twharrell 37 Posted June 26, 2013 Share Posted June 26, 2013 Mathijs, As an exclusive P3D user, I've been quite intrigued by your comments regarding LM's Academic License availability to simmers, as well as LM actively pursuing you and other developers to make your addons compatible with P3D. Oh, and you are not the only developer I am reading this from. It is good to know that our suspicions are confirmed - LM does plan for P3D to be a major player in the flight sim entertainment market. Let's face it, commercial simulation can attribute its success to the thousands of simmers and developers that have made this hobby what it is over the past 3 decades. You especially caught my interest in another forum in response to a comment I made about the legal aspects of develpment for P3D. Namely, that you haven't needed any legal representation or counsel to support P3D, largely because of what the Academic License really is, and the fact that LM pursued you. I find that interesting because we still have major developers (read PMDG) who still hide behind lawyers and EULAS in there refusal to support P3D. I was wondering given your experience with the people at LM, given that LM has been very open about their active support of the flight simulation community, why there still are a few developers like PMDG that still use legal arguments to justify their refusal to support P3D? I don't intend this to be a PMDG bashing thread as I know a lot of folks here love PMDG, and I personally think they produce beautiful addons. I was hoping you might be able to clear the waters for us a little since you are very outspoken about supporting P3D. Thank you! Todd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt_Smith 1116 Posted June 26, 2013 Share Posted June 26, 2013 Why do PMDG use the legal argument, well its quit simple really. They produce licensed Boeing aircraft, do you really think Boeing want such high definition simulations of their aircraft running on a direct competitors flight simulator? Also this isn't the place to discuss EULA's, if you want someone to discuss that get yourself a solicitor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snave 466 Posted June 26, 2013 Share Posted June 26, 2013 The answer for LM is simple: Talent The answer for PMDG is simpler: They're right. The rest of us can hug the wall and pretend we're holding up the ceiling, They cannot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheyenne Chief Pilot 829 Posted June 26, 2013 Share Posted June 26, 2013 (...) The answer for PMDG is simpler: They're right. (...) Probably we can't be more explicit than that on the Aerosoft forums ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aerosoft Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558 Posted June 27, 2013 Aerosoft Share Posted June 27, 2013 Mathijs, As an exclusive P3D user, I've been quite intrigued by your comments regarding LM's Academic License availability to simmers, as well as LM actively pursuing you and other developers to make your addons compatible with P3D. Oh, and you are not the only developer I am reading this from. It is good to know that our suspicions are confirmed - LM does plan for P3D to be a major player in the flight sim entertainment market. Let's face it, commercial simulation can attribute its success to the thousands of simmers and developers that have made this hobby what it is over the past 3 decades. You especially caught my interest in another forum in response to a comment I made about the legal aspects of develpment for P3D. Namely, that you haven't needed any legal representation or counsel to support P3D, largely because of what the Academic License really is, and the fact that LM pursued you. I find that interesting because we still have major developers (read PMDG) who still hide behind lawyers and EULAS in there refusal to support P3D. I was wondering given your experience with the people at LM, given that LM has been very open about their active support of the flight simulation community, why there still are a few developers like PMDG that still use legal arguments to justify their refusal to support P3D? I don't intend this to be a PMDG bashing thread as I know a lot of folks here love PMDG, and I personally think they produce beautiful addons. I was hoping you might be able to clear the waters for us a little since you are very outspoken about supporting P3D. Thank you! Todd I got no comment on the point of view of PMDG, I just do not know what the exact reasons behind their stand are. I do know that I use P3D 90% of the time these days, if only because it loads so much faster and because it is just more stable. If it is Boeing to prevents it.... well that says more about Boeing then about Lockheed. I believe that LM is not actively pushing P3D to us lowly customers, but I know that the people I speak to certainly do not mind, in fact they love it and they have asked us many many times to push our products on that platform. And clearly they do not do that for a professional or academic market. If anybody has a problem with it, it will probably be Microsoft. I know they are making some noises. For now let's enjoy a better FSX! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twharrell 37 Posted June 28, 2013 Author Share Posted June 28, 2013 Here, here! I think the noises we are all hearing from the halls of Microsoft are the wailing and nashing of teeth over the complete failure of "Flight" (or "Stall", as it should be called), and as they regret their short-sighted decision to end flight simulator development. I appreciate you chiming in, MK. And thanks to all the others, too. Todd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
torkermax 2 Posted June 28, 2013 Share Posted June 28, 2013 (or "Stall", as it should be called), LMAO Yes it was nice hearing an honest answere/opnion for MK! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.