I think it is appropriate to pay extra cash.
I don’t think so tho. I think they will work on those things without charging extra
MSFS brought me back to flight simulation after the good old FSX days. Prepar3d and Xplane are both good sims (dont get me wrong) but i was looking for some better graphics like in other games at that time. But none of them offered what i was looking for. So I think you all agree that there was not really a big improvement in terms of graphics in the past few years in our genre. But than Microsoft annouced the MSFS and my expectations were big because MS has to resources and the know-how to revive the genre and the screenshots showed what i was so long looking for - amazing graphics - finally.
MSFS is the platform we all were looking for - the step in the future. I think the release of the sim was a few month too early but we cant change that now. If you look back what Asobo achieved since release no other flight simulator has a 14 days update circle. We have to be patient until the SDK is ready for big projects. That takes time but once it’s ready the 3rd party devs will take over and as the userbase of this sim is so much higher than the other sims of these days. Many of them will move over and we will hopefully see PMDG and Flight Factor on one platform - MSFS. The higher sales rate allow more room for new projects and thats what the genre needed.
So to come to an end. Give the sim its time and the the “pro” features will come.
Hopefully your sentiments, which are shared by many, will come true.
I was however somewhat disturbed by a couple of remarks from the Asobo developers on yesterdays live Q&A video.
- They intend to revamp the ATC module from scratch (good idea) but have decided to adopt an “everyday speech” model …AKA the American
way, rather than the European “by the Book” model.
I think this decision is fundamentally misguided, and will result in the new ATC system lacking credibility with Simmers (especially trained Pilots) outside the US.Personally I will not use such a system, which I regard as casual and unprofessional… I used Radar Contact with my previous MSFS which, although written by an American, was developed jointly with European Pilots and ATC professionals and, although not perfect, is a reasonable workable compromise between the two fundamentally different ATC systems. - They intend to prioriitse the development of the Airliners. Its up to them how they use their time and effort, but surely both would be better spent making the GA aircraft work properly first. Airliner systems are very complex and third party specialist like PMDG, Aerosoft etc will no doubt produce “the goods” in due time. I.M.O there is no point in producing decent airliners if there is no realistic ATC or AI traffic to use with them.
Please, please, MS concentrate on getting “the basics” sorted properly before the “complexities”… Then perhaps on future Video Q&A sessions the participants will not look quite so tired out !
Well thats true but as an absolute airliner fan i personally dont care about the GA planes. I know many people like them very much but for me they are only useable for VFR. But you are right. Pushing the “not so complex” GA planes would be better for beginning. But i think the plan should be fix the generic GA planes and update the SDK for the 3rd parties to bring their experience with complex airliners into the MSFS 
And for ATC. Well we all agree that a change in that system is needed but for now i would risk to have a study level airliner without a proper ATC 
But that’s maybe just my opinion 
In a few years, when they’ve ironed out everything, then I would agree this is something that could be offered.
The current sim is clearly designed to appeal to the masses, which is fine, that’s what drives sales and $.
Hopefully though that won’t even be needed, as the sim itself matures to the level it should be at…
I don’t think that is anything to worry about; the idea that US ATC does not follow standard phraseology is way overblown. There are a few phraseology differences, like backtrack vs. back-taxi, and of course inches of mercury instead of millibars, but not that many. See Chapter 12 on this page for the full list; it looks long, but looking at the actual differences it is not all that significant.
GEN 1.7 Differences From ICAO Standards, Recommended Practices and Procedures (faa.gov)
Where standards differ is if anything out of the ordinary happens: In the US we quickly switch to normal English to get the message across (which sometimes works and sometimes just causes more confusion), in Europe they try to find some phraseology that fits no matter how stilted it is, or just become flustered and start humming and hawing. But for scripted flightsim ATC things out of the ordinary don’t happen so that will not be a problem. All standard messages like approach clearances will sound fine.
Readback practices differ a bit: The important pieces to read back is things like altitudes, runways and taxiways, altimeter settings and so on (there is a formal list). US pilots tend to read back those items verbatim, not necessarily the instructions associated with those items. E.g.: “Descend and maintain 8000” “Down to 8000”. 8000 was read back and that is what matters, “to 8000” can sound like “2 8 000” so that is unfortunate but you hear it anyway. In Europe they tend to read back the whole instruction verbatim instead. So maybe that would sound a little different, but both are legal, opinions differ on what is better depending on language proficiency, and both are realistic. The sim ATC could just read back verbatim, you hear that in the US a lot too so it would not sound wrong.
Thanks for this…quite informative… We in Europe are trained quite strictly in R/T procedures before we can claim the addon to our licence which allows us to t.ransmit on the Airband. .All that needs to happen is that ASOBO get whatever regime they settle on implimented properly. I hope also they improve considerably their testing and quality control before an improved ATC is released.
1 Like
Having thought furthur about this…I am still uncertain which market Fs2020 is aimed at.
Is it the "Casual Gamer (who wants an aviation based game), armchair pilot (who thinks he knows about flying), or past and present Pilots,trained at various levels who DO know about flying. Perhaps they, MS/ASOBO that is, are trying to please everyone, and,at the moment at least, are pleasing no-one.
Every licenced Pilot knows that real world Aviation is NOT a game, and any flying machine is NOT a toy. I believe there is a fundamental difference in mindset between Pilots and untrained enthusiasts. Trained pilots are always going to approach an avowed Simulator with different expectations,and standards to others.They can’t help it…its the training and experience they have had. The Sim designers should realise (if they have not already) that there is only ONE way to aviate in the real world where safety is the absolute “bottom line”…that is “by the book”. A Pilot can lose his licence for serious contraventions of the “Book of Rules” and it has happened.
Its up to the “Project Managers” to decide their policy, and we, the customers, will decide if their product meets our needs.
Its early days for FS2020 yet…so they deserve more time and patience from us all.
Or does Flight Simulator draw its own market that could include people from all kinds of groups? And those are the people that actually are happy with it?
There’s a lot of stereotyping on these forums, and traditional norms to which people are trying to make Flight Simulator conform. The idea that there are “real simmers” (as opposed to pretend, wannabes simmers?) or that a “flight simulator” has to include this or that to merit that title or appease pilots (or else it’s a flying game) is rather silly to me. Flight Simulator has always been a ~$60 entertainment title, an open world sandbox, a flying game, and a real world simulation.
2 Likes
That is absolutely right, and very well put!
It is all those things, not one or the other of them.
I’m against a Pro version because I personally believe that would bring about a category of privilege
over other members in the community& also when talking about “accessibility” that is something to keep in mind.
But I’m also not for the extra stuff you are able to buy in the market place since I believe that a community on grounds of mutual care
should try to make the experience of flight sim as real & pleasant as possible for all that play it & therefore all the stuff in the market place should be integrated in the game if it
improves areas or provides extra plane models imo.Because of a welcoming community based on mutual care.The common goal being to make FS the best game it possibly can be for everyone & so any new member to the community would be amazed & inspired to perhaps get involved themselves. “accessibility” could also be seen as equal distribution of content /equal playing field for
any long time FS fan or new player alike. But thats under the philosophy that you try to create the best possible experience for any player based on a kind of collectiveness within the community.Fs being the common dream
A more altruistic approach where equal distribution of content is seen as essential for the game experience, the accessibility of any member,showing that every member is valued the same without favoritism,
has access to the same things & helps foster an inclusive nature that is essential to a healthy social fabric.
But thats my view on it
If by “PRO” the original discussion means FAA approved training software, that does make some sense long-term, but we are talking up to a few thousand dollars a copy not an extra hundred bucks or so (FAA approved XPlane is $US750 a copy) and there would also be requirements to use it with certified hardware that is far from cheap. The market would be flying schools, as it is simply not something very many average gamers could justify or even afford at all.
https://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/nsp/data_lists/
Otherwise you are just splitting the sim for Epeen and extra profit and there would be no real benefit to doing it.
1 Like
I’d definitely pay extra for a none Xbox compatible version that’s more serious and doesn’t have things dialed back to make things suitable for arcady xbox’s.
I’ve had plenty of years on xbox’s from the gen one onwards but msfs doesn’t belong on it, for me it should of stayed on pc, I feel the flying experience is getting watered down to make it suitable for a console aswell.
Should definitely be two separate releases but not so over the top that it’s a rediculous price just a more serious focussed version with only realistic flight models on there and no silly arcade handling fighters.
2 Likes
Same, I wish there was a time to remove the cartoonish and game stuff so that we can use it as a “SIMULATOR” to simulate flight. Not that discovery flight game stuff
1 Like
Hi @MalarMarlin3683,
What specifically do you consider to be “cartoonish and game stuff” that you would like removed?
Thanks,
MSFS Team
How - specifically - is the flight profile becoming “watered down” due to Xbox? Would that be the soft body physics recently introduced on both PC and Xbox, or the watering down by introducing the new prop simulation on both PC and Xbox", perhaps it’s the thermals, and aircraft CFD implemented on both PC and… oh you get my drift maybe…
I’m not sure that paying more to exclude others, or paying extra to be safe in the knowledge no pesky Xbox is going to be able to run that version is going to lead to greater happiness? Or possibly I’m wrong.
If there’s an element of the sim-game we don’t like, how about we just don’t use it. So for example if i think others are using Discovery flights whilst I’m not even on multiplayer mode how does that impact on my experience?Not a lot i think. Or if someone wants to fly the Halo spaceship (absolutely not my cup of tea but hey), i just don’t use it myself, I’ve never even fired up an engine on it, yep it’s there but it doesn’t impact my life…
I’d be careful what we wish for, less reputable developers would eye this kind of thread with glee and wink conspiratorially to their team and laugh at how if they just tinker with this and that, change the splash screen font colour to platinum and write a tag line “For Particularly Serious Pilots Only” then an attractive premium can be creamed off.
Look, we all sit at our PCs or Xbox or other cloud supported screen and pretend to fly a plane, a bunch of pixels on a screen. That’s the bottom line. When we start to try to differentiate ourselves from others we make our community divisive.
7 Likes