Rob Ainscough Posted February 27, 2022 Share Posted February 27, 2022 Customers are people that buy products you publish, past, present, and future. As I pointed out, updated development and new development is still being done on P3D. Do you need more examples? If you feel P3D is not viable, that's entirely your decision ... but such a decision is indicative that MSFS isn't providing sufficient funds to support bringing your existing P3D up to similar feature specification such as PBR, Sloped Runways, Material Scripting, Dynamic Lights, Dynamic Reflections, etc. ... these features were provide a long time ago, but only your "new projects" (some not all) would leverage "some" of these features?? I'm a 3DSMax modeler and know enough about both P3D/MSFS workflows to know they aren't drastically different (sure some difference especially around texture sizes MSFS being much weaker in that regard). Many existing products (long before MSFS was even on the table) were never updated, forever bound to FSX limitations, the LCD in development. A few products were updated as paid "Professional" versions and still didn't leverage all the new features available in P3D ... and then you wonder why sales are not good?? Perhaps supporting the same features that exist in P3D that currently exist in MSFS would have helped with "sales" in P3D? I have no idea why you didn't embrace these new features in P3D (PBR, sloped runways, material scripting, dynamic lights, dynamic reflections, etc.) that were available long before MSFS even hit the market? The work effort to bring your existing products up to date with these features is a relatively easy process for any 3D modeler. MSFS sales are better because of visuals, the same visuals P3D supports with one exception ... native Ambient Occlusion support. You made no serious effort to bring P3D forward ... if you want an good example of just how good P3D can look, load up P3D FlyTampa PBR enabled airports ... IMHO, they look better in P3D (certainly texture resolution) than they do in MSFS. Clearly the visual features where there and could be leveraged, but Aerosoft and those whom publish under Aerosoft seemed to just ignore them. I get that you want ONE platform for all ... you made that clear many years ago during one of the FS conferences. But if MSFS sales are "so good", then I'm certain you'd have the resources to bring your existing P3D customers up to similar visuals as your MSFS customers? So either MSFS sales aren't good enough, or your pushing the ONE platform mission. Rob 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!Register a new account
Already have an account? Sign in here.Sign In Now