lindbergh72 74 Posted June 5, 2016 Share Posted June 5, 2016 Regarding P3D and version 3.3 Dear Aerosoft, Maybe you need to control if your developers from using old dx9 rendering system for addons. Beau Hollis wrote:Exact replication of the draw order generated by the legacy dx9 rendering system is not possible in the new system. We've done our best to fix specific issues as reported, but there will eventually be cases where fixing one add-on by modifying sort orders will break other add-ons. We posted a couple years back that we were dropping official support for the fs2002 routines for this vary reason, and encourage developers to stop using tools that rely on them. We made some major performance improvements in 3.2 which relied in part on changes to optimize some draw order sorting routines. These changes caused issues with a few add-ons which had worked in 3.1 and we addressed those issues in 3.3. We also fixed a bug in the sorting routine which made draw order non-deterministic in certain cases. We believe the sort is stable now and would prefer not to modify it again. Please keep reporting these issues, as we do appreciate the feedback, but also understand that we may not be able to investigate and respond. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deputy Sheriffs Tom A320 4915 Posted June 5, 2016 Deputy Sheriffs Share Posted June 5, 2016 And what exactly do you want to say with your post? That AS should make sure that new add-ons will comply to P3Dv3.3 (as long as they are being sold as compatible)? Or that AS update hundreds of old add-ons (of course for free, as you paid already 10 (or even more) years ago for them)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
funkyaz77 2 Posted June 5, 2016 Share Posted June 5, 2016 45 minutes ago, Tom A320 said: And what exactly do you want to say with your post? That AS should make sure that new add-ons will comply to P3Dv3.3 (as long as they are being sold as compatible)? Or that AS update hundreds of old add-ons (of course for free, as you paid already 10 (or even more) years ago for them)? Hi Aerosoft, I think that developers should ensure that if they are selling a P3D V3 compatible scenery that they at least support it and provide current updates. With that said if the work to update is above and beyond what is considered normal updates (or if old methods were used to save time and new work has to be completed) then I think a nominal fee should be applied. Noone should be expected to work for free. Hope this helps. Blessings Duncan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean_johnston 3 Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 Such as Dublin mega airport it's isn't compatible with P3D V3.3 and all and needs to be redone as it isn't well optimised in P3D V3 so this would be a good chance to improve and optimise airports like Dublin using dx11 and to aloe it V3.3 compatible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aerosoft Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558 Posted June 6, 2016 Aerosoft Share Posted June 6, 2016 Once the dust settles we will look into it. It is clear that staying compatible with P3D does not get easier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ageva 69 Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 1 minute ago, Mathijs Kok said: Once the dust settles we will look into it. It is clear that staying compatible with P3D does not get easier. I agree Mathijs. I just post it on ADX and I will write it here as well, lots of P3Dv3 compatible scenery add-ons are affected by LM decision to drop support to the old SDK... Only AS have on my list 34 titles that I guess need to be reviewed and verified to be fully compatible with P3Dv3.3 Maybe adding to the compatibility list here http://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?/p3dv3/ an warning? "All P3Dv3 scenery add-ons are fully compatible with P3D up to v3.2, compatibility with P3Dv3.3 is to be reviewed" Better safe then sorry, right? Amos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
data63 421 Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 maybe LM should have made a V4 instead of V3.3 when changing a major part Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gmoneyprs 186 Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 On 6/5/2016 at 5:22 PM, Tom A320 said: Or that AS update hundreds of old add-ons (of course for free, as you paid already 10 (or even more) years ago for them)? That's a red herring, Tom. The fact is that this latest P3D update has uncovered a remarkable trend among [scenery] developers of using wildly-old SDKs, dating perhaps back to the days of FS2002. That developers continued, in spite of this warning, is evidence only that developers wanted to save time and finagle the same set of files to work with both FSX and P3D, a feat that many developers have been able to accomplish, unbeknownst to consumers, for a long time... until now. That being said, I think developers in this day and age, should have stopped advertising generic "P3Dv3" compatibility when LM has shown that they're willing to break compatibility in the middle of a version cycle. Staying true to the strict interpretation of language, if you advertise a product as being v3 compatible, you've obligated yourself to maintain it, free of charge, throughout the version cycle. This isn't my opinion, nor is it a demand directed at Aerosoft, it's merely a logical interpretation of language, as we all understand it. Hindsight is 20/20 and I hate to be an armchair developer, but I would have claimed that a product, in this environment, is only guaranteed up through the latest, tested version (3.2 in this case). Again, this P3D update has done some great things for consumers. First, it dropped legacy code, which should always be viewed as a step forward. Secondly, but not of lesser importance, it's shown consumers the extent of complacency among developers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deputy Sheriffs Herman 1591 Posted June 7, 2016 Deputy Sheriffs Share Posted June 7, 2016 This thread is trending in the same direction as the now closed thread titled "Info regarding the problems with P3D 3.3" here. I'm going to close this one too. If another mod wants to reopen it, no need to check with me first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveCT2003 2553 Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 LM is going to produce a hotfix in the next few days to address the scenery bgl issue, but they again warn the day is coming where P3D will move forward from the older functions. See the post by Adam Breed at the link below. LINK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.