Prepar3d2 support - once more

[McMobo 4]

No, but LM will at some point stop the development of P3Dv2 and move on on P3Dv3 (they too need to earn some money with their development). Until then compability with AES will be broken with every new P3D update LM releases. Since it requires seriously much work to get AES working in each new version currently only have the option to wait.

Ah, I see. Makes sense.

[Jetwings32 29]

Thank you for the post Oliver, I hope you can work out the issues with LM. I can understand some of the technical challenges moving forward and I'm sure it may seem daunting and no rewards for major changes to something that worked in FSX. LM have been pretty responsive to many 3rd party content provider requests so my hope is they continue to work with you/Aerosoft on this.

Although a "static" platform is good for 3rd party content providers in some ways it is also not good for 3rd party content providers in other ways ... there are many that don't want another 7 years of static unchanging platform, in fact, we embrace the changes because they move us that much closer to reality and since flight is very much a visual medium that's core to progress. My hope is that 3rd party content providers are aware of the environments for which they target and how those changes may impact them ... I'm in the same boat for the development work I do (not Flight Sim related) and I'm constantly having to adjust to changes in OS, web, mobile targets ... so I do feel your pain/concern. But to have targets NOT CHANGE is frankly a luxury ... developers need to adapt, learn, adjust, and deploy.

I'll disagree on the "we don't need a second GSX" ... I've used the Virtuali based products before and it's been very problematic with continued issues around updates that frequently requires complete re-installs of their add-on manager -- it's been a major headache. I've stopped buying FlightBeam and FSDT products because they use Virtuali (no option to have the airport without Virtuali which is a shame because FB and FSDT airports look fantastic!). I feel there is a very good need for a "second GSX" product and like it or not SimConnect is going to be the process on which things will grow over time. SimConnect is now a managed part of P3D (not a separate install) allowing developers to use "managed" tools (.NET framework, VS 2010, VS2012, VS2013) products to work with SimConnect I think is a big plus for developers and the future of possibilities.

Your stance/opinion seems to be in contrast with Mathijs who I can quote in some of his threads that he feels the future of simulation is very much with P3D. Has this opinion changed?

Cheers, Rob.

Wrong one.. ignore this response seeing I can't delete it.. I was trying to ask Oliver something..

[Rob Ainscough 204]

No, but LM will at some point stop the development of P3Dv2 and move on on P3Dv3 (they too need to earn some money with their development). Until then compability with AES will be broken with every new P3D update LM releases. Since it requires seriously much work to get AES working in each new version we currently only have the option to wait.

You folks will need to find another way - your approach will never be sustainable. Even when v2.x development stops and they move to v3.x your problem will remain the same for v3.x onwards. I highly recommend you find an alternate dependency or put in a request to LM to provide you with the necessary hooks/tools you need such that you are not tied to versions.

At this point in time I doubt this is really a market share debate.

Cheers, Rob.

[Nthabti 18]

You folks will need to find another way - your approach will never be sustainable. Even when v2.x development stops and they move to v3.x your problem will remain the same for v3.x onwards. I highly recommend you find an alternate dependency or put in a request to LM to provide you with the necessary hooks/tools you need such that you are not tied to versions.

At this point in time I doubt this is really a market share debate.

Cheers, Rob.

My thoughts exactly! Other developers manage to do that too. To wait for LM to stop development of P3D is an aberrant way to look at things.

I have moved to P3D with v. 2.0 and I am not going back. All my AES credits are currently going to waste. The approach of Aerosoft not to make AES P3D compatible on the one hand and not using the FSX/P3D feature to move the jetways on the other leaves P3D users with a very unsatisfactory situation.

[OPabst 2091]

Please read my statement here, the situation around P3D has not change in any way and is more and more going away from the code in the graphic engine needed to implement AES in P3D as it is in FSX now.

So, the Vistamare modules are not the key problem anymore, as even when they are available, the AES code could not be implemented here, as this parts of P3D are not stayable and maybe not continued in future. So no way to transfer AES to P3D.

To develop a complete new product with the limited "standard" features of Simconnect is not a very usefull approach. As long as there are no other option coming in future to control animated object and sequences, I don't see any way to invest time here.

[Matthijs88 13]

I'm also a little sad to hear that aerosoft is not able to design something new like the good "old" AES for P3D.

We can't stay forever with FSX and the limits of it.

Why not invest in a future proof platform like P3D?

[OPabst 2091]

I'm also a little sad to hear that aerosoft is not able to design something new like the good "old" AES for P3D.

We can't stay forever with FSX and the limits of it.

Why not invest in a future proof platform like P3D?

Why dont you try to understand, that such a invest, based on the not clear technological future of this project and a relative small user base, is not possible to calculate at the moment. You will not pay it.

I think, no need to keep this thread open, i have tried to explain it, but have the feeling, my english is not good enough, so i close this here. When the things change, we can continue the discussion.