P3Dv3.3 Hotfix Released!
- Thread starter TuFun
- Start date
Works beautifully with the hotfix now! Didn't see any more problems so far, the flickering of close co-planar surfaces is completely gone as I can see.
Cheers,
Mark
Cheers,
Mark
TuFun
Charter Member
I thought this was interesting from Adam (LM)...
"As part of this bug, we have identified some capabilities that are necessary to further support developers to use our recommended methods. We are developing those enhancements and expect them to be included in a future release. We will provide more information as soon as we can."
I'm guessing 3rd party developers will need to get on board soon after this.
"As part of this bug, we have identified some capabilities that are necessary to further support developers to use our recommended methods. We are developing those enhancements and expect them to be included in a future release. We will provide more information as soon as we can."
I'm guessing 3rd party developers will need to get on board soon after this.
lagaffe
Members +
The only thing which is not say in theses LM announcements; it is that theses developements are possible via 3DS Max and impossible to use this technic under Gmax !
So a lot of developers will be in the impossibility to continue to develop for P3Dv3.x ...
Agreed. I wish they would be a bit more verbose on what these "methods" exactly are and what impact these methods have on backwards compatibility. The other issue is that one of the major scenery development applications, SbuilderX, is most likely not further developed. New methods or altered exisiting ones are not brought in anymore, and there are already a few incompatibilities.
In regards to scenery development we definitely need a design application that recognizes the changes Lm is adressing. I sometimes wonder why LM does not pick up the software development of such an application themselves. Nobody knows the matter better than them and I'm sure it would generate a good revenue.
Cheers,
Mark
Well, I think GMAX (I used that long time ago) is really deprecated and should be put to rest for good.
Blender enjoys some popularity lately (check FSDeveloper, also with great tutorials) and it's free. If someone would adapt the existing .x translation script to P3D specs many P3D devs would have what they need.
If I'm not totally mistaken, since the geometry and animation translation into a FSX .x file in Blender works, I figure one could wash that .x product through p3d's native xtomdl compiler at the end to get a working native P3D mdl.
Cheers,
Mark
UnknownGuest12
New member
LM quote
"This update only requires an update to the Client. See the Prepar3D v3 Download and Installation Directions for more details on how to quickly update. If this is your first time downloading v3.3, it is automatically included in the available downloads."
So as I see it, and not finding any "hotfix" file for 3.3 on purchased downloads, will have to reinstall complete "CLIENT.MSI", no?
Regards and thanks
"This update only requires an update to the Client. See the Prepar3D v3 Download and Installation Directions for more details on how to quickly update. If this is your first time downloading v3.3, it is automatically included in the available downloads."
So as I see it, and not finding any "hotfix" file for 3.3 on purchased downloads, will have to reinstall complete "CLIENT.MSI", no?
Regards and thanks
UnknownGuest12
New member
Done...
thanks
thanks
rhumbaflappy
Charter Member
Hi Dick,
the findings are relatively minor up to now. One is that the object library manager can't read native P3D bgls / mdls (I reported that in the SBX dev forum), and I have not been able to trick SBX64 into accepting the P3D Folder as it's "FSX Folder", of which I'm not sure what consequences there are.
The first issue can be worked around by making a native FSX as well as a P3D set (if needed) of the same source mdls and use the FSX version for SBX. This is OK for now but as soon as LM decides to implement non-compatible functions like new material settings or serious handling problems of legacy FSX models in P3D start to evolve then this route will become very laborious. If that comes into being one really has to build two different versions of the same model and keep the two libraries synchronized during the development process.
Apart from P3D another problem for SBX could surface with WIN10 or further derivatives.
I must say that I am very fond of SBuilderX. I'm amazed at how much knowledge and work went into this application and hope it will continue to soldier on for a long time. But if it doesn't I fear that we'll loose the only good scenery development tool we have and there is nothing in sight that could follow up.
Cheers,
Mark
the findings are relatively minor up to now. One is that the object library manager can't read native P3D bgls / mdls (I reported that in the SBX dev forum), and I have not been able to trick SBX64 into accepting the P3D Folder as it's "FSX Folder", of which I'm not sure what consequences there are.
The first issue can be worked around by making a native FSX as well as a P3D set (if needed) of the same source mdls and use the FSX version for SBX. This is OK for now but as soon as LM decides to implement non-compatible functions like new material settings or serious handling problems of legacy FSX models in P3D start to evolve then this route will become very laborious. If that comes into being one really has to build two different versions of the same model and keep the two libraries synchronized during the development process.
Apart from P3D another problem for SBX could surface with WIN10 or further derivatives.
I must say that I am very fond of SBuilderX. I'm amazed at how much knowledge and work went into this application and hope it will continue to soldier on for a long time. But if it doesn't I fear that we'll loose the only good scenery development tool we have and there is nothing in sight that could follow up.
Cheers,
Mark