https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/...up-a-perfectly-good-prepar3d-v4-installation/
so we will have to compile for FSX, p3dv2-3, P3dv4.
what's next?
so we will have to compile for FSX, p3dv2-3, P3dv4.
what's next?
-
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.
According to this, porting from p3dv3 to p3dv4 is a no go
- Thread starter Roland81
- Start date
=rk=
Resource contributor
- Messages
- 4,702
- Country
If you believe that, then you need to purchase my "update security insurance," to absorb the impact of these persistent updates.*
From prop disks to Earth curvature, .bmp, .DDS, etc, developers have had to explore, test and make decisions about version compatibility. The only thing new here is that LM makes us do this about every 6 months or so.
I have initial reports of a scenery that was compiled for FSX:SE that works perfectly in V4. Of that fact I am dubious, while at the same time I have an interest in it doing so. Still, no CTD's and no lurking mania to purge all but PMDG certified software. I am confident that when I get around to it, I will probably have to make some minor adjustments, as usual.
* Or continue developing as you always have, relatively secure with no real need to indemnify.
Because to me that sounds like a sales pitch. What's he selling..?
Ookay got it, landing lights might cause a FPS hit, hopefully a relatively stable one. Where's this ugly CTD instability alluded to, here?
Huh, an un-documented allegation doesn't prove this software was compliant with any version of the simulator in the first place. An upstanding developer might speak about his own products and allow other developers to determine and certify compatibility with various versions of the sim.
From prop disks to Earth curvature, .bmp, .DDS, etc, developers have had to explore, test and make decisions about version compatibility. The only thing new here is that LM makes us do this about every 6 months or so.
I have initial reports of a scenery that was compiled for FSX:SE that works perfectly in V4. Of that fact I am dubious, while at the same time I have an interest in it doing so. Still, no CTD's and no lurking mania to purge all but PMDG certified software. I am confident that when I get around to it, I will probably have to make some minor adjustments, as usual.
* Or continue developing as you always have, relatively secure with no real need to indemnify.
Is PMDG throwing the rest of the FS development community under the bus? I find these comments completely self serving. no doubt that PMDG products are by all means what drives this hobby with so much enthusiasm over the years, and keeping FS alive, but....
to pass the blame on certain things on not having a product 100% of a certain code, I think its not nice.. coming from some one so respected like PMDG.
to pass the blame on certain things on not having a product 100% of a certain code, I think its not nice.. coming from some one so respected like PMDG.
I'm looking forward to seeing an affidavit by LM certifying that the "default" MSFS scenery content derived from ESP (READ: from "FSX" because "ESP" was FSX under another name ! 
) ...has all been re-compiled and optimized via the P3Dv4 SDK for the current release (version-4) of Prepar3d now being sold. 
GaryGB
) ...has all been re-compiled and optimized via the P3Dv4 SDK for the current release (version-4) of Prepar3d now being sold. GaryGB
Last edited:
- Messages
- 5,214
I do not think so seeing his many references to PMDG.
Most of my P3Dv3 scenery works also in v4 except for the effects and the AI.
And when I compiled every item once more using the v4 compiler but I did and do not see any difference in FPS at all. I have a steady 30 FPS except when I try to change some graphics setting in P3Dv4 and go back to the same airport and the FPS will have dropped to 6. Closing and opening the program again and I have the same 30 FPS (limited at 30) once again.
Most of my P3Dv3 scenery works also in v4 except for the effects and the AI.
And when I compiled every item once more using the v4 compiler but I did and do not see any difference in FPS at all. I have a steady 30 FPS except when I try to change some graphics setting in P3Dv4 and go back to the same airport and the FPS will have dropped to 6. Closing and opening the program again and I have the same 30 FPS (limited at 30) once again.
JB3DG
Resource contributor
- Messages
- 1,325
- Country
I'm looking forward to seeing an affidavit by LM certifying that the "default" MSFS ESP-derived scenery content has all been re-compiled and optimized via the P3Dv4 SDK for the current release (version-4) of Prepar3d now being sold.
GaryGB
Judging from posts I saw in the P3D v4 beta forums (yes I was on the beta team) they did just that. There were a number of scenery errors that various testers found during the course of the beta and LM themselves repeatedly recommended that all scenery be updated to use the new formats.
So all default customized scenery elements (hundreds) they were re-compiled with the P3dv4 sdk? and the thousands of generic/ library default objects?
JB3DG
Resource contributor
- Messages
- 1,325
- Country
As far as I can tell yes.
And on that note, say what you will about Randazzo but it would be so incredibly stupid of him to blame ported sceneries for performance hits if 99% of the scenery within v4 was purely "ported" instead of recompiled by LM. I cannot in all seriousness think his intelligence is that blinded or PMDG wouldn't exist.
And it would be downright hypocritical of LM to so strongly recommend that all scenery be updated to use v4 tools while they fail to do so themselves.
And on that note, say what you will about Randazzo but it would be so incredibly stupid of him to blame ported sceneries for performance hits if 99% of the scenery within v4 was purely "ported" instead of recompiled by LM. I cannot in all seriousness think his intelligence is that blinded or PMDG wouldn't exist.
And it would be downright hypocritical of LM to so strongly recommend that all scenery be updated to use v4 tools while they fail to do so themselves.
Would you think it is reasonable that any developer has to every 6 months or year constantly trying to keep up with these updates? its great that the sim has evolved (I believe the true evolution has been v4) but ever since they came out with p3dv2 and onward its kind of a roller coaster for any developer really.
I guess any other ex-PMDG developer has to figure out how to act now that there will be 3 different platforms to cater.
hairyspin
Resource contributor
- Messages
- 3,253
- Country
Why not? FSX has been stable for years because Microsoft disbanded the development team, but the software world is constantly evolving and updating its tools and methods. The move from 32-bit to 64-bit is bound to mean developers have to update and the new features in P3D v4 are surely worth keeping up with? I believe Alphasim lost their market position when the FS world went to FSX and they didn't.
Yes, I did find that post a little strange, but I had already done a quick comparison of a selection of default files using the command line 'FC /b' before I started my new installers. Nothing but identical files, so I've gone ahead with a straight migration.
The goal was that for those who have both v3 and v4, they'd share the same install, but after mulling it over for a couple of days, I decided that this won't work -- there are slight differences in my scenery depending on whether users have FTX NZ installed, so I may be the only person who has FTX NZ in just one sim, but I can't take the chance
Moral is -- don't rush into things... and don't believe everything you read...
The goal was that for those who have both v3 and v4, they'd share the same install, but after mulling it over for a couple of days, I decided that this won't work -- there are slight differences in my scenery depending on whether users have FTX NZ installed, so I may be the only person who has FTX NZ in just one sim, but I can't take the chance
Moral is -- don't rush into things... and don't believe everything you read...
=rk=
Resource contributor
- Messages
- 4,702
- Country
If you had thousands of adulating fans begging you to tell them what color shirt to wear on any given day, you might be temped to expand on the theme..
hairyspin
Resource contributor
- Messages
- 3,253
- Country
Last edited: