• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

Milviz stops developping FSX airplanes

Speaking of surveys and outcomes, I've often wondered where payware developers get their data that says they decided to spend the resources to produce a specific product for a specific simulator. Despite what I spend annually on FSXA addons, I don't recall ever participating in a survey of any sort.

I'd love to see native FSXA F-105. I have one for FS9 and now there is one underdevelopment for P3D, totally ignoring the FSX market. And, I have tons of Mustangs and Corsairs for FS9 and FSXA, but no native B-25 Mitchell. Baffling it is. :dizzy:
 
"you know you can buy P3D, the F-105 and a decent GPU for less than that, right……?"

And you know that is entirely NOT THE POINT, right? ...;p

My GPU is not the problem, if it was I'd spend the grand on it....but instead, at the time I spent 10 grand on the computer and it was the fastest possible to be built at the time [about 3 years ago - when a GTX980 was THE top of the heap].

I paint for FSX...and I've invested a crapload of time in FSX. I'm not about to have some 3rd party outfit 'make me' change choice of Sim.... not after spending eons creating a photo-real Thud 2D pit in FSX [photo-real as in the canopy reflections even have mirrored and working gauges].
 
it is not "some 3rd party outfit 'make you' change your choice of Sim", but rather technology gently nudging you in the direction of 64bit flight sims.

FSX isn't current anymore, and just like FS9, it will soon be a thing of the past.

Priller
 
Legal blah : I dont/cant talk for milviz or AH as a group. This post is not meant to attack anyones rights to free speech or opinions. The following is my opinion. Again sorry for any issues you may have with it. ( remember a time when we didnt have to run a disclaimer like that... when a developer or anyone could just talk in a forum without fear ? ...:dizzy: )

Developers and publishers are only reacting to the market. They are not driving the market. The quote " vote with your wallet " is used alot on SOH and other forums. Guess what? It has worked. The voting has shown that 64bit exclusivity is the way forward both fiscally and from a market share point of view. Not to mention the future.

From a customers point of view it is a purchase of a new simulator ( x-plane or p3d or both - definitely both if you can afford it ) and in most cases your addons will work. Will they utilise all the new features? Probably not. But the enjoyment and engagement that you had with the addon in a 32 bit platform is still there in the 64 bit platform with the added bonus of knowing that it will continue to work under updated 64 bit Os's and p3d v4.4 ( there are rumours that V5 might break backwards compatibility but we have to wait on that. ) I like to think that despite not true p3dv4.4 a development that has given you hours - if not years - of enjoyment will continue to give you that enjoyment in the era of 64 bit.

As for unreleased developments , well 64bit + pbr + changes to sdk is very mouth watering for devs who finally get to give you something closer to what they want to give, rather than in 32 bit where they have to approximate.

I just keep remembering that the FS community is a symbiotic relationship. If one side dies or leaves the other also dies or leaves. And then there are no winners.

Warhorse : The B-25 has 2 developers working on separate developments, both well known. No other dev is likely to consider one. Especially since one of the devs is going to a detail amount that is not cost effective for most devs. Just a case of waiting for one or both of the devs to finish up.
 
As mentioned before, the same situation happened when FSX came out; lots of hurt feelings, but FSX eventually ruled the day. I think the problem is now further complicated in that some will be leaving or have already left the FSX camp for X-Plane, or other flight sims like DCS, and have absolutely no interest in P3D. I tried P3D and it just wasn't for me. I recently gifted my entire flight sim rig with a fresh install of X-Plane 11 (64 bit) and FSX with all my FSX add-ons that I had bought and collected over the past decade to my friend's youngest son. He much prefers X-Plane 11 (64 bit) over FSX (32 bit) as he gets much better graphics on the same rig. To him it's a no brainer; he will be investing in X-Plane and deleting FSX in its entirety. Sad to see my FSX install and all my add-ons go like that but it's his rig now, and it is what it is.


Tommy
 
People just need to chill out when it comes to which platform developers choose

If devs want to concentrate on a platform that achieves the desired aim and drop another as it limits or constrains them so be it

Its the sign of the times, how many said im not changing from fs9 to fsx

We have never had a true backwards capability with msfs and definitly from now never will

To date there have been countless devs announcing the dropping of older platforms to purely focus on the newer ones for many reasons from coding to PBR this also hasnt just effected aircraft development, flytampa fsdreamteam have stated no more fsx sceneries

You will see more and more devs dropping older platforms in years to come

Like it or not but its the evolution of the pc flying genre
 
Milviz was the first to make the move to abandon FS9 back in the day. They got way more flak for doing so than now.
 
Fascinating. Thanks for the information about simmers Wombat. I do recall that in its heyday MS counted 22 million flight sim users world wide it would be interesting to know what the numbers are now. The only comment I make about the survey is it is also restricted to primarily english speakers or western countries such as the US, as well. And we all know there are some very active sim groups in countries all around the world, spanish speaking, french speaking, russian speaking etc who produce lots of scenery etc etc but unless you really dig about you don't find them or know about them and unless your read and understand the language you do not get a handle on what is going on or what there interests are, like us they tend to focus on their own patch and paints and planes etc that operate there. To give you an example there is a group of Japanese developers who do scenery for FSX, they do limited releases which is if your in the know they give you an idea it is under development, then there is a download window and then that is it you cannot get it anymore. They produce some of the most exquisitely detailed scenery for flight sim I have ever seen bar none, but the other catch is, it is only for Japan. I spent a lot of time translating pages to get an idea of what was what before I picked up the way they worked and now I check regularly every couple of months to see what is happening or if what was underdevelopment has been released. I have discerned no particular focus in any of these overseas groups to tubes but a bit of everything.

As far as the technology and software issue is concerned that is the nature of micro computers and always has been I think we are always surprised at how quickly what was top of the heap very rapidly becomes not obsolete but well an also ran, I guess we all have rigs of one sort or another that when we bought, with simming in mind was state of the art but is no longer, but hey it works fine until such time is it does not work and as GMANs recent travails show, it is always a hardward failure that brings about a reassessment of what you had and what you have, I think it is amazing actually that we have been able to continue with FSX, a 32 bit program as long as we have. I can remember when in the work environment looking at a rig with 300mb of memory was viewed almost as a super computer. Computing wise I have always had an issue with software bloat and the loss of those people with programming skills who could work across platforms (Remember Cobol?). I have been simming since ATP started off but always have been restricted to MS based systems because sim programs were all written to run on Windows/DOS platforms but I am a firm and experienced user of alternative software platforms such as UNIX and LINUX which are more robust easier to program with once you know what your doing but more importantly are based on an ethos of open source and community participation. I am in a minority though, for most people it is Windows or nothing else because that is all they know and all that is offered to them. And it is for that reason alone that I will, when FSX becomes a dead duck for me, move to X-Plane because I can run it on a non MS software platform like Linux and other nice stuff like GIMP run on LINUX as well and that is a major attraction why? because that platform demands a tighter approach to software design, uses less memory and is invariably faster in execution. I look at the scenery being done and very rapidly now in X-Plane and I see that potential being unleashed and it actually looks visually a whole lot better than P3D to my eye.

But I am caught by the problem we all have, that is, while there are things I can do there a lots of things I cannot. So I rely heavily on payware and very talented and industrious solo shows for the aeroplanes I like to play around with (Not tubes with EFIS or PC screen displays, I have flown them for real and they are as boring as batsh@#T. What has caught my attention is that serious developers such as Carenado and PMDG have produced their stuff for X-Plane as well so hope springs eternal for the future but until the inevitable hardware meltdown I will continue with a 32 bit program on a 64 bit PC, then again I still run programs (long consigned to the software dustbin - ala Lotus 123 and Lotus Notes), designed for the Windows 3 and Windows 98 era for certain family members who insist on using them and nothing else. IMHO those 20 year old programs still are just as visually attractive (GUI wise) and had heaps of internet or HTML interconnectivity, work better and have more capacity than anything else produced by the Corporates since, except another public open source offering Open Office which kills MS Word etc.

No gripes at all but I understand completely why MILVIZ and others would say nope, 64 bit stuff only now. If your in that game you have to.
 
jeansy said:
People just need to chill out when it comes to which platform developers choose

If devs want to concentrate on a platform that achieves the desired aim and drop another as it limits or constrains them so be it

Its the sign of the times, how many said im not changing from fs9 to fsx

We have never had a true backwards capability with msfs and definitly from now never will

To date there have been countless devs announcing the dropping of older platforms to purely focus on the newer ones for many reasons from coding to PBR this also hasnt just effected aircraft development, flytampa fsdreamteam have stated no more fsx sceneries

You will see more and more devs dropping older platforms in years to come

Like it or not but its the evolution of the pc flying genre
Click to expand...

It only hurts when I think about the money...
I don't care personally one way or another who develops for FSX and who doesn't - the people that do continue will get my money because this is the software library I already own.
I have other flight sims - DCS, IL2(new), ROF, etc..that are 64bit and I will continue to spend money on hardware upgrades - but what I personally will not do is start over with FSX (ie P3D or Xplane) and purchase a whole new library of scenery and aircraft for it - I can't justify it. Sure some developers allow you to simply download for the version you have without an upcharge, but many do not. And in both of those cases (P3D and Xplane) it seems they keep reinventing the wheel every six months and breaking things, raising the frustration levels around the very thing that is supposed to alleviate that unhappy condition. I'm just going to keep riding this ol' dependable hoss til it drops thank you..warts, tics, chiggers and all.
 
heywooood said:
It only hurts when I think about the money...
I don't care personally one way or another who develops for FSX and who doesn't - the people that do continue will get my money because this is the software library I already own.
I have other flight sims - DCS, IL2(new), ROF, etc..that are 64bit and I will continue to spend money on hardware upgrades - but what I personally will not do is start over with FSX (ie P3D or Xplane) and purchase a whole new library of scenery and aircraft for it - I can't justify it. Sure some developers allow you to simply download for the version you have without an upcharge, but many do not. And in both of those cases (P3D and Xplane) it seems they keep reinventing the wheel every six months and breaking things, raising the frustration levels around the very thing that is supposed to alleviate that unhappy condition. I'm just going to keep riding this ol' dependable hoss til it drops thank you..warts, tics, chiggers and all.
Click to expand...

To be brutally honest then its your choice to remain with fsx

This is what people fail to forget no developer is forcing anyone to change plarforms or sims or upgrade or what ever

Theyre are merely saying they are no longer going to develop for dated sims. If someone whats to remain with the older platform i cant see why they are targeting and wanting to delay the evolution the genre

Was there this much tears when cars replaced horses
 
from those who had just bought a horse - or a herd..? yes.

and after 100+ years of fossil fuel burning I think many have carbon monoxide induced tears..if not asthma as a result. Progress for its own sake ain't always a good thing

but I digress - to your point, I'm not holding anyone back - just stating why I wont be in any particular hurry to follow this herd
 
In many ways we were spoiled by having FSX being the leading sim for so long, had they kept developing we probably would have four or five new versions since then (remember FS v1-v5, FS95, FS98, FS2000, FS2002, FS2004, FSX). Now that LM and XP have some momentum behind them its I am glad to see the 'state of the art' finally moving forward again.

I do remember when FSX was released and how much resistance there was to it, and sometimes I think that lack of love from many (including me) may have helped kill it, so even though I am not a fan of X-Plane I still buy it to support them, hoping the next version will finally be usable.
 
heywooood said:
from those who had just bought a horse - or a herd..? yes.
Click to expand...

And it would be my luck too your family background was stud ranchers as well

Ok i will try again

From fingers to knifes and forks?

And again it would be my luck youre missing a few digits so that one wont work either
 
Yes, it would be interesting to see how many users are into flight simulation. I remember when I would check SOH daily and there would be two pages of discussions, now there is usually about a quarter of a page. I don’t think that simmers are going to other websites either because I believe that ours is the best and has a sterling reputation.

i have noticed that activity has been picking up in the x-plane forum which is good. No one sharing downloads yet. I don’t know if a section for them would work here, It seems that most freeware developers go to x-plane.org. SOH is known mostly for MS and LM users.
 
Gee this thread wanders about a bit. The intention of a developer to stop developing for a simulator does not necessarily mean the end for the simulator. There are many other developers both free and payware who will continue to support FSX for some time to come. As for "investment" , people own the existing products they have and are enjoying them in their simulator of choice. What's to change? Who has "lost" anything?:engel016:
 
Most true.

Not only is it not the end of anyone's favorite sim platform, but it could open the door for the consumer to begin learning how to develop their own projects. Take charge and provide for their own appetites.

I was most pleased in the past few weeks to wander through here and notice that some enthusiasts are creating new files to run in CFS1.

Amazing. Old sims don't die so easily. Purple skies and all.
 
gman5250 said:
From my chair:

All of the above comments are valid and indicative of a common dilemma. Technology and markets are always moving forward.
If I may, I'd like to add one or two additional observations.

I find myself in a situation where I am more or less forced to build a completely new system, with very limited resources. I am, of course, in need of a system that is capable of not only running a 64bit simulation platform, but also effectively managing resource intensive art, video & 3D modeling software. After some concentrated research I find that I will be able to pull off my rebuild for less than I had originally forecast, and move up to a Generation 9 system. Am I making sacrifices to make it happen? Sure.

For those who are comfortable in FSX 32bit that's a great thing. Add-ons are plentiful and very well developed. If your concerns about moving into P3D 64bit center on the cost of upgrading systems, let me offer some good news.

The price of processing, video cards, memory and storage have become very favorable for building extremely capable systems at a modest cost. Tech has advanced so quickly in the last two years, what used to be considered expensive has become quite affordable. Memory, SSD, CPU, GPU and motherboards only one generation old have come down dramatically. Realistically, one can build a very fast and capable system for a few hundred dollars. I would do some serious price shopping and find out exactly what it would cost to build a system that would suit your needs. You may be pleasantly surprised. I was.

That said, I'd like to make a point about P3Dv4 64bit/PBR in its current version, and V5 which will most likely be full PBR...from the developers standpoint.

PREPAR3D is coming very, very close to a stage of development that rivals, or even surpasses DCS. Bear in mind that P3D is a global simulator, that will very likely make full use of Physically Based Rendering and eventually ray tracing. The impact of that cannot be understated, especially as it applies to the simulation environment. My ongoing PBR development, including side by side comparison of DCS and P3Dv4 PBR have shown me, conclusively, that the two are becoming virtually indistinguishable. This brings me to the point of the developers.

When developers begin to focus on modeling for P3D using the same tools and techniques that DCS developers have been exploring for quite some time, the improvements in that simulation will be dramatic. This comes at a cost. Speaking from my own experience working with PBR modeling, particle rendering, ray tracing and their applications in the simulator, it is logical that developers must choose carefully where they wish to place their R&D energies.

The differences between FSX modeling and 64bit PBR modeling will very shortly require that any developer who wishes to offer products for both will be required to maintain two separate and dedicated development modalities. This will require twice the energy and expense. The learning curve alone is prohibitively expensive and the investments in software can be staggering. Most developers are small or mid sized operations. Some are individuals. Amortizing the cost of moving into the main stream "gaming" world are simply unrealistic when attempting to maintain two work flows, art programs, marketing, support...etc.

Our community is facing a kind of crossroads. The good thing is that everyone can make their own choice and remain very comfortable with their decisions. I support the developers who choose to move forward as the technology moves upward on the exponential. I also encourage any and all interested in developing for FSX to learn the process. The software is inexpensive, some of it is even free i.3. GMAX or Gimp. Those are fine platforms and can be utilized very well.

I have enjoyed Milviz projects, including the King Air in it's various stages of development, for years now. I'll be quite content to wait for that airplane and all future releases. I absolutely can't wait to see what comes out of their labs for V5. I congratulate them for their commitment to a fine product line over the years, and for the courage to make a tough decision.

Kudos, and good luck gentlemen.
Click to expand...

Yup couldn't agree more. My forrays into PBR especially with Gordon's help form my perspective, are that it was just time. And as a beta tester and someone who's known Colin for a long time, it was a tough decision. I'm not speaking for him, just my observations through conversation. But I can tell you from my perspective it was about time! Upwards of 5 sims is resource intensive...which is a complete understatement. PBR is the future. You simply can't get these visuals in FSX.

45886887474_39e880a2fa_o.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top