Yes for general dx12 SU10 and later, but that DLSS feature is almost ready, boost performance and add sharper image, which is due for SU10, we should see performance boost as they explained on Q@A.
2 Likes
That is great news!
I can express how ridiculous your point is. I will wait for a fix, until then why would I want to play something that irritates me. I am not telling you or anyone to not to play; I am not saying the game is bad. I am stating when I think the game will be good for me in answer to the post.
If you cannot handle a different point of view then I would say don’t look at posts asking for them.
1 Like
Show us a screen shot then at normal zoom and native resolution. It will be extraordinary if your ultra wide works differently than everybody else’s! And dont call me son. And to suggest somebody should run the game at a different resolution from native just proves the point that the game doesnt cater for ultra wides and the wider the monitor is the worse the effect can be. This game cannot even produce a start splash screen that completely fills ultra wides, no issues you say!
1 Like
what is “normal zoom”? Since I use a head tracker your point is moot.
Good grief! ¯_(ツ)_/¯
The default setting the sim sets the cameras too. See the camera zoom setting half way down the image on the left. Head tracking doesnt have anything to do with the issue, it just duplicates up down, left and right panning of the camera that we have on our controls. I too have head tracking. I agree with you, it can be worked around but it is an issue that they should address because it hugely exaggerates the curvature of the earth at low altitudes.
1 Like
Stop trolling go play your own game.
1 Like
As I’ve said elsewhere, I’m a big believer that the primary things to be fixed (and as base software, rather than third-party fixes) are the features promised at launch and shown in the many marketing videos.
This includes proper GPS functionality (non necessarily fully comprehensive, but on par with X-Plane - after all, they are labeled “Garmin”), working autopilots, and actual, reasonably accurate real-time weather, etc.
Further, I was disappointed that the most expensive version was required for something like a steam-gauge 172, and that many of the aircraft systems weren’t functioning properly.
To me, these fixes far outweigh extra aircraft and airports, though I recognize that for a lot of people, just flying a bunch of different planes is really fun.
1 Like
Not by todays standards it’s gone backwards.
1 Like
For me the sim has been a pleasant surprise since release. I’ve used most flightsims since the SubLogic days and Xplane11 was my favourite for realism and graphics … until MSFS came along. The environment you fly in, the visual quality of the aircraft and scenery, the realistic scenery that doesn’t need Terra-bytes of capacity to support.
Not to mention the sim is constantly being updated and worked on for performance enhancements and bug fixes, along with new content. With a ten year commitment from the developers we have so much to look forward to.
In addition, the sim is being embraced by third party developers who are producing quality aircraft to futher enhance the experience.
So YES, this sim is going from strength to strength with each incremental update. I’m loving it. Haven’t flown much in Xplane, P3d or FSX since it’s release. I tried a few times to return to Xplane but I miss the visual quality of the scenery and amazing atmospheric effects. The skys the limit with this sim.
2 Likes
“The price of excellence… is eternal vigilance.”
1 Like
In which aspect(s)? I think its advanced in many ways since release, but one very obvious regression is cloud quality. When I look back to videos I took shortly after release, its shocking how much worse the clouds look now.
If there are already performance problems with the default aircraft of the simulator, and with third-party products, FWB A320, Salty 747, etc … I don’t even want to imagine how the PMDG 737 will perform…
1 Like
The thing is I can understand coding bugs and some complex parts of plane’s avionics not being quite right, in something this complex there will always be some unintended bugs and functionality that can be improved over time.
What does annoy me is the things that are missing that are as a result of deliberate decisions that are absolutely core to being a flight simulator. The principal one is wind and turbulence. Many of us have been raising this for a long time and it is simply ridiculous. Without wind and turbulence it is simply a world scenery viewer with a cockpit image bolted on. There was a lot of hype about weather before release, and yet it turns out it was all superficial appearance. After mechanical integrity of the aircraft weather is by far the overriding factor concerning every pilot before every flight from bush planes to widebodies, and here I don’t even have to think about it.
1.How can it be that I can fly a Cessna into a hurricane as if it’s a clear sunny day?
2.How can there not be gusts in live weather? We know the simulator can do gusts because they are there in custom weather. This is a deliberate decision we’ve had no explanation for and means it remains impossible to find a place anywhere in the world to do a challenging landing in live weather.
3, However, the UI is totally borked for custom weather so if you set winds of 50km/h to give a good challenging gusty day at the upper limits of what real planes will land in, it actually gives you 100 knots or so because it is actually setting winds in metres per second. How has this not been corrected?!
4. Because of this it is likely some flyers who think winds are fine don’t realise that the wind they set in the custom weather menu bears no relation to what is produced in the sim, so they think a 30km/h wind is throwing them around when it is actually 80 knots!
5. Why give me a weather radar if flying into a cumulonimbus has no effect on my plane whatsoever, either in terms of control or structural damage, and I can’t ask ATC for a deviation anyway?
6. To sum up, weather has no effect on my flight experience or decisions whatsoever, except for visibility. Between this and the poor ATC, I am just not getting the immersion.
It is such a mess, and the worrying thing is Asobo must know for example that the custom weather menu is wrongly labelled. If they can’t fix it the coding must be an absolute mess: they must fear what will be broken just by fixing a little thing like that. It certainly explains why so many seemingly minor UI bugs remain, and why new things get broken with everything that is fixed - they have completely lost control of the coding tree, if there ever was an attempt at control.
This may all come down to building it on top of FSX - the results of which are particularly clear in ATC. Unfortunately rather than build a new simulator, Microsoft chose to hire a studio with no credentials for a flight simulator, to take FSX and make it pretty. In the process while the graphics are much better we’ve actually lost some of the simulator function and flight and weather modelling have regressed. I don’t blame Asobo, they were always going to be in over their head with this, I blame Microsoft for how the game was tendered. But it really needs some people to show humility, admit where they are overwhelmed/outside their area of expertise, and bring some people in in with the right expertise to fix some of this.
9 Likes
Very good scenery, but aerodynamics、atc、replay、sdk Third party support…After more than a year of repair, it is still a mess，hope everything can get better
2 Likes
I think you summed it up nicely.
3 Likes
If I may re-work the question. How much money are you willing to spend for a ‘good’ flight sim? May I quote an LA Times article “Boeing 737 Simulators cost between $6 million and $8 million each, and then another $400 to $500 an hour to operate because of labor and maintenance costs”. For me for the investment of money less then $2000 (hardware and software) this game is very good. It is very rare you can get a 10 year commitment by a software company for any type of software - we users got that. Is it (the game) prefect - name me one software title that is. In fact name me one software title that the users isn’t just a paying beta tester.
I’m happy I can fire up MSFS 2020 fly a few hours to just about any spot on earth.
dw
If I may re-work your question:
What promises made and features presented in pre-release marketing should be delivered when the customer pays the asking price?
5 Likes
Proper replay function yes, but for that we have 3rd party solutions. Real time weather and real time traffic are however very much there. It has even gotten a lot better lately with departing flights. If you had actually touched the sim you might have noticed that it is not “full of new bugs”, but an extremely enjoyable sim, I am still flying practically every day since launch. I love planes like the a32nx from FBW, TBM930 with MixMugz, 787 with Heavymod - all free, and for payware the latest Boeing 24D is absolutely incredible.
My current biggest peeve is the missing API for 3rd parties to create a proper terrain and weather radars. Well, not mine per se, but 3rd parties are complaining about it (like FBW) and refusing to implement what they can at the moment - which would be good enough to me, tbh.
Talking about substantial updates, I wonder if you missed SU5, which practically fixed the worst issue the sim was suffering, the abysmal perfomance? For wider understanding what the team is doing, have you checked any of the DEV Q&As on Twitch/Youtube?
3 Likes
All- I do not think they took FSX and rebuilt it. First, why did not one of the good planes in FSX make it over here? Second, yes ATC in FSX is not good, but ATC in MSFS is a mess, it took year for them to get the syntax fixed, and to this day, ATC will not descend the AC down far enough out, to reach 10K AGL at 10 miles from threshold of RW. For the better part of over year, you could not setup ILS landing in any of the Boeings. Once in while could get it to work in the TBM. After SU8, got memory error and could not get it to clear, had had it with all the bugs, and poor performance. I spent more time fixing than flying. I use FSX and XP-11 because for most part, both works. At FL-330, what is to see really? MSFS-2020 is off my pc, staying off till we get finished moving and I can determine if PMDG 737 is worth buying, if not seriously thinking of staying off game until another player moves into this space and fixes this game, currently, it’s a visually stunning mess. The long post above is just one example of what is broken, and like he says, the code is so broken, it may be unable to be fixed, but so much time and money involved, it will never be fixed. YES, XP-12 will have bugs, the difference is, they will addressed and fix them fast, and it was never designed to be visually stunning, it was designed to be as close to real world as possible. One expensive version is FAA approved for flight training with the approved hardware, MSFS will never be that good, based on the two years already spent working on it. FSX actually works better, not as pretty, but works better. I really think most of the issues are related to having most of this thing online, and not much filed locally. Real slow internet here, I can spend week getting it to download. Totally a mess now.
2 Likes