Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ArjenVdv

What's the problem with Prepar3D development?

Recommended Posts

I am very sorry to be this guy for once, but I am wondering something I can't understand. I am completely aware that Robert made some topic about PMDG and P3D, and I know this topic has already been discussed into fine detail. However, this was already quite a while ago, and things seem to be starting to change.

The bit that I don't understand is, why are like 90% of the lately released add-ons compatible with Prepar3D and PMDG products are not, and aren't planned to be either? OpusFSX, REX, Aerosoft Scenery, ORBX, just to name a few, all feature an option during installation that allows it to be installed for P3D. So obviously the question is, why can other companies, but why can't PMDG do this?

FSX has already proven to be the best platform for the current flightsimming community. Lockheed Martin bought the FSX code from Microsoft, and are developing it further and further. In a while, it will be 64-bit, DX11, and it will be much more stable. Wouldn't this platform be a much better option for PMDG, considering how much more room it features for development? For our community, it will probably be the ultimate flightsimming dream.

OK, I know that Lockheed Martin only sells academic licenses and such, but seriously, does that really make a difference for PMDG and our community?

Share this post


Link to post

My PMDG 737NGX works great with P3D so what is it you are asking? A public admission that they are compatible?

Share this post


Link to post

My PMDG 737NGX works great with P3D so what is it you are asking? A public admission that they are compatible?

Well, yes.  

 

What if, in the future V2.0 is out and it no longer is compatible with P3D? Then what? This is why we need PMDG to support P3D and vice versa. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

PMDG is looking into Xplane10 for future projects, not P3D.  FSX and XP10 are home entertainment products, P3D is not because of the EULA :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post

I would bet all PMDG products will work with 2.0 but if not , then yes official collaboration would be great. I for one would not buy 2.0 unless it worked with PMDG so from a financial perspective it will hurt PMDG and P3D if the new version is not compatible.

Share this post


Link to post

I would bet all PMDG products will work with 2.0 but if not , then yes official collaboration would be great. I for one would not buy 2.0 unless it worked with PMDG so from a financial perspective it will hurt PMDG and P3D if the new version is not compatible.

Also, forgot mentioning that according to PMDG's EULA, their product may NEVER be used with Prepar3D. Which ultimately means you are never allowed to openly discuss the use of your PMDG products in P3D nor can you ask for support in that regard. 

 

But the question remains, why don't other developers seem to care about this all? Their installers even openly feature the option to install for P3D, and I cannot imagine an Aerosoft airport is supposed to serve as "studying an aviation related subject". In that regard PMDG would have a better excuse looking at how complex and realistic their products are. They can always rely on the excuse their products are being used for studying purposes, and at the end of the day isn't that exactly what we are doing? Don't we want to study as much as possible about aviation, because we have such a big interest in it? From my point of view this wouldn't violate the EULA of the academic license. 

Share this post


Link to post

The other companies apparently dont take issue with the EULA or deem it beneficial to 'risk it'. I understand PMDG's decision to not 'officially' support it. All it takes is P3D to make a few changes regarding the end users and I dont see why PMDG wouldnt re-think that decision. 

 

Perhaps Lockheed have this EULA revision planned with V2 - who knows. Will have to wait and see.

Share this post


Link to post

 

 


In that regard PMDG would have a better excuse looking at how complex and realistic their products are. They can always rely on the excuse their products are being used for studying purposes, and at the end of the day isn't that exactly what we are doing? Don't we want to study as much as possible about aviation, because we have such a big interest in it?

 

Well, not really. You are not using the NGX to study for your university course... you are using it for entertainment - even if studying it in non-academic sense is a part of the entertainment.

 

PMDG products are strictly entertainment products. P3D is strictly non-entertainment (commercial and/or academic). This does not combine. While Aerosoft et al. probably feels they are fine with allowing their product to be used for non-entertainment purposes, I would say PMDG has their reasons this is not OK with them.

One does not have to go far to see where this is stemming from. Some pointers are in said RSR posts.

Share this post


Link to post

Uhhm, re: PMDG and P3D, aren't Lockheed and Boeing competitors?

 

I know PMDG aren't exactly in bed w/Boeing (at least not totally), but.... :wub:

Share this post


Link to post

Also, forgot mentioning that according to PMDG's EULA, their product may NEVER be used with Prepar3D. Which ultimately means you are never allowed to openly discuss the use of your PMDG products in P3D nor can you ask for support in that regard. 

 

But the question remains, why don't other developers seem to care about this all? Their installers even openly feature the option to install for P3D, and I cannot imagine an Aerosoft airport is supposed to serve as "studying an aviation related subject". In that regard PMDG would have a better excuse looking at how complex and realistic their products are. They can always rely on the excuse their products are being used for studying purposes, and at the end of the day isn't that exactly what we are doing? Don't we want to study as much as possible about aviation, because we have such a big interest in it? From my point of view this wouldn't violate the EULA of the academic license. 

PMDG said they might still make products for P3D but those will be special Training edition

 

 

Im hoping for EULA to be modified for PMDG support

 

Even though Xplane is an okay sim (good defult flight model, 64 bit) it still lacks the complexity and 3rd party developer support that FS ennjoys. PMDG want to remake all their products into Xplane one day but I for one am not too excited as I will still lose out on my old addons and their developers who may just keep with P3D. Xplane is growing but the market is still too small compared to fsx 

 

I really hope the EULA changes or Xplane gets a 100 times better


Flying Tigers Group

Boeing777_Banner_Pilot.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post

Perhaps Lockheed have this EULA revision planned with V2 - who knows. Will have to wait and see.

 

Those are my thoughts...


Howard
MSI Mag B650 Tomahawk MB, Ryzen7-7800X3D CPU@5ghz, Arctic AIO II 360 cooler, Nvidia RTX3090 GPU, 32gb DDR5@6000Mhz, SSD/2Tb+SSD/500Gb+OS, Corsair 1000W PSU, Philips BDM4350UC 43" 4K IPS, MFG Crosswinds, TQ6 Throttle, Fulcrum One Yoke
My FlightSim YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@skyhigh776

Share this post


Link to post

It's a liability issue. If you're training in P3D in an official capacity in the PMDG 737 and then you crash a 737 you can possibly try to blame PMDG, hence why they strictly prohibit use in P3D. The realism of PMDG is part of the problem. It's so close to the real thing that you can almost train on. There's enough realism to get you in trouble. But PMDG is not in that business and does not want that responsibility and red tape. They make entertainment addons for civil flight simulators. It doesn't matter for scenery addons because there's no liability. Are you going to sue Orbx because there wasn't a tree placed in the correct place at the end of the runway? Or Opus because the weather wasn't simulated correctly when you trained ahead of your real flight? And perhaps it is a Boeing vs Lockheed issue. But they only compete on the military side, and even then the F-22 was a joint project. Boeing made the wings, aft fuselage, and avionics; Lockheed did weapons system and radar etc. They did lose the F-35 contract to Lockheed though.....

Share this post


Link to post

P3D is still 32 bit isn't it... So still more susceptible to virtual addressing space limitations.

 

when it's 64 bit then I'll get interested.

Share this post


Link to post

I think that is has something to do with the fact that the add-on developers have to purchase, I believe, an  SDK for P3D and that is an extra cost that would have to be passed on to us, the end users.

 

I think that the PMDG aircraft are just fine like they are.  Yes, they work in P3D, even though you are not supposed to know, (after all, P3D is just FS11 beefed up).


Harry Nelson

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...