May be Microsoft and Asobo have seen what developers like PMDG and others have achieved and just want to offer the same level of immersion?
Being a MSFS user since MSFS 95, I can only say that each new release was better than the previous release. So I’m staying positive and hoping the same will happen with MSFS 2024
Seems to me they put all the most requested features such as seasons and biggest improvements such as weather and flight model into the new sim. It’s like how do we get more revenue from them oh let’s put everything in that they want into a new Sim and charge for it.
Everyone needs to look back at the history of the sim. They have released a new edition every 4-5 years I believe.
They committed to a ten year support window, but they didn’t ever say they wouldn’t release something new along the way.
Actually, it was even shorter intervals. It was usually 2-3 year intervals and with no cross compatibility at times.
all those features that we wanted in the current version, ie seasons, better weather (for me the deal maker or breaker) that are coming to the 2024 version scares me a bit because even if we all get what we want, they might still take them a way or break them as the did in 2020 for the clouds since su7…so we/I can’t even rest in peace that the next version is the one!!! In my opinion people have all the right to be upset and skeptical, we are all paying money to a product that doesn’t even stay the same along the way…
I still remember the times where you had to edit the fsx.CFG file everytime you changed some minimal setting. Calculating the affinitymask, highmemfix=1, the dx10 option that never worked, the uiautomationcore.dll CTD, installing a new texture or mod that requires overwriting files and forget to backup the original files.
MSFS is by far the less buggy and most stable sim i ever used.
As long as all the planes and stuff I bought still work I am excited for 2024. I always like the new shiny stuff 
What gets me is most of the complaints are from folk that get there mods from outside MSFS who will probably least affected. The stock scenery including future world updates, the revised engine, improved weather and (maybe) even atc will most likely all find their way into FS2020. Quite simply it would be both difficult and illogical to split them and of course will also merit the tag of ongoing support for the old sim. Maybe the flow of freebie aircraft will stop but I can’t see that being a big hindrance anyway.
Finally I betting 60-70% of the community will invest just for whatever improved features are on offer e.g. A.I. driven multilingual Azure ATC.
Just my take, you don’t have to agree.
I’ll take that bet. You will not see seasons in MSFS2020. It will be a selling point for MS2024.
Oh yea of little faith and sorry not included as there’s a chance it won’t be done server side (so not default scenery), if it is 2020 will get it automatically IMO.
Here’s my view on this and say why you will but I understand asobos side. However, Fs2020 is still missing arguably basic features like weather proper radar and terrain radar. Still missing things like proper wet weather affects. Stills missing proper taxi physics. (Note PMDG not being able to turn properly unless you’re going barely 2kts). It’s still missing a lot of basic things a flight sim SHOILD HAVE. Do not get me wrong I love FS2020 but to me I understand the frustration of folks. How can you expect folks to trust Asobo with a new sim when they haven’t even delivered on the things the promised for the current one?
That’s just my 2 cents. I’m neither here nor there on the matter I’ll wait to see what they deliver and make my judgement then.
No, no flight sim has ever got the basics 100% right.
Each iteration has gotten closer.
But a huge part of the problem is what you call luxury another person calls basics. What I call luxury, you might call basics. So it’s very hard to nail down.
While this is very true, there’s also the very real reality that historically that is exactly what was done. Honestly, 4 years is better than we’ve historically gotten, and we are already being told what some of us already guessed which is that most add-ons will be compatible.
FS2024 is targeting a new generation of hardware. FS2020 has limits to how far it can be pushed before they have to draw a line in the sand. Continued features on FS2020 means more and more support pain as they have to ensure it remains compatible with so much legacy.
Making a clean-ish break every few years is just kind of necessary in this environment. They need to draw a line in the sand and say “these legacy things won’t be supported in 2024.” We don’t yet know what exactly those are, but as someone who has done a lot of things with the SDK, I have some ideas. They have changed a lot of how things work in the last couple of years, and now they have a legacy and modern flight model, a legacy and modern navdata api, a legacy and modern facilities api, a legacy and modern systems api. That legacy has got to be starting to be a weight around their necks.
And this comes full circle.
There are so very many aspects to the sim. What is basics?
Flight model?
Weather?
Thermals?
IFR?
Map?
Terrain?
Ground Handling?
Airport facilities?
Opening Doors?
Systems?
ATC?
AI Traffic?
Multiplayer?
Which one of those is “basics?” Because the truth is all of them are, and that’s why it’s so hard. Working Title has been doing so much with the AAUs and the new avionics sdk is huge, but at the same time a huge problem for support because now there are two versions of the G1000 and G3000/50000 in the sim. All vanilla planes have been updated to use the new ones, but the legacy ones have to be supported. And that’s just one example.
So yes, 4 years, a new system, closer to 100% working, honestly it’s a good thing even if it doesn’t look like it. And yes, Microsoft and Asobo get to make a bit of extra money in the process, that part is too bad, but overall, this is a good thing. It’s also a good sign that the franchise isn’t going anywhere anytime soon. I for one will be buying FS2024 day one.
And I’d happily pay for MSFS 2024 on day one if it does include all those things.
I am a bit conflicted by all this and am not sure if I should be thrilled or angry.
I am glad that the X-box crowd is included now, because it broadens the available customer base.
I agree that, though eye-candy is great, there are certain things that should be working and a stable platform should be the priority. However, a PC isn’t X-Box and it becomes a nightmare to support because the number of variables is essentially infinite. X-Box is a closed ecosystem that they have more control over.
Essential/basic features are in the eye of the beholder. One man’s “essential” fix is another man’s “who cares?” However, I believe that obvious regressions and scenery that used to be OK, that are now a post-apocolypse world, (like Canada), should be top priority.
“Money talks, B.S. walks” has been true since the amoebas crawled out of the primordial slime zillions of years ago. “Innovate or die” has been true for almost that long too. I have been expecting something like this, for as one poster expressed, it becomes necessary to “draw a line in the sand” and move forward and there needs to be the occasional infusion of cash to keep the shareholders satisfied.
Though PC spec’s have been improving, a better PC should just work better using the older versions. I spent about 100,000₽, (about $1,300 U.S.), for the beefiest system I could afford, (with about 2/3 of that being subsidized by my son), more than $400 U.S. for the video card alone, and I still get stuttering.
No matter what you might think or wish, MSFS has always been a “game”. An extremely sophisticated game, but a game nonetheless. If your priority is flawless aircraft physics, you should be using something else. But be prepared to give up the phenomenal scenery.
All that being said, I still think MSFS 2020 is the best bang-for-the-buck simulator out there.
Given my 'druthers, I would like to see them clean up the regression list first, and only then release a new version.
I am cautiously optimistic about this “new version” and I won’t automatically discount it, but I won’t necessarily buy it 30 seconds after release either.
IMHO, we can fuss about this until the cows come home. What we should be doing is spending time enjoying what we have and then let MSFS 2024 stand or fall on its own merits.
What say ye?
Thank you for your detailed reply. And I do agree with a lot of it.
What would I class as basics in the real world?
Being able to talk to ATC- you wouldn’t be able to fly without radio communication, right now ATC isn’t even working for me.
Ground effect and taxying, in the real world you wouldn’t be able to control the plane so that’s definitely a basic.
Trimming the aircraft, I can only do this correctly on about 15% of aircraft I have.
Constant crashes
I would much rather these sort of areas were concentrated on from day 1 to give at least 4 to 5 years of stable enjoyable flight sim experience. Concentrate on the luxuries further on down the line once these are sorted.
It’s a bit like playing red dead redemption only to find you can’t steer your horse correctly. Or you can’t talk to other characters in final fantasy. I would class these as basics and all these games come out 90% complete from day 1.
I would like to see a little more focus on Cockpit builders. Not much is needed for them to be able to run their cockpit with MSFS.
Here are some things needed to make it work:
Start immediately without having to press anything at the last place, eg at the gate, (Auto save) (Auto start).
Microsoft might then think that they will miss all our news and offers for purchases in the Microsoft Store, but they might be able to get under the “Loading screen”. Eg new airport or, airplane or something similar. This is a hugely important feature for cockpit builders, and it’s been there in all platforms since the dawn of time.
More features when it comes to setting the outside view. Geometric deviations, Removing the virtual cockpit.
Geometric distortion in a triple-monitor setup for MSFS 2020, compared to XPlane 11 | Xinhai Dude
There are probably many other things missing to make it work for home cockpit builders, but these are 2 of the most important.
There are two main criteria used to assess whether a product is finished or not. One is that the feature content is consistent with what was promised. The other is the number of critical defects the product has when it’s released. MSFS 2020 failed on both counts.
That’s fine, but then make it non-disruptive. I would be ok with a subscription model if there was a good balance of fixes and new features that evolve from the installed platform.
I don’t want an entirely new MSFS product, with major incompatibilities regarding existing mods and addons, and that comes with its own bag of new bugs and issues, for which again new solutions and workarounds need to be found.
Releasing another new product and dropping the existing one before it was even close to being mature makes you and me continuous paying beta testers. Not for me, and with respect to this, I agree with the OP.
I addition to that, addon makers will have to deal with a moving target, which does not help achieve the stability and feature set that we simmers would like to see.
To be honest, I am not sure what Microsoft’s plans with flight simulation in general actually are. Granted, I am not participating in any dev live-streams and I am certainly not the best-informed flight sim guy here, but to me it seems that Microsoft sees “hardcore-simmers” (like cockpit builders, and those wanting deeper avionics/systems simulation, more realistic flight and weather models, …) as a marginal group.
They rather strive to bolster sales by creating a “flying game” that appeals to a very broad and mainly casual, gaming-minded audience with a visually pleasing environment and “missions” and “challenges” in which you can advance yourself in their “achievement” system.
Well, I guess that’s where the money is, and that’s where they will hence go.
I too would rather see more effort go into more realistic and more completely simulated aspects of actual aviation matters than into more “gamification”.
We are two