spatialpro
SOH-CM-2025
That is a fair point! I did have AI traffic, but few and far between (limited to GA it seemed to me).
-
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
First reviews?
- Thread starter YoYo
- Start date
That is a fair point! I did have AI traffic, but few and far between (limited to GA it seemed to me).
Naruto-kun
Charter Member
FSX planes can work in it but you have to add some extra things to the fltsim entries in the aircraft cfg.
My Saitek panels don't work with this sim. The yoke does, and the rudder pedals, and the trimwheel, but not the switching panel, the radio panel or the instrument panels.
Cees
Cees
Cirrus N210MS
Charter Member
It's that silly ring where autogen turns into blurry vague suggestions of landscape that kills it for me. That's about as far from what one really sees when flying as you can get.
It was free for me, and I downloaded it on my fast internet connection at work yesterday, so I'll try it out today. But if they don't fix that silly ring, I'll have no interest in keeping it.
It was free for me, and I downloaded it on my fast internet connection at work yesterday, so I'll try it out today. But if they don't fix that silly ring, I'll have no interest in keeping it.
Mach3DS
Charter Member
Can I ask a question? So, how does AIMEE's statement that they've gone "under the hood" to ensure that old products won't be compatible, play into this, if at all? Is the the thinking/feeling that we'll be able to keep this working as is? Or is the feeling that, now that DTG knows many products are working without any form of validation, will they squash that functionality in a future iteration? Or am I completely off my rocker?which has been known to happen!
Rick, please. What you have written is nonsensical.
Aimee did not say that they had "gone under the hood to ensure old content won't be compatible". DTG have rewritten the sim with a 64-bit architecture, different render engine and many other "under the hood" changes to make it not crash with modern content, on modern PCs and to make it a viable sim platform for future development. Are you saying that car manufacturers should never fit a more efficient body shape, or a more modern engine, into a car because old spares will no longer fit it?
Changing from 32-bit to 64-bit breaks anything that directly addresses the old 32-bit architecture (dlls, including any C++ gauges), it breaks anything that uses GDI rendering (many 2d gauges, particularly "glass cockpit" screens, but its not to harm you, it's so that bigger, better, add-ons can be made and so that you don't get the OOM crashes that people have moaned about since FSX was pretty much released.
32-bits is 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000
64-bits is 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000
Where's the data that you were addressing at bit 2F? Is it stil at 2F or is it now at F0 or maybe even outside the memory range which could even be accessed by the 32-bit code? The change from 32-bit to 64-bit is not minor, it's a major step change and yes, it really does break things unless you hobble your software by not allowing larger addresses than 32-bit for existing code like, say, "textures" for example.
Yes, you are completely off your rocker. You are looking for reasons to complain about a product that is actually completely irrelevant to your FSX add-ons. They're for Microsoft Flight Simulator X, not for Dovetail Games Flight Simulator World. Do you expect to be able to use them on X-Plane 11, or in Flight Unlimited III, as well? That's how you have to look at it. It's a different sim. Any compatibility we get is a bonus, if you want to be held back to 32-bit architecture, which went out of date 20 years ago, then you'll have to stick with FSX and not get a 64-bit simulator platform.
Ian P.
Edited to add missing word, so a sentence makes sense...
Aimee did not say that they had "gone under the hood to ensure old content won't be compatible". DTG have rewritten the sim with a 64-bit architecture, different render engine and many other "under the hood" changes to make it not crash with modern content, on modern PCs and to make it a viable sim platform for future development. Are you saying that car manufacturers should never fit a more efficient body shape, or a more modern engine, into a car because old spares will no longer fit it?
Changing from 32-bit to 64-bit breaks anything that directly addresses the old 32-bit architecture (dlls, including any C++ gauges), it breaks anything that uses GDI rendering (many 2d gauges, particularly "glass cockpit" screens, but its not to harm you, it's so that bigger, better, add-ons can be made and so that you don't get the OOM crashes that people have moaned about since FSX was pretty much released.
32-bits is 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000
64-bits is 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000
Where's the data that you were addressing at bit 2F? Is it stil at 2F or is it now at F0 or maybe even outside the memory range which could even be accessed by the 32-bit code? The change from 32-bit to 64-bit is not minor, it's a major step change and yes, it really does break things unless you hobble your software by not allowing larger addresses than 32-bit for existing code like, say, "textures" for example.
Yes, you are completely off your rocker. You are looking for reasons to complain about a product that is actually completely irrelevant to your FSX add-ons. They're for Microsoft Flight Simulator X, not for Dovetail Games Flight Simulator World. Do you expect to be able to use them on X-Plane 11, or in Flight Unlimited III, as well? That's how you have to look at it. It's a different sim. Any compatibility we get is a bonus, if you want to be held back to 32-bit architecture, which went out of date 20 years ago, then you'll have to stick with FSX and not get a 64-bit simulator platform.
Ian P.
Edited to add missing word, so a sentence makes sense...
manfredc3
SOH-CM-2022
Well rick,
First of all I do not recall Aimee stating anywhere that Dovetail went under the hood to "ensure" that FSX add-on's would be incompatible.
What I do think is that, with the work that Dovetail has done to the coding, it is not possible to confirm that any FSX add-on may or may not be working properly in FSW. Let alone benefit from the improvements Dovetail will/have incorporated in the new simulator.
Similar to some add-on's in FSX do or do not work with DirectX 10, and a lot of FS9 port-overs do FSX still have issues.
I am sure Dovetail does not want to spend their resources on compatibility issues with FSX add-on's, which would pretty much mean going backwards to the FSX experience, instead of moving forward to a sim which benefits from modern day technologies and hardware.
I am happy to see that Dovetail is willing to listen to the flight sim community for further development of the simulator, and am looking forward to seeing what they bring to the table in the next few months
Just my two cents.
First of all I do not recall Aimee stating anywhere that Dovetail went under the hood to "ensure" that FSX add-on's would be incompatible.
What I do think is that, with the work that Dovetail has done to the coding, it is not possible to confirm that any FSX add-on may or may not be working properly in FSW. Let alone benefit from the improvements Dovetail will/have incorporated in the new simulator.
Similar to some add-on's in FSX do or do not work with DirectX 10, and a lot of FS9 port-overs do FSX still have issues.
I am sure Dovetail does not want to spend their resources on compatibility issues with FSX add-on's, which would pretty much mean going backwards to the FSX experience, instead of moving forward to a sim which benefits from modern day technologies and hardware.
I am happy to see that Dovetail is willing to listen to the flight sim community for further development of the simulator, and am looking forward to seeing what they bring to the table in the next few months
Just my two cents.
Bradburger
Charter Member
FSW - Thoughts From 'Three Grumpy Simmers'
Some interesting views from three longtime simmers on FSW : -
Cheers
Paul
Some interesting views from three longtime simmers on FSW : -
Cheers
Paul
Mach3DS
Charter Member
My question was legitimate, and not sarcastic. I don't appreciate your condescending reply, IanP. Everyone makes mistakes. It's obvious I did!
I went back to try and find what I had read originally and I was referring to this statement by AIMEE:
"That's the point. We haven't left it untouched. Where do you think 64 bit came from?
We have done a lot of tinkering under the hood which prevents add-ons from being backwards compatible."
found here: https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/...ght-sim-world/?do=findComment&comment=3615911
Clearly, I misunderstood the "prevent" in her comment from being passive to active. But seeing as I don't speak 64bit, it was bound to happen.
I went back to try and find what I had read originally and I was referring to this statement by AIMEE:
"That's the point. We haven't left it untouched. Where do you think 64 bit came from?
We have done a lot of tinkering under the hood which prevents add-ons from being backwards compatible."
found here: https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/...ght-sim-world/?do=findComment&comment=3615911
Clearly, I misunderstood the "prevent" in her comment from being passive to active. But seeing as I don't speak 64bit, it was bound to happen.
Chill out dudes. It's a new FS, we have it, and several years ago it was a pipe dream, but now reality. What's not to like?
Every iteration of FS has initially been met with the same IIRC, it doesn't run on my computer, it stutters, it lags, and so on and so forth. We ALL grew to love them in the end, otherwise we would not still be here.
We all share the same passion, maybe not to the exact tangent, but close enough to be a community. And that was what always drew me to SOH.....
What happened? I'm not as active in simming as I was in my CFS2 and FS9 days, but I still love this place enough to check in every day, and you all know why, because you do it too.
We seem to have driven many devs off, why? It used to be great to stop in and see the latest from many designers, it was exciting. Where is Lionheart, Colin, etc. I know some have collegues that come, but even those devs who do come, do so less often. Possibly due to longer dev time hopefully as I would hate to think that it was due to the site itself, it's not what Ickie would have wanted. We need to make this a place that the devs (Dovetail included) want to feel comfortable visiting, it's a win, win situation after all.
A big thank you to all the guys that still stick around, SSW, AH, JF, and those that I forget (did I mention I'm not really actively simming, lol). I still get a buz out of seeing what is coming.
Here's to keeping SOH a beacon in the fog of multiple sims, like it always was. One of a kind (Netwings the exception, RIP).
Jamie
PS. Bought and paid for just out of support for the cause.
Every iteration of FS has initially been met with the same IIRC, it doesn't run on my computer, it stutters, it lags, and so on and so forth. We ALL grew to love them in the end, otherwise we would not still be here.
We all share the same passion, maybe not to the exact tangent, but close enough to be a community. And that was what always drew me to SOH.....
What happened? I'm not as active in simming as I was in my CFS2 and FS9 days, but I still love this place enough to check in every day, and you all know why, because you do it too.
We seem to have driven many devs off, why? It used to be great to stop in and see the latest from many designers, it was exciting. Where is Lionheart, Colin, etc. I know some have collegues that come, but even those devs who do come, do so less often. Possibly due to longer dev time hopefully as I would hate to think that it was due to the site itself, it's not what Ickie would have wanted. We need to make this a place that the devs (Dovetail included) want to feel comfortable visiting, it's a win, win situation after all.
A big thank you to all the guys that still stick around, SSW, AH, JF, and those that I forget (did I mention I'm not really actively simming, lol). I still get a buz out of seeing what is coming.
Here's to keeping SOH a beacon in the fog of multiple sims, like it always was. One of a kind (Netwings the exception, RIP).
Jamie
PS. Bought and paid for just out of support for the cause.
Unfortunately Rick, you have written a number of posts where you have twisted what has been said in all sorts of convoluted ways and nor are you the only one here doing that. I was not being condescending, Everything I posted was either my clearly stated opinion, or fact which can be verified by other sources. If you choose to take it as condescending to correct you then that's your prerogative.
Yes, you did misread Aimee's statement. Can you please stop capitalising her name? I did actually paint the A2A Cub for her as AI-MEE at one point... I should really update that with the feedback she gave me!
Ian P.
Yes, you did misread Aimee's statement. Can you please stop capitalising her name? I did actually paint the A2A Cub for her as AI-MEE at one point... I should really update that with the feedback she gave me!
Ian P.
Naruto-kun
Charter Member
The read into part is due to both insider knowledge that devs have which made them voice their concerns as well as ambiguity after their concerns were voiced that has led to so much confusion. I can't say I like the twisting and false facts running around (and it is painful to me that I have had a part in this whole situation) but to set the record straight, there is no movement, as far as I know, on DTG's part to completely block getting these addons in. The move to x64 in and of itself breaks backwards compatibility with any addon that relies on C++ gauges/modules. The same will happen with P3D v4.
The concerns the devs had is more along these lines: Is DTG going to allow the freedom to sell a "unofficial" FSW addon on their own store without selling on DTG's channel or not? The barrier in this case is not including some special bit of code to allow FSW to load the addon but more a legal barrier. Going head to head with DTG in a court for refusing to sell an addon through their channel while selling it through another is not something any developer wants to experience. Only the top guns can afford the legal battle and even then the risk of losing to DTG is far higher than it is worth.
The concerns the devs had is more along these lines: Is DTG going to allow the freedom to sell a "unofficial" FSW addon on their own store without selling on DTG's channel or not? The barrier in this case is not including some special bit of code to allow FSW to load the addon but more a legal barrier. Going head to head with DTG in a court for refusing to sell an addon through their channel while selling it through another is not something any developer wants to experience. Only the top guns can afford the legal battle and even then the risk of losing to DTG is far higher than it is worth.