Since the cat is out of the bag ...

[TheGrunt 44]

For now. But things will change and quick if Microsoft sees Prepar3D as a threat to Flight, and with the number of people saying, "Screw Flight, I'm getting Prepar3D!" that's probably going to happen sooner than later.

This is pure assumption as long as you have no real clue of the contract. Or do you?This seems ridicilous speculation to me. And for making things clear, I haven't bashed your sim of choice, but made my criticism and supported people to at least try the demo.

[JasonHarris 96]

Let's put it this way: it's more likely to happen to Prepar3D than it is X-Plane.For now. But things will change and quick if Microsoft sees Prepar3D as a threat to Flight, and with the number of people saying, "Screw Flight, I'm getting Prepar3D!" that's probably going to happen sooner than later.

Why? If I had a couple million in my bank account I would be asking myself when it is time to retire. Businesses don't work that way. I am still struggling to see what impact MS can have on this?

[Mountain Man 142]

FSX is a cash cow for FSX developers, so I don't blame them for not wanting to port over. They have vested interested in the status quo.

Bingo. It's less about perceived "warts" and more about the cost of learning new development tricks and expected rate of return. Plus there's that whole chicken and egg thing going on here: The big FSX developers would move to X-Plane if it had a bigger share of the market, and it would have a bigger share of the market if the big FSX developers moved to X-Plane.

[JasonHarris 96]

Not true. The cloud rendering in XP10 is very efficient and can be tuned to give you minimal performance loss without sacrificing visual quality.

Really? Clouds have a real impact on my frames and the last beta got rid of the 'trick' to help framerates with clouds. Turn off clouds and put on nice weather, what are your frames. Then put on % clouds, whats it like then? This isn't a bad thing, it's the reality of how it is done. all I said is that there are pros and cons to weigh up. Edited January 5, 2012 by JasonHarris

[xxJohnxx 21]

So I think it will become very interesting if MS wants to go to court agains LM. Lets see. MS makes operating systems for computers. Somehow important and somehow not important. LM makes weapons, fighters and lot's of stuff we don't know. How buys LM products? Right, the USA (and other countries). How pays the lawyers? The USA! Maybe you see the point. Would be a interesting scenario, however I doubt that it won't happen realy.

[Orbx 123]

<cough> ... Back on topic.I understand that my original post possibly creates more questions than it answers, but I only gave you a "glimpse" of what occured. There was an ongoing engagement with MS over two years which at one time included bi-weekly telephone conference calls with MS devs, which were positive and enthusiastic. But much of what was communicated between Orbx and MS was commercial-in-confidence and I am not going to risk beng a tiny minnow company being obliterated by the MS legal department.What I can say is that the developers on the MS team I spoke to were really nice guys. They believed in their work, and at the start really did want to adopt many of our ideas and really offer up a true simulator. So please, don't tar the development team with an evil brush, since the impression I got was that they wanted to create something special, and early in the project I was excited by the potential, based on what code we were given and the direction our discussions were heading.However, at some point the suits got hold of the project, and decisions were made at management level. At that point we and other developers were frozen out. I don't think the core developers wanted this to happen, but they are not the ones paying the bills or the salaries. You can likely blame the fact that the studio is part of a division run by the VP of XBox that has ultimately influenced the outcomes.To those who say I got it "wrong" with respect to Flight, I can only offer my insight into what happened, and what every other developer faced as well. We were given a promise of a new sim, but were frozen out 2/3 into the dev cycle after working with their team for quite some time. This then is less of a case of me beng wrong, than being betrayed by MS. I use that word in a politically correct way, because I cannot repeat what other Orbx team members thought of MS after the lock-out.Indeed, MS probably does not realise that the FSX developer community talks to each other quite regularly. There is a lot of sharing of ideas, communication and even cross licensing of tech. I recently had dinner in London with another large scenery developer, and we recently licensed tech from other scenery developer. This happens all the time, and MS probably did not realise that we shared opinions between developers on how we had been treated by them with Flight. So I can assure you that the consensus amongst the major FSX developers out there is one of rage, and that there is no love lost towards MS right now.It is for good reason then, that the developer community has long been looking at other ongoing viable parallel platforms to FSX,in addition to continuing to develop for FSX for the long term future.Platform wars are always fun to debate and get passionate about, but in this instance I don't see it being relevant to the discussion in this topic. I was asked about X-P and gave a superficial answer, so please don't start a flame war about it. We are an FSX/P3D shop and will remain so for the forseeable future, regardless ofthe pros/cons of other platforms.

[Mountain Man 142]

Really? Clouds have a real impact on my frames and the last beta got rid of the 'trick' to help framerates with clouds. Turn off clouds and put on nice weather, what are your frames. Then put on % clouds, whats it like then?

I suppose it depends on your hardware. And they didn't get rid of the "trick", they just combined three sliders into one.As for the impact that clouds have on my performance, it's negligible at a 25% setting.

[JasonHarris 96]

Bingo. It's less about perceived "warts" and more about the cost of learning new development tricks and expected rate of return. Plus there's that whole chicken and egg thing going on here: The big FSX developers would move to X-Plane if it had a bigger share of the market, and it would have a bigger share of the market if the big FSX developers moved to X-Plane.

I have written code using simconnect for fsx, the first thing that looked strange was the LR do not support the SDK. That IMHO is one of the first things they should rectify to get confidence from third parties.

[airlinejets 709]

Then put on % clouds, whats it like then?

Jason, I really don't understand you FPS problems. I'm getting anywhere from 50 to 100 FPS in XPX. Granted I always use real weather, so some days, there aren't any clouds to speak of. Maybe something in your setup, I don't know.

[Mountain Man 142]

What I can say is that the developers on the MS team I spoke to were really nice guys. They believed in their work, and at the start really did want to adopt many of our ideas and really offer up a true simulator. So please, don't tar the development team with an evil brush, since the impression I got was that they wanted to create something special, and early in the project I was excited by the potential, based on what code we were given and the direction our discussions were heading.However, at some point the suits got hold of the project, and decisions were made at management level. At that point we and other developers were frozen out. I don't think the core developers wanted this to happen, but they are not the ones paying the bills or the salaries. You can likely blame the fact that the studio is part of a division run by the VP of XBox that has ultimately influenced the outcomes.

Oh, wow.

[Jet_Airliner 0]

Guys, stop arguing about FSX vs XPX. We all know what is what.X-Plane is fine with their graphics engine and optimization. The done well with default scenery. I really like that the clouds are 3D now, even new Flight lacks that.But even in Xp9 which is very old, I didn't see any good quality aircraft close to PMDG or even Feelthere (not wilco).There is no point of buying XPX for serious simmers (which are at least a half of us here are) because, there is no aircraft to fly. No FMC, no sort of active sky where you can plan your fuel like in real world depending on temperature and winds at cruise levels) and many other stuff. I don't see any point in arguing here...it's very silly

[mgh 89]

For God's sake Gerry, quit digging! The very NAME of the monthly license says all that need be said: Prepar3D® Developerhttp://www.prepar3d....prepar3d-store/http://www.prepar3d....etwork-program/ Developer Network ProgramAnyone can join the Prepar3D® Developer Network Program. No matter if you are a seasoned developer, or just starting out, we want to encourage you to develop for Prepar3D.

But the EULA itself, which is what matters, prohibits use for personal/consumer entertainment.The only references to develop/er/ment in the EULA are in section 15. Developer Network Agreement. which defines:

"Consumer/Entertainment Markets" means the markets and distribution channel for individual end user purchases of goods and services who personally consume the product for entertainment purposes.

The P3D site also states:

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

http://www.prepar3d....etwork-program/

[JasonHarris 96]

Jason, I really don't understand you FPS problems. I'm getting anywhere from 50 to 100 FPS in XPX. Granted I always use real weather, so some days, there aren't any clouds to speak of. Maybe something in your setup, I don't know.

I will take it to the xplane forum in case it's something that can be resolved.

[JasonHarris 96]

But the EULA itself, which is what matters, prohibits use for personal/consumer entertainment.The only references to develop/er/ment in the EULA are in section 15. Developer Network Agreement. which defines:The P3D site also states:http://www.prepar3d....etwork-program/

You must have missed my point above. The real company missing out is LM because you have hundreds of people using fsx for commercial gains when it is not licensed for that in the EULA. Microsoft are clearly not enforcing it well enough there by depriving LM of profits from the ESP platform licensed to LM from microsoft. I think it's a silly debate that doesn't matter but if you are serious about it then the reality is that microsoft are damaging LM more than the other way around.

[airlinejets 709]

We are an FSX/P3D shop and will remain so for the forseeable future, regardless ofthe pros/cons of other platforms.

We got the message in your first post, warts and all...lol :(