Prepar3D version 2.0?

[lion737 0]

does pmdg aircraft work in P3D?

 

Just read on the PMDG website:

 

"As such, our support of the platform as a home for our retail/consumer products is unlikely"

 

It´s explained in all detail. At the moment it works, because p3d is still using the FSX engine. But do you really think it will work with v2.0, if it is not supported ?

[Parping Couplet 117]

Having got my toes briefly wet with P3D, I quickly bugged out and cancelled my subscription. Definitely has some appealing features, but installing add-ons is a major, major hassle and, even when you've apparently installed something, how can you be sure it's working exactly as it should do?

 

FSX, for all its shortcomings, is universal and everything works 100% with it. Then comes the whole issue of P3D version 2.0 compatibility.

 

I'll be sitting on the fence and seeing how this pans out.

[Jet_Airliner 0]

We better have DX11 or I seriously have no used of switching.

This means that it will be impossible to transport addons from FSX (DX9) to P3D (DX11)

[Ian McPhail 55]

Well Parping you pooped too early. Sure FSX is universal, but P3D is already FSX on vitamins.

 

It is the same base code, ESP, now in the process of being upgraded.

 

Unofficial fixes, and really good ones like Orbx, and plenty of forum advice make getting add-ons migrated now without too much fuss. Paarvo is trying to help with a slightly more sophisticated version of my own cookbook - and that of others.

 

And if v2.0 is as we have been told DX11, then those who want will go the new way (count me in), and those who don't can stay with v1, FSX, FS9 or whichever legacy version they like - it's a free world. And others will go with X-Plane, and less dedicated simmers with FLIGHT. The marketplace is a great big wonderful world.

[Ben Cap 89]

This means that it will be impossible to transport addons from FSX (DX9) to P3D (DX11)

 

We have to break backwards compatibility to move forward.

 

We can't continue to use the same techniques to create aircraft and scenery forever.....

[HughesMDflyer4 470]

We have to break backwards compatibility to move forward.

 

We can't continue to use the same techniques to create aircraft and scenery forever.....

 

Agreed. And being an add-on developer myself, I have no issue with re-exporting/upgrading my add-ons as required to stay compatible with the current version. If it means improving the overall experience, change is good!

[Parping Couplet 117]

Well Parping you pooped too early.

 

:LMAO:

 

Maybe. The beauty of the subscription is that I can have another go, if the mood takes me.

 

I'll probably come back to it when the whole situation has matured and the transition is a lot more seamless than at present.

[vernon 0]

I to cant wait for V2.0,but lets iron out the bugs for the next Version,1.4 maybe,i have unfortunatly gone back to FSX because of the visibility bug which i am sure will be sorted,i cant use the program without visibility settings just my preference of course,i will be back on board when it is fixed.

[N1125Y 22]

..I do not, really, understand what are the differences between the P3D versions, any reason to go with the $199 ?????

 

Tnx

 

Yair

[HughesMDflyer4 470]

..I do not, really, understand what are the differences between the P3D versions, any reason to go with the $199 ?????

 

Tnx

 

Yair

 

There's no difference except for what the licenses say. And the Academic version only has a tiny watermark on the menubar. Other than that, they are all identical in functionality.

 

You could also look at the P3D website. The information there would be the most accurate.

[N1125Y 22]

..okay, I got it

tnx

 

Yair