Literally standby…
2 Likes
Hard to say…
It’s a game, hardly see a game with so many obvious bugs affecting gaming experience.
It’s a sim, hardly see a sim with so many obvious bugs affecting siming experience.
IMHO, in any way, it’s a halfway finished product.
Live traffic is an option in the menu system which mirrors live flights from real world schedules. But is not always working as well as it should. What is supposed to happen is that most if not all live traffic that is happening in the world is supposed to be simulated in the sim. If signal is lost AI takes over and flies the plane until the signal is received again. Sometimes planes are not following the paths that the real aircraft do, they do peculiar things on approach and dont follow the flight paths and patterns that the real aircraft do.
@BURRIS7744 I agree with you and have expressed the same view myself. However, despite the current shortcomings, it does represent a major step forward in terms of base platform. A software ecosystem which is built for today’s advanced graphics processors (particularly after DX12 is implemented). My hope is that the SDK is completed quickly and completely so the 3rd party devs can bring complex and complete models to market which will turn the current game into a simulator.
2 Likes
Thank you for the elaboration. I must agree with what you are now saying and I am sure that will be fixed. I suppose that when it is, and assuming the fix will be included in one of the next two updates, we will hear many users claiming that MSFS2020rc3 or rc4 is indeed a simulating flight simulator and the others, like x-plane or P3D, are neither flight simulators, simulating flight simulators nor games (e.g. because they do not offer any employment or entertainment).
1 Like
I don’t think that MSFS will ever be “like” P3D or X-Plane.
It will have its own strengths and weaknesses, and be a different option to those other two.
No point is just copying … MSFS need is to Enovate, and seems to be doing that quite nicely.
An instructor in a level D sim who also acts as ATC which takes about 90% of my problems away… as for the others you have your charts in the Level D sim, if they arent current you shouldnt leave the ground the main reason I brought this up is because FSX had them and airport Diagrams!. 2. I have never ran into a vehicle taxiing to the runway… 3. ya who cares about the graphics because as soon as you rotate your in the clouds for 99% of the time… If I had an instructor who performed atc like this you woud lose the real world feel extremely quickly!
A real world Pilot has an opinion some of you guys dont like and rather than try and learn from this person, most of you lambast him because you think you know better. Sorry but this forum and the type gamers this mess of a sim/game/cruel joke as accrued is terrible.
I honestly despair, if you were to post “this is the most realistic sim ever,” I am sure real world pilots would not treat you with such distain and honestly reply with some of the stupidest reply’s I have ever seen, more over you would not get lambasted and called a liar but you would probably get some sound advice on what’s working right flight dynamics wise and what’s not (at the moment not a lot) but whatever if your happy then good.
But no you are driving people away with your comments and ego’s and fan boy defending of things which need fixing not defending, nobody is saying its terrible, I almost feel like people are scared of it getting real as they wont know what to do! things get broke patch after patch the community IMHO is getting worse, people cant have an opinion that isn’t layering the sim in praise and admiration.
Mark my words, if add-on devs cant make decent add-ons soon, not rehashed ones we have built from the ground up or not for MSFS it will die, and then all it will be a roof top skimming hey mom I can see our house, with dime a dozen rip off add-on’s that do nothing but ■■■■ up your money, but whatever lets all praise the graphics whilst the other major half of the sim needs fixing but nobody wants to admit this. If ASOBO dont address this major issue then it will die, and that would be a shame or they need to be honest and say, realism is not their target and then all the people who want realism will go else where leaving the chase view flyers doing GTA V missions to their oh so realistic sim
What a sad sad way to go, when it could suite all types of players/simmers
1 Like
Sorry , but being new to this genre , can you name me a sim / game / simcade etc that have all the things you have mentioned ? ( Base game without DLCs ) .
You seem ( in my opinion ) , to be " hyper critical " .
see here is the deal, why do you compare? So what if others dont have it? If I compare MSFS to X-Plane in the area of flight dynamics where and wait for it… Xplane at the moment clearly trumps MSFS and also has more add-on planes and study level ones… You get the usual “you cant compare, MSFS is new blah blah blah” But yet in defending MSFS you can compare? Crazy right?
Nobody cares what the other sims do, we are talking about this sim, and we want/would like to have. Unlike many other “Experts” on here some of us actually Paid the full £110 for it and expect a bit more than pretty graphics for a flight sim that costs twice the price of another flight sim but does not do the flight part very well.
ASOBO for all its community feedback which is not addressing the real problems and is just picking popularity which is alarming by the way, that people will cry about a small part of the world being off but think the flight dynamics are amazing!!! is not engaging with those who want more, and they need to. Just because a person has an opinion that you dont agree with does not make it right to start a pile on that has happened.
Ultimately if you are serious simmer MSFS is not a good choice, if you want some fun then fine, I would love to delete all my other sims, but MSFS offers nothing but pretty graphics to me, I mean for me. Now for the money I have spent I expect more or some honesty from them. I have add-on planes I cant use, scenery that dies or causes a CTD again not for everyone, I have all the add-ons in fact even from simmarket, so I am invested, but the sim isn’t offering what I need and does not appear to be going that way, and I guess its the same for others.
There is nothing wrong in asking or making suggestions for things to be better.
1 Like
Why are YOU replying to a question , that wasn’t directed at you ??
( P.s Not really a reply either , more of a rant than anything )
Here’s a question I have for all the “real pilots” who claim that this is not a sim.
Can you:
- Plan a VFR flight plan from one uncontrolled airstrip to another using VOR and NDB’s
- Start up the C152, and be treated to a reasonably accurate representation of the actual interior.
- Taxi the 152 to the runway, announce your position and takeoff
- Trim the aircraft, set cruise speed and Fly your flight plan using the NAV radios in the cockpit.
- Approach your destination, enter the appropriate pattern, announce runway, pattern entry.
- Fly the pattern and successfuly land the plane
- Taxi off the runway, announce clear of runway.
- Taxi to a parking spot, set the parking brake
- Shutdown the aircraft.
And can this be done with a reasonable degree of accuracy, compared to real world performance taking into consideration the inherent limitations of PC’s ability to model certain flight parameters.
I think the answer is a resounding yes.
If that isn’t enough to be considered a flight simulator, then I am not sure what is. Q.E.D.
Yes, you can do all 9 steps in FS2020. You can also do all 9 steps in a similar aircraft on X-Plane for mobile.
It’s a simulator, but the degree of fidelity is where you start running into diverging opinions and is an area where FS2020 tends to get some flack for from users who have used other platforms.
For instance, I can take a steam gauged 172 from X-Plane mobile, load up an approach, highlight the FAF on the GNS unit, hit the direct to button, and it will let me fly direct to this waypoint on the approach just as the real unit.
You cannot in FS2020, unless of course you mod the unit (and thankfully there are great contributors on this front).
Now, this doesn’t bother me the slightest tbh, but it’s just one example that will probably irk some users. When a default aircraft on a free iphone app has more functionality than a simulator on PC with a price tag to match and exceed a AAA game, seeing a bit of concern here and there should be expected.
To expand on this a little bit, the above screenshot is taken on an ipad. I can’t remember if this particular aircraft is free or not on mobile (at most, it costs <$4.50) but it is included on the PC equivalent of X-Plane. Everything highlighted item is functional. The turboprop dynamics also work as intended, with ITT rising as you climb higher.
When I fly the King Air in FS2020, to a large degree, it seems to pale in comparison.
1 Like
Yes, and it’s the degree of divergence between two platforms that’s the issue. Someone who flies mainly VFR, will likely think the sim is great. As you get deeper into the weeds, try different things like filing IFR flight plans, or having to change an IFR plan on the fly, then niggles start to appear that you didn’t see before.
I suppose, like many things, sims are like onions, and the deeper you go, the greater the divergence is seen between a developing platform, and a more established one.
And there in lies the rub. This condescending attitude that “VFR” is some how inferior to “IFR”. Despite the fact that VFR is the foundation of all of aviation. You can’t get IFR certified without VFR. You can’t get your ATP without VFR.
Many of the IFR snobs complain because you simply can’t program the FMC or avionics, switch on the autopilot and cruise the magenta line. And there are bugs in the system, no doubt. And they are being fixed. But it is incredulous to me the amount of criticism this sim gets because it didn’t have study level airliners on day one, or included in the box. Might I remind some that it took over 2 years to get one in FSX.
But those same snobs couldn’t fly cross country in a Piper Cub in a remote region of Alaska, Canada, or South America if their lives depended on it.
There are plenty of sims that have more functional or realistic cockpit environments and they handle IFR better having received the benefit of having already matured and having a huge amount of 3rd party support. I challenge someone to take FSX Steam edition out of the box, strip it of all of it’s expensive add ons, fly each version and tell me FSX is better. I don’t care how many “charts” or “navaids” it ships with. If 150kts feels like 15 then it’s pointless. and FSX doesn’t even get the sensation of speed close to being right despite running at 60fps+
MSFS is one of the few simulators that really gets VFR right, and it’s immediately dismissed out of hand as a scenery simulator. It’s laughable.
Many GA and Bush pilots come on this forum and others, at marvel at the fidelity of the simulation, but again the “real pilots” then come behind and insinuate that the product is just a game because the managed speed function on the A320 doesn’t work right, or because the Wind indicators on the two MFD’s of the G3000 contradict each other.
4 Likes
I wouldn’t call it snobbery exactly, but its fair to say that if you don’t use a given feature in the sim, you may not be fully aware of its weaknesses, and this will alter your perception of it.
And they would be right, there are a lot of problems with the avionics at the moment. As long as those complaints are framed in a constructive manner, I see no problem with that.
I used the Internet Wayback Machine, and old steam reviews, looking back at the initial released of X-Plane. I don’t remember the years exactly, but it was released at the tail end of one year, and made it to steam early-mid next year. There were reviews on Steam at that time complaining that there was no in-game map. Just a map, and that was not in the initial release. When you compare MSFS to that, the initial release was pretty good in my book, despite its problems.
2 Likes
To answer your questions every sim has different things but there isnt that one true sim yet! Xplane is used in real world for Instrument training, I’ve never seen a single flight school use fsx I asked when I was in training and they told me they dont have the depth and im assuming the reputation Xplane has. I dont think T.C or F.A.A has even approved it. ( Could be wrong)
This is the newest “sim” on the market and when something that is 10+ years older you would expect to have all the features in the previous version available in the current. However I dont believe this is the case! As far as the IFR world goes which is a major topic and has to be considered major because vfr isnt really used in operational commuter/airline flying. VFR is alot more simplistic then IFR. Almost any game developer that wanted to these days can include flying a plane… its the level depth that turns it from a game to a simulator. The other thing is how people fly it! If your a crazy lunatic who flies between buildings 20 feet off the ground its a game! Your not simulating anything your just having fun ripping around buildings and I dont blame you thats what makes it fun! you can do all sorts of things that you would have your license pulled in real life. However I look at it from this perspective I think this game or sim whatever you want to call it, If it wanted to show what flying was actually like as close to the real thing as possible they have a lot more to do! Vehicles on taxi ways, ATC! Etc…
Look at the working title CJ4 that aircraft is incredible! The level of immersion into the FMS is mind blowing! Asobo released a very poor version of it but 3rd party guys are stepping it up look at A32x the difference between these 2 models are night and day!
Asobo/MS has definitely done some good groundwork I realize it was launched more of a beta version but having a full working aircraft is not their intent they say that in Q&A 1. They just want basics, people who pay over 100 bucks want more. Lets be honest though there have been bugs and glitches galore I still cant get a half decent looking city yet…buildings look like they have been through war, lightning is almost everywhere in the tropics and United states, Icing is incredibly intense all the time, ground textures look blurry flying over etc… These are all fixes that are coming and as they come in the level of immersion will grow but right now completing a flight from A to B with ATC on Without losing immersion I would give it a no! Some people think what Im saying is out to lunch, thats your opinion Im simply stating this is how I lose immersion as a pilot on this “Sim”
If you dont agree with me look at the general population and reviews of the Game or the thousands of articles that seem to agree it has a way to go.
There is no fully Software Sim certified by the FAA because the FAA requires all simulations to be a combination of software and hardware. So while certain simulator manufacturers may use XPLANE or P3D as a base for their simulation product, it doesn’t mean that what you have on your desktop is the same thing. In the same way that if Ford has a Mustang used in NASCAR, that the one you use is remotely the same other than it’s body shape.
You stated that how people fly it helps determine whether it’s a sim or a game? REALLY. So all these people who are breaking the licenses for P3D by using it “for entertainment purposes” have actually turned it into a game?
Your logic is a bit foggy on that one.
The complexity of flying VFR vs IFR is not what makes something a simulator. It’s how the program handles flight dynamics, does it model the aircraft correctly, does it model the surrounding atmosphere correctly. You claim that XPlane is so much better, but you can’t enter a flat spin in xplane, period. It won’t model it. MSFS will. XPlane won’t model windflow over mountains and terrain, MSFS does.
It will be interesting to see if MSFS will be able to model other phenomenon such as windshear or wake turbulence.
MS/ASOBO has done the groundwork, the overall flight model is solid, the atmospherics are solid, and even 3rd Party developers have admitted as much. This makes it a flight simulator. The fact that they have not fully modelled certain cockpits or have bugs in certain aspects of the avionics does not change this fact.
Using your logic, I could simply dismiss Xplane as merely a “cockpit simulator” but I won’t do that. You portray yourself as being objective and yet your statements belay that.
1 Like
Everyone knows that the flight dynamics are pitchy but again they are improving it in the last update Ive noticed a very big difference. Since the last update no longer will it randomly pitch to abruptly when turning and cause you to go over the G limit. The photogrammetry is not what makes it a sim I never said that. This is not a sim in a sense of just doing a ride this is a simulation where they want to showcase the world so its an important detail in this “sim”. ATC, Real world traffic this are the big things in this “sim” and they have a long way to go. Id love to fly with real world aircraft and not hear "american you are 28,000ft above you assigned altitide descend and maintain 10,000ft " meanwhile you cant get a word in edgewise because they are constantly correcting other traffic because for some reason I dont think they can climb above 10,000ft yet.
I enjoy it for what it is with certain features off right now mainly ATC it will come in future updates but right now I find it distracting!
Im sorry, no idea what you mean by breaking licenses… If you fly an aircraft outside the limitations you are having fun and your not trying to simulate a real world flight if you pitch the aircraft into a nose dive and reach 350knots indicated then pull up with tons of G force, if you barrel roll an airbus full of passengers you arnt simulating a real flight! There are different types of simmers they have done well in certain areas such as flight dynamics flying through feeling the bumps going through clouds and picking up ice but they are still having to tweak things and will be for months im sure but that all helps turn it into an all around balanced sim.
As stated this is my opinion as an individual who is in the sky roughly 900 hours a year and I get distracted by issues which doesnt make me feel as though I’m simulating a realistic flight.