• Which the release of FS2020 we see an explosition of activity on the forun and of course we are very happy to see this. But having all questions about FS2020 in one forum becomes a bit messy. So therefore we would like to ask you all to use the following guidelines when posting your questions:

    • Tag FS2020 specific questions with the MSFS2020 tag.
    • Questions about making 3D assets can be posted in the 3D asset design forum. Either post them in the subforum of the modelling tool you use or in the general forum if they are general.
    • Questions about aircraft design can be posted in the Aircraft design forum
    • Questions about airport design can be posted in the FS2020 airport design forum. Once airport development tools have been updated for FS2020 you can post tool speciifc questions in the subforums of those tools as well of course.
    • Questions about terrain design can be posted in the FS2020 terrain design forum.
    • Questions about SimConnect can be posted in the SimConnect forum.

    Any other question that is not specific to an aspect of development or tool can be posted in the General chat forum.

    By following these guidelines we make sure that the forums remain easy to read for everybody and also that the right people can find your post to answer it.

Lockheed Martin - Prepar3D

Messages
952
Country
panama
Downloaded it on friday night, three files to an amount of 10 GIG. It took about four hours. Fired it up and it smoothly loaded with no problems.
The outlook is a little better than FSX, specially the cities. Panama looks ok and MPTO is well done with no surprises. I added some freeware planes and the procedure is exactly as FSX (well this thing is FSX with some new administrative screens) they all worked fine. I did notice that I got basically the same fps as FSX a constant 25-35 all over with all sliders maxed, San Francisco buckled down to around 12 fps. I guess I´ll use it the rest of the month then cancel the monthly fee. :)---Really nothing new, some people have written that water looks better, I din´t notice this at all. Sky is as bad as FSX´s. I find it very expensive.:eek:
 
It's not expensive at all. The trouble is that FS was, considering its licenced content, very cheap, made possible only by the vast numbers of units it sold and favourable licencing conditions from the content vendors for non-commercial end use.

If you were to try to build a simulation of the world, buy all the licenced airport and nav databases, geo-typical terrain etc, then add flight modelling, gauge displays etc. from the professional sim vendors, you'd be looking at many tens of thousands, possible hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Si
 
It's not expensive at all. The trouble is that FS was, considering its licenced content, very cheap, made possible only by the vast numbers of units it sold and favourable licencing conditions from the content vendors for non-commercial end use.

If you were to try to build a simulation of the world, buy all the licenced airport and nav databases, geo-typical terrain etc, then add flight modelling, gauge displays etc. from the professional sim vendors, you'd be looking at many tens of thousands, possible hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Si

Sorry, I still find it too expensive, thanks for your valuable description of the economics of making a sim...:eek::eek::eek:
 
Last edited:
Well it's too expensive for me to justify using at home also, but that's not its intended market. We've built a few sims at work and (assuming it meets the requirements) shelling out $500 for a platform instead of $50,000... well, you can see how we'd consider it cheap! :)

Si
 
$10/month developer license ... too expensive?

How much would you propose it should cost?
 
$10/month developer license ... too expensive?

How much would you propose it should cost?

How about US$89.99 for the developers license and whatever they want for the other one......I would buy right away the first one.;)
 
At $90 as a once off, there would be no income to develop the platform.

Given that P3D is being actively developed, that's not going to be feasible, unless you want to pay $90 each time an update comes out.

That probably won't be too different to $10 per month.

It is fine to want the earth for very little, but you have to be realistic.


Sent from my mobile .. words substituted by iPhone at will.
 
Hi,

We got some feedback from a user of our NL2000 scenery. He had not so great performance in FSX and in Prepar3D his performed at least doubled. I think that was mainly concerned with the amount of photoreal scenery and reading from disk. So it seems in some situation there can be a performance difference with FSX. I guess it also depends on the PC used.
 
As far as development goes, there isn't a lot of advantage to using Prepare3d, unless you are specifically developing for that platform. I don't think you need that unless you have a contract in your hand to require that platform.

Just using it out of curiosity wouldn't be very cost effective, when FSX will do the same thing in 99% of your usage.

Dick
 
As far as development goes, there isn't a lot of advantage to using Prepare3d, unless you are specifically developing for that platform. I don't think you need that unless you have a contract in your hand to require that platform.

Just using it out of curiosity wouldn't be very cost effective, when FSX will do the same thing in 99% of your usage.

Dick

For those of us who both use XML extensively in compiled models and/or script gauges and logic in XML, Prepar3D has one terrific advantage to offer...

...when loading into the sim, all XML "problems or errors" are reported in message boxes!

I was quite honestly astonished to discover 32 "errors" in a GPS module that has apparently been working properly in FS9 and FSX for years despite those "errors."

Once I corrected them, I discovered to my amazement that although FS9 and FSX both allowed them to run, several previously unknown "features" started working that I'd already written off as unresolved "bugs" in FS9 and/or FSX!

In other words, Prepar3D's XML parsing engine is much stricter than that of either FS9 or FSX. So, I find Prepar3D useful for properly "validating" all of my XML scripting... :D
 
... and of course, theres the new 3dsMax export modules.

(which you can get without subscribing, but are only available because there is a Prepar3d program being actively financed.)
 
Bill, doesn't FSX already contain the ability to report XML errors, but you have to add the entry for it to do so in the fsx.cfg?

Si
 
Bill, doesn't FSX already contain the ability to report XML errors, but you have to add the entry for it to do so in the fsx.cfg?

Si

Simon, you'd think so, but if it does I'm totally clueless. I seem to vaguely recall some fsx.cfg undocumented entry about "errors," but I've long since forgotten what it was...

Google searching didn't yield any results for me though. :confused:

Even so, the error box(es) in Prepar3d are very specific by listing the precise error in syntax and/or schema by gauge name and exact string in which the error exists.
 
Last edited:
Bill, doesn't FSX already contain the ability to report XML errors, but you have to add the entry for it to do so in the fsx.cfg?

Si

I belive you might be thinking of the "optional" fsx.cfg entry that allows you to list missing scenery objects ?
I also have never heard of one to list XML errors...

Geoff
 
First experience

I want to share with you that I published a dedicated version of MyTraffic for Prepar3D on friday. A dedcated version was needed for the SimConnect client, some differences in the airport, available models etc. For existing FSX costumors a cheap package (10€) containing the differences is offered.

After one weekend I can say that there is a market for P3D add ons resp. updates, so I can encourage other developers to take the time it needs to verify and adapt the product and create the installers and support infrastracture etc.
 
I was really happy to hear about the price cuts. $200.00 is much more affordable for the general public.

I purchased, downloaded, and installed the Developer package and found it ran VERY WELL! Totally astonished. I was only using FSX to make planes for, as the payware market is mainly FSX now. I was so disgusted with the bugs in FSX (studdering, wormy movement of the ground terrain, blinking clouds, pink flashing runways, hopping planes) that I couldnt fly it, only FS9. Now.... I fly in P3D with ease, no bugs, just smoothness.

Sorry Gera its not working for you. You must have a very powerful computer. Must be nice! :)

I will be making planes in this platform now. Goodbye FSX... You will be getting P3D models adapted to you now. (large grin stretching from ear to ear, eyebrows glistening... )
 
I am currently updating ADE to work directly with P3D. This will mean that ADE can be directed to P3D rather than FSX and use the files in P3D. While this means that folks developing for both would need to compile twice it does mean that ADEP can be updated as P3D develops without any changes happening to folks working with ADEX.

It turns out to be a surprisingly large job :eek: Primarily because ADE does partition different versions completely.
 
In my opinion, the real advantage is, that P3D is under continuous development while FSX is in a dead end street. Thinking on new hardware in the future and enhancements in DirectX and OGL. FSX will only have a limited advantage out of it. Even the annoying well known bugs in FSX will disappear over the time in P3D.

To the pricing: I can remember the time when we had flight simulations on SGI computers for 1.5 Million Dollars per piece. This was only the hardware. The software costs were at least the same. In 1975 we build a ATC radar simulator in Kaufbeuren, Germany for 17 Million Deutsch Marks (if I remember right). The performance was far less than what we have today with FSX. So I could live with the offer.

If Lockheed decides to focus on the professional market then it would be a solution to found a certain kind of APP store where every developer has a chance to sell his work under controlled conditions. Such a platform could ensure a kind of quality control and a possibility to offer a product on a wide market. For the enthusiastics in our community: as far as I know, the license does not forbid to use P3D as developer at your home if you only drive your hobby.

Regards
Mike
 
sorry fore some Dumb questions I read Lionhart

I was really happy to hear about the price cuts. $200.00 is much more affordable for the general public...
I purchased, downloaded, and installed the Developer package and found it ran VERY WELL! Totally astonished. I was only using FSX to make planes for, as the payware market is mainly FSX now. I was so disgusted with the bugs in FSX (studdering, wormy movement of the ground terrain, blinking clouds, pink flashing runways, hopping planes) that I couldnt fly it, only FS9. Now.... I fly in P3D with ease, no bugs, just smoothness.

Sorry Gera its not working for you. You must have a very powerful computer. Must be nice!

I will be making planes in this platform now. Goodbye FSX... You will be getting P3D models adapted to you now
I prefare to pay the 200$

but as a paywere Scenery developer or Aircraft creator I think that this is the only option so for a 1 year of use will cost 120$
http://www.prepar3d.com/prepar3d-license-comparison/
please Correct me if I'm wrong
thanks
David
 
Back
Top