This is inaccurate at best. Flight1’s products could not have the database updated. Nor can RXP. (Garmin sells updates - pretty expensive)… F1 didn’t “rage quit” because Microsoft got a Garmin license. RXP is still in business and nothing is preventing them from continuing to support their Garmin-trainer based products in both P3D and XP. F1 “rage quit” because the main developer of their GTN gauge hasn’t been with the company in a while (and for potentially other reasons - I would guess sales were a factor too).
2 Likes
Really it was that lame that they lost a programmer and failed to retain ownership of their product? That would be embarrassing.
And yea at $150 and no support for non-corporate customers, They definitely weren’t exactly knocking down doors to sell the thing.
Also it wasn’t a gauge, it was a stand alone unit with interface. Otherwise I would have just bought the RealityXP gauge, but I wanted it run on a separate computer on a dedicated touch screen and bezel.
Yeah, I agree. That’s the beauty of having more than one platform. I keep bringing up X-plane because I have a hunch that their new sim will be the one for “serious” simmers. MSFS will be for a broader audience and continue to underwhelm many while blowing others out of the water.
1 Like
Actually, I’d love to be able to blow things up in MSFS. Can you imagine the multiplayer dogfights?
But we’re talking about developers who seemed genuinely surprised when the community wondered why MSFS didn’t have replay or helicopters 
So Asobo’s issues with producing a sim that doesn’t break every few weeks impacts everyone to one degree or another.
The thing with “serious” simmers is that they’ve been in the game for 10, 20, 30 years and feel that MSAsobo really underdelivered. That’s why they’re so vocal. But, we’re also in the minority in this new age so…My guess is that there will be a next-gen Xplane that will satisfy the technical fliers and MSFS will continue to have broad appeal but pretty superficial experience.
1 Like
Weather or not a sim is taken seriously is in your hands. I remember one time I was in the ZLA ARTCC Discord for VATSIM with a bunch of other folks after a long event talking about how fun the event was that just happened and I was sharing my screen lollygagging around in the Flight Factor 757 for XP and one person says “Do a Barrel Roll” and I do just that (though it was a pretty sloppy one) at very low altitude (I don’t remember exactly it was but the RA was still alive and I only lost it when it’s antenna was no longer pointing towards the ground). While I was inverted I lost both engines thus engine generators kicked offline and the RAT popped out giving me power. The EGPWS was screaming at me while at the same time I started the APU and ended up landing on a very short runway given my weight. Again, serious or not, it’s in your hands. One thing for certain is MSFS has a lot in store for serious simmers (including myself).
2 Likes
True- everyone comes here with their own preferences and expectations. I’d complain less if we had more than 2 jets that mostly-work in the sim 13 months after release…That’s why I think dogfighting would be a good addition, I mean if we’re going to do air races, might as well fire rockets and missles. I’ll get a tomcat for that lol.
What? Have you never heard of the Reno Air Races? If I want to use armament I have DCS and the F-14, F/A-18, F-16, F-5, AJS-37, A-10C II, L-39, MiG-15, MiG-21, M2000, F-86, P-51, Mi-8, Ka-50, UH-1 for that. Also have a few other sims that fit that bill such as the IL-2 series. Air races make total sense in MSFS.
1 Like
I’m sure they’ll include realistic flight physics too. And there’s the issue. The people wanting guns and bombs and racing won’t want the realistic handling because it would be far too difficult. There’s a reason military pilots and air racers take years to train and most fail. However, those of us that want to fly realistically do want the correct handling and specs (and a stable simulator on which to fly incidentally). I can’t see where the common ground is going to magically appear tbh.
Where are these peeps at, can you link me to something that suggests such a thing? I just see such a claim as dubious however I’ll eat crow if I can be linked to something that suggests people are more interested in armament than anything a civilian flight sim can offer sensibly including air racing.
To be quite frank it’s completely nonsensical to throw those who are interested in armament (if they actually exist) to those who are interested in air racing. How one figures they correlate with one another I simply can’t fathom.
The thrill of doing 400+ knots with realistic handling racing people is fun in itself. MSFS already offers assists to those who are simply not on the same level as many of those who are serious flight sim fans. I have zero assists on myself and I really don’t care if someone has all of them on, that’s for them to decide.
When it comes to the problem with realistic handling the only thing I see people complaining about is the torque from a massive prop and engine with a ton of horsepower. Use assists or use rudder trim and right rudder. Everyone is a happy camper then.
EDIT: Revised post.
So you think someone who needs to work on fuel to air mixture logic is too focused working on aircraft models for this upcoming DLC? I don’t understand why people think that everyone works on the exact same thing.
2 Likes
The DLC is much more than just a mixture??
And yes the modellers could be working on fixing issues with existing aircraft models and handcrafted airports…
They probably need about 4 months of doing nothing but fixing stuff. Sure, after that there will still be bugs left. But at least it’ll be up to a decent standard.
…so what are your feeilings on the very necessary expansion that will go along with the new Top Gun “documentary”? …j/k… just trying to wind you up…
Odd reply to my post.
I suggest you take a look at the patch notes of the previous dedicated sim updates.
Horribly inefficient and you will end up throwing dirt back into the hole you’re digging.
1 Like
Continuing to build on something that is broken is not inefficient?
Once you fix the broken thing you may have to fix anything you built on it…
I spent time in the past fixing a program with bugs at the core. Fixing that made me redo anything built on top. Fix your stuff ASAP.
You do understand that people that work at Asobo are getting paid right? You can’t expect people who don’t work on fixing bugs to fix bugs and not do anything because of that. I used to work at sandwich shop a while back and my job was to make sandwiches. There were times where I didn’t see customers for 30 minutes or more. That doesn’t mean my manager thought it was ok for me to just sit around and do nothing, I had to do something as I was getting paid to work there.
So now people who make bugs can’t fix bugs?
Not what I was implying. Is it not true that you’re implying that this DLC should be put on the back burner?
Absolutely.
There is not a single person in the devteam that does not have to fix a thing in his field.
I don’t think you understand the nature of bugs in a complex program (that many people are working on in parallel, to complicate it further).
Except I’m a dev myself…
All I’m asking is a tiny bit of focus on fixing things rather than piling up more bugs on the existing bugs, meaning they will both need to be fixed rather than fixing the bug now and having to do it only in a tiny section of the code.
If you don’t fix it now, and add new code dependent on that bugged code, you’re in for a wild ride. Which is what we’re seeing here. Hence the repeatedly breaking of stuff previously ‘fixed’.
2 Likes