What about high settings.Notice any improvement going from high or medium?
That’s been - mostly - my experience. I have had CTD events, but one look in Known Issues for the root cause and apply the (temporary) fix: no more CTDs. There are “bugs” to be sure, but I’ve been flying a mix of GA aircraft, in a mix of VFR and IFR flight plans. All good. Well, mostly…
They have said in the past, that they have a dedicated A/P team working on the autopilot. The autopilot will be a complicated portion of the code base, and may not be able to be shared between aircraft, meaning that some functions may have to be addressed one aircraft at a time.
Just because the chart has indicated patch 9, doesn’t mean we won’t see improvements before then.
A personal bit of speculation on my end - Just because something is targeted for a certain patch doesn’t mean we can’t see it sooner if things go better than expected.
please fix the lightnings and thunder at sunny days live weather…
Let me calm things down a little. I’ve been a developer for almost 40 years. I listened to customers carefully and discussed solutions with them.
As a development team we knew the good, the bad and the ugly parts of code in great detail and could think of 101 improvements; often more than we had time for.
We would do as many of the small tasks as possible, and take on a few of the big tasks that may take weeks/months.
The difficult choices were based on numbers of people responding and the benifits we saw to making the product world class.
Sometimes just one user spots an important bug or reproducible crash; we would fix those immediately, often within hours.
So as users we are on a journey; the product will morph into what we want, which is what great products do. Like all flights you must take the rough turbulence with the sunny smooth and patience is a virtue. We all land at the same time.
The Cessnas are ok for IFR, big jet flight plans work well. I’m flying the A320 from JFK to Orlando - autopilot at 500ft and relax. Tune the Alt at waypoints.
It feels that the quick arcade style from/to autoroute straight into the satnav (MCDU) then Fly, was the key objective. The interface is very slick and smart; almost a Google Earth “me too” moment for Bill Gates ha ha.
Yes we have the product early, but with the world on fire in 2020 we needed something to distract us.
Paul
The customer(s) can never be the problem in a business relationship. If we are, Asobo may need a new business plan.
And - clearly - Asobo does not feel that way.
This is the first time in all my years of using software - of any type - that the devs have had frank and open discussions with the user base.
This is going to be a fun journey…
The only way I found to record flight hours is starting in parking or gate in cold and dark and finish in parking or gate in cold and dark.
That’s interesting I’m also leaning to this, the only difference is that I’m just a simple user Anyway THAT right here would be a huge “understanding” difference for the community here : knowing if the update plans are worse case projection (AKA set targets in the calendar) or if they are minimums to seek first (proper) fixes
And I hope I’m a positive dude so… To me, those are also targets and things could be fixed/enhanced/updated before the target is reached
to the general debug/fix & AP dev teams @ Asobo Lots of simmers here counting on you !
I’d like to add on to this. The autopilot issues will be finished being addressed in Patch 9. That means work on the autopilot will be complete or close to complete.
We will likely see improvements before then, but that’s when the work will likely be completed.
Again this is speculation, but I’m sure they’ve already made improvements
Ooooh, I wouldn’t agree with that at all. All sorts of misinterpretations evident in this user base.
I guess you have never heard the saying “the customer is always right.”
Yes, there are. Guess whose fault that is? I’ll give you a hint: not the customer. Even when the customer is technically wrong, it likely is not their fault. In this case, it is a lack of effective communication about the product generating that misinterpretation. Asobo can choose to try to correct this, but either way the customer is not the problem.
Imagine a scenario at McDonalds if they were to sell chicken sandwiches, and a large number of customers became ill as a result of contamination with salmonella. Then, blaming the customers for not having immune systems sufficient to prevent the contaminated product from making them ill. Or even worse, the customers themselves feeling like they are the problem for not having said immune system, and McDonalds is okay because they tried to deliver a competent chicken sandwich. I do enjoy my analogies, I hope you can see the line that I am drawing here.
Just as in Six Sigma (management fad) where the employee is never responsible for bad outcomes (it is the system that set them up to fail), the customer is never wrong. If they are it is because the business has failed them in one area or another, and it is incumbent on the business to address it if they want to continue getting business.
I understand, but can’t take seriously any analogy that is based on a food vendor poisoning their customers and then blaming their immune systems. One of the most ridiculous comparisons I’ve ever heard.
Customer walks into McDonald’s, orders a quarterpounder, gets it, then complains it’s not a Big Mac. “But you ordered a quarterpounder”. “Yeah, but I was expecting a Big Mac. Your picture makes it look like a Big Mac”.
Is the customer right?
Yes, they are. In your scenario, the shift or general manager would intervene and try to understand the customer’s issue. At the end of the discussion, the customer would likely receive an apology, and either a refund, future discount, or a comped “Big Mac.” The customer would also likely be asked to fill out a survey about their experience. This customer response would go to the corporate offices and would be part of a much larger internal study on marketing and customer expectations, and could lead to real change in how the menu options are presented. The scenario you described is actually very common in the restaurant industry (ever sent food back and asked for something else?).
To bring us back to Flight Simulator, Asobo should apologize for the state of the game to those who feel unsatisfied with the product, they should attempt to understand why those customers are unsatisfied, and then work to correct it (either through expectation management, or by actually fixing real problems). If customers want refunds, they should work with Microsoft to supply them. To date, we’ve only seen a tacit admission that the development and release cycle is flawed, and definitely not an apology. There has been very little expectation management since most of us still know very little about the mechanics of the game. And, the problems obviously aren’t fixed.
The customer is right, and definitely is not the problem.
Oh good lord. OK, in your determination to cling to the idea that the customer is always right, I doubt very much you will accept any logical or factual mistakes made by a customer as a sign that they’re wrong. On being asked to offer their payment, the customer could punch the server in the face and, under your framework, simply say ‘I thought you said “punch me in the face”’, and they would be right.
As for MSFS, yes, I join many other customers in being unhappy with many things in the current sim but on balance I’m very happy with the overall experience it offers for VFR filght. Even including the CTDs (of which I had 2 today).
In any of their marketing, I did not see any guarantees of fully functional default aircraft at launch. I did not see any guarantees of the world scenery being equally high quality in all areas and without anomalies at launch. I did not see any guarantees autopilot would be fully functional at launch. I did not see any guarantees no users would experience CTDs under some conditions at or after launch. I did not see any guarantees water masking would be as in promotional materials in all areas at launch. etc. etc.
I do repeatedly see users naively assuming that they were going to get all the above at launch, and claiming they were hoodwinked into believing it was going to be complete at launch despite nobody claiming such. Now I do not deny the launch was stupidly rushed and I’m sure Asobo were as blindsided by it as we were. But to say Asobo should
implying they have done / are doing nothing to understand and correct issues is, frankly, insulting given the work they’re clearly doing monitoring forums, implementing bug tracking and now voting, regular roadmap updates, publishing bug priorities with estimated patch numbers to fix etc. etc. I’ve been a user of DCS, il2, FS2004, FSX, XP10, XP11, Aerofly, and now MSFS, and I promise you none of them have been as transparent about their bug-fixing programme as Asobo.
Apologies and / or refunds? Go and talk to Microsoft. They’re the vendor.
For years and years I worked in a highly technical field. Most - if not all - of our customers did not understand how we did what we did. The majority were simply happy to get quality results in a timely manner. For the few that weren’t happy we had a saying, “Let them go experience the pain somewhere else.” Bottom line: some people will never be happy, no matter what you do. Best to let them “experience the pain…” instead of wasting your time, and taking time away from helping the other 95% of customers who appreciate your work.
So - no - the customer is not always right.
Is there anyone here who would choose FS2020, even after the 3 patches we have, over XP, P3D, FSX, FS9… if the graphics were all the same for all those sims? Is there anyone here who would choose FS2020 right now for the way it flies, for the “flight-simulator-specific” features?
The reason I got excited about FS2020 during it’s year of hype was because I expected (was led to believe) “Wow! Finally a flight sim where the world and environments look so real!”
I didn’t “expect” anything more than a complete fight sim, at least as complete as those I mentioned, with the visual improvements that todays technology offers. I knew it would improve and grow with 3rd party planes, etc. But did I have a right to expect a sim as complete in aspects of flight as those I used many years ago? I think I did.
I will be patient- what choice do I have? But I don’t feel at all guilty about my disappointment and complaints I’ve made about the state of this sim so far.
I have - literally - hundreds and hundreds of dollars of payware A/C for FSX. I flew in the FSX environment - happily - for many years, and in FS2004 before that. I had both installed - on two different machines - for quite a while.
One thing I’ve learned though, which will change the way I do things with this one, is I keep going back to one or two favorite aircraft. I doubt I will get “dozens” of payware A/C this time around. I’d be happy with one or two “study level” aircraft in my virtual hangar.
I’m not unhappy with the way the DA62 and the TBM fly. Some systems need attention, but that’ll happen. For barn storming the C152 and the CubX are splendid. To me, it feels like I haven’t even scratched the surface of this one. So I would not choose any of the simulators mentioned: been there done that. Even with “modern” graphics, all those mentioned use old legacy code that has been supplanted by this new engine. And when VR matures… oh, yeah!
Totally agree with you, mainly with the last part, LOD…I completely lost my will to play until it is fixed, but on the positive side, removing the stupid press any key will let people , maybe, focus on what it matters.