27 comments on “We were wrong – Prepar3d is the best sim for the future

  1. How can a review by the very person (John Vennema) that has the most investment in Prepar3D be not biased?, of course Prepar3d is the (his) platform of choice.

    I accept fair comment but most MSFS simmers will think this is unbiased comment which it is not….

  2. Lets put the biased review aside. From what I read it does make sense that a FSX simmer, that invested in FSX hardware/add-ons will be happy to continue using the same invested staff on Prepar3d, it is like buying a software for WindowsXP that will also work on Windows 7.

    So in investment point of view, this might be the preferred route for FSX simmer.
    Another interesting part is the “water” capability, if I understand correctly it might be able to simulate underwater “crafts”.

    I love X-Plane, but I don’t see any reason not to buy the “Prepar3d” when it will be mature and reviewers will have enough time to test it.

    • agree, although I just think it was pointless putting his name to it. I too hope p3d expands, esp if they can fix the fps and fm. And if PMDG build a fully detailed Ohio class nuclear sub, Im totally sold!!

      • Seeing as how Prepar3D is mostly a code maintenance fork of FSX, you can pretty much consider it a mature platform.

  3. “[And] now Lockheed Martin releasing the version of Prepar3D (P3D) everyone can afford: P3D Academic ($49 for home users).”

    Just because something is now in the realm of being affordable does *NOT* mean it has a license which is friendly to developers. And YES this does matter because Prepar3D is still not a commercial product.

    In-fact some companies who make 3rd party planes for FSX, such as PMDG, are actually now going out of their way to make sure their planes are not compatible with Prepar3D due to the commercial restrictions of the Prepar3D license.

  4. Don’t worry guys when I hit the $540million lottery tonight I will start a big design group and develop for X-Plane….

    Keep your fingers crossed….

    • I’ve not tried P3D, but from what I’ve heard, FPS is generally on par with or slightly worse than FSX (due to the added features). Which is too bad really, because out of all the problems FSX has, I would rate it as one of the worst and most important to fix.

      • Exactly Jon. Hence our saying that xp has a limited window before v2 of p3d steals back the hardcore simmers, or any other lurker emerges, like Aeroflyfs on steroids. Or MS come to their senses and releases a serious airliner addon patch fix update to flight.

        Fun times!

        Sent from my iPad

  5. Look at it this way, it should motivate us who are involved in XP to prove him wrong.

    I know many of you would like to see Aerosoft 100% onboard with XP, but they are just looking at the numbers and saying to themselves the consumer base isn’t there yet….

    How does XP get there? Simple LR and 3rd party developers need to give the end user what they want….

    One thing I know that would help sway some of the old MSFS crowd to switch to XP would be access in the SDK so changes to the water engine can be implemented.

    Recently LR has been more open to these suggestions and I think you will see XP grow in the near future….

  6. I write a blog primarily about FSX (and sim primarily in FSX), but I still don’t understand this.

    Some use the fact that Orbx scenery is already in P3D as a stepping stone to suggesting developers will come to widely accept the new platform, but I think they’re really missing the point. There is a huge difference between scenery and the aircraft that will be used in that scenery, and if I were a developer of payware aircraft add-ons I don’t think I would strongly market for P3D considering what might happen if Lockheed starts worrying about being sued by Microsoft if there were to be a massive move of developers and simmers over to the platform. Heck, Lockheed might even have to crack down on users.

    Simply put, I don’t think P3D will be a viable alternative moving forward unless Lockheed acquires the rights to sell it as an entertainment product, which I don’t see happening with Microsoft banking on Flight.

    • Thanks, and send us a link to your blog.

      Yes, those guys had better tie up all the legal loose ends, on top of improving its performance. Then we’ll have some certainty.

      C’mon Laminar, announce some new scenery developers coming over asap, then the tide will start to come in.

      • Already in your sidebar actually (A Flightsim Blog), just didn’t work correctly that time. I’m hoping it will this time.

        “C’mon Laminar, announce some new scenery developers coming over asap, then the tide will start to come in.”

        The impression I get is that it’s a game of cat and mouse. Developers don’t want to take the risk of moving to X-Plane without more guarantees of a customer base, and customers don’t want to move over to a platform that doesn’t have the developer backing, even more so so when they are invested in existing platforms.

  7. “To see which version of Prepar3D® is right for you, please reference the chart below. As provided in our End User License Agreement, the Prepar3D application is not to be used, offered, sold or distributed through markets or channels for use as a personal/consumer entertainment product”

    from P3D website: http://www.prepar3d.com/prepar3d-license-comparison/

    • Strange. This whole thing is confusing me! In one spot, it says it’s for undergraduates and under for home use, and then they say it’s not for entertainment purposes…

      • The way I interpret what they say (and what I believe LM is trying to convey) is that you’re allowed to use it at home as long as it’s for “educational efforts at or below the undergraduate level.” This would preclude use for strictly entertainment purposes.