I really enjoy MSFS but one thing that seems to nag me recently is that the title seems to be developing a ‘quality issue’ with its updates. This is some feedback as a player and perhaps an indication that how things are currently set up is not really working that well and could be tweaked?
A few things make me think this:
Update Regressions. It seems that every update introduces some sort of new bug or bug regression. The beta periods do catch some issues, but often it seems like they are reported and then left as is. This makes it feel pointless to report things. Even the recent Aircraft & Avionics Updates (which I thought was more just about aircraft systems) have introduced system wide issues outside of the aircraft they enhanced. It would feel better if out-of-band fixes got deployed, but that doesn’t seem to happen as yet.
Bug Age. Long standing bugs tend to be getting really old. As someone that has participated since the start, I’ve got dogs that are celebrating 3rd birthdays that are younger than some of the issues we see today still. This makes the news of MSFS 2024 a bit of a double-edged sword, in that it seems more likely the worst areas will be addressed with complete rewrites or new features, meaning a longer wait for existing players. Maybe up to 18 more months?
Workaround Madness. The workaround for bugs or missing features means that people outside the team try to implement solutions outside of the sim are getting out of hand. Here’s an example of what I run when I start up the sim:
I use MSFS Addons Linker because MSFS takes so long to start up that it’s better to just unlink stuff not in use. The aircraft and scenery pickers in the sim are not easy to make bulk changes, so it’s easier to use a free 3rd party helper.
The MSFS AI is bugged, so I use FSTL Traffic injector that uses FlightRadar24 rather than the built-in traffic. That has SIDS/STARs and free liveries and it’s better and easier to use being a free 3rd party helper.
The MSFS traffic lands in the middle of the runway, a regression introduced in a SU and never addressed. I use AIFlow as a separate exe running to help stop that. You can watch it literally wrestle with the MSFS AI bug to try to put the aircraft down correctly.
The traffic also doesn’t exit the runways correctly, so I have to use AIGround as a free 3rd party helper. It also helps stop aircraft taking off and landing from opposite ends of the runway.
In VR I use the OpenXR Toolkit to implement fixed foveated rendering to help performance, as VR has not been updated for at least a year now and it provides important functions as a free 3rd party helper. Nearly everything it does would be efficient if implemented in the sim itself.
The VR panels are bugged in that a recent SU introduced a regression that scales them incorrectly making the labels too small. Things like VSR (for vPilot) broke in SU12 and it was never addressed again.
Pushback is via a set of radio commands in the stock sim, so I use GSX Pro as a paid 3rd party helper.
Stock navigation data has missing NAV points, making Navigraph pretty essential as a paid 3rd party helper.
I use a free utility called ‘No More White Dot’ that is an exe that scans the running image of MSFS and tries to delete the routine that shows the white dot that causes input issues. This issue was introduced in AAU2. We’re at the state of things where people are writing helpers to modify MSFS as it runs rather than wait for a fix for an issue introduced in an update. It’s kind of crazy if you think about it?
I have lots more but it’s getting exhausting. (for those counting we’re up to about 8 separate exes running just to correct MSFS default behavior). The only point I was trying to make with the list was that there’s an entire ecosystem emerging on workarounds and helpers to try to get around bugs not getting fixed or features not being properly fleshed out.
Often a lot of these utilities are done for free and in people’s spare time. It is fantastic they exist. The feedback that we get for some of the regressions is that they are very hard to fix and will take time, but then hobbyists in some areas are doing better fixing the sim. It’s like they are a crutch that could be used to rationalize why underlying issues or regressions aren’t being fixed?
With the upcoming MSFS 2024 and the team getting bigger then this is some feedback to perhaps try to readdress the balance between working on new features and content versus going back and fixing regressions in 2020? It is a hard balance and MSFS is a great sim, but it is developing a reputation for having poor quality updates. As I previously wrote MSFS is a challenging title to get right, but I think there is a pattern emerging of just letting things slide, and MSFS 2024 is probably going to make that worse.
In the spirit of constructive feedback, here’s some suggestions of things that could be improved:
If a bug or regression is found in a SU or AAU and it is marginal on if to release or not, do not release. Hold it for testing longer and miss the date. The date and releases are important, but then so is the impression of quality of the experience.
When planning MSFS 2024 new features, communicate early if an area that is particularly thin or has bugs in 2020 is getting ‘redone’ in the new sim. This might seem counterintuitive in terms of marketing, but it gives those with 2020 a more honest idea of what is going on. It would be worse to stay silent about AI and ATC for a year and then just try again in 2024 than just say sooner ‘We aren’t going to improve this in 2020 but here’s what we’re doing in 2024’. People might freak out (of course), but it is better than just not acknowledging it and having to wait 12 to 18 months.
If there is future budget for new 2020 content (City Updates, Famous Flyers, World Updates etc) then the existing player base would probably have a preference for taking some of those funds and allocating them to address MSFS 2020 regression issues. They are boring and harder and a different set of people, but it’s part of the technical debt of having a complex title like this. Just like outside agencies are used for scenery, aircraft, perhaps look at some of the tools (and the people that do them) I listed above and give them money to try help improve 2020 in the shorter term? I understand that’s a pretty hard problem, but big picture people on 2020 are ok for content and they now just want fixes rather than wait till 2024.
Anyway, perhaps just more my perspective. Interested to see if others are getting the same impression or not.
Agreed! 100%!
No need to open a new thread about all that stuff. It will just end like all the others that have come before. It will only support the angry crowd and in the end accomplish nothing but keeping people angry. For getting the devs to notice a specific issue there’s a whole bug-related part of the forum.
On another note:
I really wish this forum had a function to mute specific threads so they wouldn’t pop up all the time in the “Latest” section. It’s good and well to say noone has to open them, but I don’t want to see them either growing either …
Anyone know a way how to do that?
Yep to CCRBS, but, this is the precursor to 2024, and if it’s as bad as this one was/and currently for many is, then it’s a wakeup call to Asobo/MS. For me. I keep my CF mostly empty except for PMDG/DC Designs/Navigraph things, and try to live with the dot, and other stuff.
X-Plane is way more stable, loads in less than half the time, and all the planes fly correct (that I fly) except the SSG-747 and that is I think my FP and how it’s input. Even if it’s buggy, it’s still as good as MSFS-747, and I have a freighter as well.
Carte Blanc - I want to (if I choose to get 2024-and that is an unknown) pick the planes I want to fly, like the salad bar choice. Do not include anything, let me pick, as I want only freighters and nothing airbus. My all-time choice would be the C-17/747/737/F-14 and done.
Not as yet. I thought by offering some things to try to do different would at least make it slightly different, as this isn’t a plain ‘moan alone’. You’ve probably thought of them all.
Seems rather late in the day to post this imo. Asobo have already said that they were on a learning curve with the software and 2024 is mostly about fixes a lot of issues. You can bet your house that any bugs that are long standing in 2020 will be highlighted in 2024 very early on.
Wait for reviews on 2024 or try to get on the beta programme.
And it would’ve led to a productive discussion too. The problem is all of these things exist in their own threads with hundreds of replies discussing these very issues.
The little magnifying glass in the upper right corner of the forums can help you search for these threads and you’ll be able to provide your own two cents instead of creating an entirely new thread to continue a conversation that has been discussed, as previously stated, ad infinitum.
As someone who’s been flight simming for 25 years (yikes!), I understand the frustrations and I too want to see improvements, especially from update regressions and length of time taken with bug fixes.
However, I will point out that flight sims (of the Microsoft-based variety) have always required external apps to mitigate the flaws / improve what’s already present in the base sim.
AI traffic taking an age to vacate the runway / taxi too slowly? ‘AI Speed’ / ‘AIGround’ apps
AI traffic bunching up on final and going around? ‘AI Smooth’ / ‘AI Separation’ / ‘AIFlow’
Point is, everyone has different needs and wants. Therefore, there will always be some reliance on third party developers.
What I want from a flight sim is the basics done right and a relatively stable platform to build from.
The third party developers can be the ones to add the extra flourish and make the sim go from being very good to truly excellent.
Thanks for actually reading the post. There’s dozens of us!
People just have ‘complaint topic’ fatigue and I completely get that, it’s all good. This is a product forum though, so a good place for product feedback I think.
I had three solutions (like you said, of a strategy not about individual bug reports) of: (1) holding releases for quality/testing (2) communicate 2024 features super early if 2020 is not progressing in that area and (3) trade planned 2020 content for 2020 fixes - and it’s basically just washing over people a bit. They are keen to get in a reply but not actually talk.
So my bad for making this too long and complicated in a way. If I rewrote it I’d probably just list the three things above and say ‘would this work forum people, as it’s interesting feedback?’ and keeping it super short.
Is it really that bad? And if it is, who’s keeping you from jumping ship to XP or P3D? Sure, you could trade MSFS’s fancy graphics for either of the others’ systems and physics but how many of us honestly want to look out the window and see the world as it appeared in 2006?
No sim is perfect but I think MSFS strikes the best balance. I think the team has been more than fair in providing three years’ worth of updates and a brand new, refined product after four years is hardly tantamount to treating customers with contempt.
After firs 4 months, I did buy XP-11 and flew in it for months because MSFS was a mess. Up till SU05 you could not fly 747 and get it to land properly. Even now with AAU2 it’s still got a few issues. I have never had P3D and although got Century of Flight-FSX-MSFS 2020-XP-11 and 12. I find myself only using XP and MSFS. I keep 11 because one of my all time favorite planes flies only in it. Same for FSX but not on PC now. XP12 has great 737 and F-14 too, and purchased SSG-7478i and flying in that. All the 747s take a while to get to learn. Not like FSX, which is way easier, but not as lifelike, RW. But XP is by far the fastest loading, and easiest to configure and fly in. I don’t see all the trees, etc. when at FL380.
More than likely will wait at least 6 months for 2024 if I even go there. Many original bugs, reported by testers before release, were never fixed, which soon will be three years, how is that for a quality sim.
percent for number 1