Hawaii needs work and looks like its from the FS9 days hope they work on it soon its such a beautiful place to fly, what do you think of the Hawaii area
4 Likes
It is poor, just like every other area of the game. There is a tremendous amount of work that needs to be done to make the game look like the pre-release marketing material. Whether or not the developer will actually do said work remains to be seen. Given the huge wave of negative reviews following the “release,” I wouldn’t be overly surprised if the title gets abandoned pretty quickly because it isn’t financially viable. That negative publicity cuts into revenue.
3 Likes
Negative reviews? You mean people screaming on forums? Because I am yet to see an actual negative review of the game. It got between 8 and 10 on all reviewing websites. IGN gave it 10/10 masterpiece. So yeah, a bunch of people will always be unhappy no matter the product and scream loud about it on forums. The silent majority is happy with what they got and busy enjoying the sim.
15 Likes
Delete it.
6 Likes
As someone that had FS9 for many years, picked it apart to figure out the inner workings, and had enough addons downloaded to fill several dvd’s, I can tell you that having a global SRTM mesh would make the sim at least three times bigger on your drive than it already is. Are there some areas that need work? Of course! And MS/Asobo are working on it. Given time, they’ll have this thing looking 10x better than it already does. And with third-party dev’s already cranking out some really nice additions, it’s only going to get better. But even as it is right now, it looks orders of magnitude better than FS9. The stock planes shipped with this sim outshine even the best payware that was ever available, and that includes the later stuff that got around the poly limit. (I have a friend that was one of the pioneers in that movement.)
1 Like
Anyone confusing MSFS2020 with FS9 is simply confused.
That is all.
5 Likes
lots of critical reviews, especially from gamers.
I think we can ignore the little manchildren throwing tantrums, they will go away. The majority of serious gamers seem to be a little annoyed but at the same time full of expectation because they were also blown away by the immersion.
2 Likes
Exactly. Thanks to well-developed review ecosystems in places like Amazon and Yelp, people are accustomed to looking at user reviews. The market for paid reviews from places like IGN is much smaller. Gamers read reddit, steam reviews, even the Microsoft store, etc. to make purchasing decisions. Before someone mentions it, yes, I’m aware of the fraudulent review schemes that go on in user-review systems. But honestly, it doesn’t matter. They still have a significant impact.
You really should hope for the opposite. The “serious gamers” which I assume means the simulation community needs regular gamers to buy and play this game. Otherwise, there won’t be enough financial support for Asobo/MS to keep going with this well into the future. You may recall that was a major issue with the last title MS released.
Ultimately, the sim market is too niche to support major titles. Unless they can market it as something awesome/special/revolutionary (they did), and deliver on that (they didn’t), the game will rapidly lose interest from a much larger, and lucrative group.
I did not read a single professional review, the days where I need such input are long gone.
And I meant the people who throw hissy fits not millions of casual gamers who fly and enjoy the game. Of course they are needed because this is an AAA title.
2 Likes
Hahahaha. Right.
When was the last time Blizzard, Activision, Epic Games, Valve, Ubisoft, Electronic Arts, or any other major game studio released a flight simulator?
Gosh, there’s just so much competition in the flight simulation space…
I don’t know for the others but Ubisoft released Lock On Modern Air Combat (which later became DCS) in 2002 or 2003. They also did very good submarine simulations up to ca 2008 when they completely dropped simulations and turned to Assassins Creed and such.
Hmm, I wonder why they dropped out of simulations if it was so lucrative? Doesn’t seem like a good business move… unless it was.
Let put it this way. The sim has its problems, no doubt about it. From my experience though, with problems or without it will not retain all the gamer market. People who never tried flight sims before and now are enjoying it will stay irrespective of bugs and most of them understands the situation (time needed for bug fixing). I personally know a few people in this category. On the other hand, a huge chunk of the gamer market will leave, even if the game had been perfect on release. They want some fun and they will move onto other games as they always do.
It was lucrative and they made money. Microsoft stated multiple times, the tech was not there to offer anything new or ground braking until now. The technology changed.
Btw Flight Simulator was on top games of the year many times previously. In 1996 it was 3rd top selling game that sold almost the same amount of copies as Warcraft II (693k vs. 835k)
IL2 BoS was able to build a up a pretty big, faithful community, and if they can do it, Microsoft can do a LOT more.
The key here to me seems wether they can sell it not only to middle aged guys in France, Germany or the USA but also young lads in Russia, Egypt, Japan and the rest of the world. There is a lot more possible if you can achieve maximum reach to get the potential millions of flight sim gamers, not just the rather small communities that make up FSX. P3D and X-Plane right now, even of they have more buying power per player.
So in a way, yes, it has to be a game, but also a simulation.
I think that is a bit pessimistic. If Asobo had stuck the landing so to speak on its marketing material, I think there would be a lot of new entrants into the genre through the various stores. Even if you don’t enjoy the simming, just the potential for the graphical bliss would be enough to keep some folks. I’ve bought and played games in genres that aren’t typically my forte’ simply for special features like that.
And sarcasm aside RageQuitBob, the point that I was trying to make is that the game needs larger player base to stay profitable and viable, and to avoid going the way of its predecessor. As an MSFT shareholder, I actually don’t expect anything less. Microsoft isn’t a charity, it exists to make me money. If in 6 to 12 months this game isn’t profitable for MS, I will be the first to vote to pull the plug.
Because of that, it is important that we the community hold the developer to the highest bar possible. That may mean looking with an external-to-the-flight-simulator-community viewpoint where mediocrity on launch isn’t the norm.
Yes, of course it has to be profitable.
If this isn’t profitable though it would be quite an embarassing, spectacular failure.
I don’t see it becoming a failure tbh, but a lot less rose tinted than some thought.
But how is it possible any other way. If I imagine: coordinating up to 1,000 people who worked on the project, managing and checking those massive petabytes of data, developing 30 planes, engine programmers who have to make all the legacy stuff fit in and hammer out a new API that can handle all this stuff, providing good documentation to the 3rd party people who are making pressure because they really want to start, then Microsoft with their demands to hurry, and of course the whole thing must work and not crash every 20 minutes … etc etc . it must be a bit of a nightmare to deliver a sim under such pressured and a company would only go through such an ordeal because it is a chance of a lifetime.
I think they did a good job so far, they just did not have nearly enough time to deliver what they would have liked to deliver.
I would differently pay extra for a Hawaii scenery add on, FS2020 is new and there will be many improvement, when Bruce Artwicks SubLogic flight simulator came out i thought is as good as it was going to get, whoops there i go dating myself again 
3 Likes
Perhaps they did the best that they could under the circumstances. But, it is important that the marketplace punishes that sort of systemic behavior of hurrying to deliver half-done things. Another poster in a different thread commented that if this sort of alpha-ish release is normalized, then the next iteration will be even more broken upon “release” than this one. I won’t go as far as they did, but to a certain extent, that is true.
For those of who have already purchased the game, there are two things that we can do: 1.) Complain 2.) Complain in a way that hurts the developer/publisher financially. As is the case with many products and services, you vote with your wallet. There isn’t much leverage over the company beyond that.
1 Like