit the nail on the head.
I will be joining you. No P3D support = No sale from me
When I, as a developer, talk to Lockheed Martin about P3D even they smile when I mention the academic license. TBH they seem all that bothered about the EULA. But that is my view and does not represent that of P3D legal.
Ridiculous comments about boycotts and C%$#%%#o comparisons, IMHO. This King Air is so far beyond anything yet produced for FSX or P3D, who wouldn't want it?
How would they have anything to lose by offering an aircraft that is P3D only, like the iFly 737NG they sell?
Well to be the devils advocate here, P3D is not a sim, not even marketed as a sim. It is a commercial platform and there is a lower price student addition. Regardless, it is your right to stop purchasing Flight1 products, due to lack of P3D support. Whether you agree with Flight1 or not, they have absolutely no obligation to accommodate this platform no more than continuing with FS9. In today's business, it would be rather catastrophic for a developer to disregard any platform that pays the bills. The clearest message will be sent with lack of sales.
I'll be buying it and could care less about P3D...FSX runs perfectly for me.
People can justify to themselves that they're not breaking the terms of the license (a student? really?) - that's human nature.
Even if P3D was the a great evolutionary step from FSX, I have no interest in investing the time and effort to switch to P3D only to see LM pull the rug out when they act on people compromising the EULA.
On a side note, I just spoke with Patrick Parnis, the Marketing Director of Dassault Aviation. He is absolutely unaware of the whole Falcon 7X and Wilco Publishing deal!
I gave him the reader's digest version of who Wilco Publishing is, explained about their bad repuation and the TBM 850 release debacle, and that they should stay away from them.
Wow, fancy that, these half-wits make a deal with Dassault and the marketing director doesn't even know about it. I mean this would be ideal for any airshow booth display to increase product awareness and general PR.
Sounds like someone somewhere tried to pull a fast one.
Why wouldn't you (or Fl*ght1) support the last chance of MSFS to be developed further? Play a modern PC game then fire up FSX. Don't let us get stuck in 2006!
I dont understand this hate TBH. Whether or not, this plane will work on P3D regardless, it's not FS9 vs P3D. even son it would still work.
You are bashing F1 for nothing, it seems their development team made very good job and now offer a good replica or B200 with very good visuals.
I'm wondering the FPS usage and comparison with Carenado one since the other was drinking FPS on my rig.
So much hate here, some even says 'lets boycott them hurayyy, pikes on the hand let's burn their home, rape their women'
Seriously guys, you all know that it's gonna work in P3D and yet you're bithcing for nothing.
Besides, P3D might give you better frames but it's using more VAS, therefore chances of getting OOM is way higher than FSX. It's still a new platform and still under development, and after each new version you have to re-install the whole thing.
I dont think PMDG and Flight1 will stay away from P3D, i'm sure they'll make their addons compatible once they're convinced that P3D is stable platform; meaning waiting V2.
You're wasting your time and bandwidth for nothing, you're whining for nothing.
Move on please.
For Pete's sake...Until P3D v2 appears, P3D = FSX = 2006. PMDG refuses to support P3D as well and do they get eaten alive? No. Why the hell must F1 get cr***ed all over? A properly set up FSX will run just as well as the current P3D. And properly developed addons will also run just fine. Judging by how that G1000 pit looks, F1 has done a pretty darned good job of optimisation since they could actually record a video of it.
Finally, Lockheed Martin is a multi billion dollar company. They need No, Zero, Nada, Zilch support from us to develop P3D v2. When P3D v2 actually appears maybe people can start begging for P3D support. But until then, you are wasting your breath and making yourselves stink in front of devs.
Exactly. Everyone wants it! That's why so many are discussing it here. It's FSX's issues people don't want...
More OOM issues? Really? News to me because it's never happened to me. You can't believe everything you read on AVSIM.
I suggest reading your last sentence and take your own advice.
ok guys it´s released go get it http://www.flight1.com/products.asp?product=f1b200fsx
To use this product in FSX would be a waste of time for me. I wouldn't get more that a few minutes of use before "Microsoft...encountered...will close" and that's if you can pull yourself away from the hours of tweaking trying to keep it working.
I use P3D. I will not buy products from Flight1 or PMDG even if they work in P3D for the moment because #1 there will be no support, and #2 I don't need *THEM* pulling the rug out from under me! Never mind Lockheed Martin...
EHUEUEHEHEHEEE... no.
I own the latest version of P3D, and VAS usage is damn high. With OPUS (Which has no impact on VAS) REX:E and NGX, VAS usage is somewhere 3.2GB. Add this scenery, more likely two payware airports (one for departure one for arrival) and voila you hit 3.7 3.8gb alone, if you use FSDT scenery (like latest ones) you already hit OOM.
Add Melbourne and Canberra from ORBX as well. There's some kind of memory issue with arrival of Canberra which causes hype on VAS usage, something they never fixed until now, Cityscape Canberra will only make things worse.
Ah, from the other hand, same scenery config same addons in FSX i have 2.4GB VAS usage, go figure
Cheers
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.