FS 2020 has been out now for over two months. We already have a large customer base of gamers, real life pilots, simmers from established platforms, new simmers and wannabe pilots. Some have left, most have stayed and some are waiting on the sidelines to see what happens. We also have a large number of developers committed to our product. But the honeymoon period is now drawing to a close.
We have a development plan mapped out for us but what is the fun in just following that ? It’s easy to moan and criticise but more difficult to be constructive and move a project in the right direction.
If you were the Team Leader and you were in the driving seat what would be your focus if tasked with improving the sim, increasing the customer base, increasing revenues and bringing yet more developers to our platform. We want to be a success, at the top of the pile and still be here in ten years time.
My own focus would be on these three areas:
improve and develop the SDK to advance the creation of study level aircraft in order to attract and keep serious simmers
improve default aircraft systems and cockpit Garmin navigational units for a similar reason to the above
helicopters, to tempt a new type of customer base
What would be your main focus(es) if you were asked to give a maximum of three ?
Could be an interesting thread IMO. While I’m thinking would you like to include
a) real weather (or exclude it as it has already caused numerous threads) and
b) a gateway to facilitate airport improvements by the community and
c) more gaming-element challenges to attract more gaming users.
I would also already focus on brainstorming about what FS2022 (as a new purchasable version) could offer.
I as a team leader would immediately put VR, Xbox, helicopter, world/photogrammetry etc on backlog temporarily , and focus 100% only on the first two points you mentioned:
and then add:
fix the bugs
add Charts+ quick
open up the weather and navblue navdata to third parties like ActiveSky, REX, VATSIM and IVAO and more so that serious simmers flying on those networks wouldn’t have to rely on third party payware or any other external sources.
As much as this game looks amazing, I would probably focus on the flight simulation part of the flight simulator. In other words, realistic aircrafts, aircraft handling and systems. Which, to me, is the whole point of a flight simulator.
A Teamleader let develop customers whishes ( #self-service:wishlist ) … also re-priorize them a bit with its technical point of view and safe its developer team for angry peoples
The people who have the future vision about MSFS is also kind of customer and give MSFS the direction.
Ground handling, nosewheel steering radius, blurring of ground textures, tree and autogen render distance, press any key window, G1000, runaway trim on AP, multicore optimisation.
That’s what OP was trying to allude to when he said:
You are referring to study level aircraft and systems. The base default aircraft were never meant to be like that, for several sensible and valid reasons.
Also, the simulation of flight is already present in the sim. MSFS is not a Google Earth viewer, and magenta-line IFR-capable jets aren’t the only kind of aircraft in the world. If that was the case then there wouldn’t be 30 aircraft in it, and aircraft such as C-152 would be banned in the real world.
Several real world pilots also tested and said some (but not all) aircraft are very close to their real world counterparts. But again, they are meant to be used by a large number of people who would range from xboxers to complete novice to pros. Therefore they will lack some features and that’s totally normal.
If you have any confusion as to the definition of flight and whether MSFS 2020 simulates flight, I suggest you take a peek at the following:
No clue why you are responding to me like that. This thread is about what would each of us would do if we were the Team Leader.
Ive seen your responses in many threads in this forums, and usually I couldnt disagree with you more in each case, but Im not here to argue about your vs mine opinions. I answered what I would do as a Team Leader, maybe you could try to stay on topic too?
I was referring to; If I was a Team Leader I would put all focus towards as accurately as possible simulate flight realism within the frameworks that is set by the developers. Currently this simulator, to me, seems to try to simulate realism in the form of graphics more than anything else, and last time I checked this simulator was not called graphics simulator, but flight simulator. So I think focusing on the aircrafts, flight behavior and systems would be first priority.
You really should stop telling people what they are referring to, when you clearly do not know. You seem to pull the “they were never intended to”-card, which is fine, and I agree to some extent. But there is a huge difference between not having study level aircrafts and what was marketed. You could always rewatch the discovery series and partnership series if you are confused about what expectations were set by Asobo/MS, and not me.
Simulation of flight is present in the sim, thats not the question. The question is how accurately is it present. I didnt think anybody didnt understand that at this point. But yes, simulation of flight is present. Simulation of flight is present in any game that has a aircraft in it. If that is your definition, you might aswell have slew mode enabled permanently and swoop around the world. I mean, it is a aircraft in the air - so by your definition it is simulating flight, no? Just fire up Space Invaders and call it a Simulator!
Confusion about the definition of flight? Maybe you should read through that first link you posted again. And this time try to read and understand, and not just get frustrated and want to tell him or everybody else that they are wrong. You have your oppinions, he has his, and I have mine. You didnt even link to his post, but you linked your response. And even that, you were breaking down his every point in his personal review trying to argue with him and every part of his review… in his own personal review. That is just mindblowing to me.
Maybe you can check out what the definition of a opinion is:
And also I would strongly suggest you look up the term “condescending” and try reflect on that matter.
So I will do what you do, just make statements and present them as truths.
The simulation of flying is not accurately present in the sim. MSFS is mostly a eyecandy Google Earth viewer aimed at a younger casual gamer audience that loves graphics and taking screenshots.
The goal is to appeal to as many people as possible, more than people that wants a good/accurate simulator. And there is nothing wrong with that, I would actually go as far as to say its perfectly understandable from a business point of view.
The thing is, fs2020 is okay. It gets a “okay” from me because of all its positives. But Its not an amazing flight simulator YET. Thats why I wanted to give my oppinion and be on topic in this thread because I would keep all the positives and also try bumping the realism of the flight simulating part up to make it a great simulator, instead of a okay one. Flight model behavior, flight systems and the aircrafts themselves.
That is what I would do, but I know that you would not. So why dont you spend your energy staying on topic for once, instead of being on some kind of crusade on this forum to just argue with people that you dont agree with.
Me and many other people do not think this is a very realistic flight simulator yet, you just have to accept that at some point. Maybe try focusing more on the game and less about other people would help?
If you are still a little confused maybe this will help.
I do not think that the current state of fs2020 is accurate enough in its simulation, specially regarding aircrafts, aircraft flight model behavior and systems.
I understand that you think they are.
Again, what I (me, as the thread topic is asking for) would focus on are more realistic aircrafts, aircraft model behavior and aircraft systems. SDK, Garmin and/or FMC for the airliners improvements are examples of a good start on that journey.
And that, that is not up for discussion, as it is my personal opinions based on my experience with this game. (As weird as it is having to mention that)
If you are still confused and want to tell me Im wrong, I would strongly suggest you read the definition of opinions again.
1 - Patch Development; Making sure they’re tested thoroughly prior to release without introducing new bugs. They are held until stable and good enough, not rushed out as we have seen with previous patches.
2 - Feature Development; Complete missing features that are currently in game first then work on new features thereafter. This covers everything from Instruments to Weather to Physics.
3 - World Development; Concentrate on fixing blatant errors in the World’s AI system, Improving upon Photogrammetry areas to be implemented.
Like what ? Nothing of what I said should trigger anyone the way it did for you. Are you okay?
I don’t care, and I don’t expect anyone to agree or disagree with me.
Agreed.
And that’s where the problem lies, as a huge majority of real world pilots who tested MSFS disagreed with exactly that. This doesn’t mean they said the flight simulation part was perfect, but it was realistic overall, although some issues still exist. But the majority of them never said MSFS devs were focusing on graphics only. I’m just pointing out the fact that there are actual real world pilots who disagree with your opinion, and that’s normal. No need to get triggered.
Yes I watched them all. Perhaps you should re-watch the live interviews given by MSFS devs before release where they clearly said the base default aircraft will not be study level accurate ?
The answer is: The simulation of flight in MSFS is not study level accurate. MSFS devs already answered this in the above interview and many others. For more accuracy, you will wait for the SDK to be more mature, and you will have to pay a heavy, premium price for the highly accurate magenta-line addons. Microsoft is a business first and foremost and not a charitable organization.
I’m not frustrated. Not sure why you think I am, though.
I agree (and already said that in my previous post), but with an addendum that several real world pilots who used MSFS 2020 also said it was somewhat realistic overall, (depending on which default aircraft is in use), and several times better than prepar3d and Xp11 in many aspects, although various issues still exist (and they will be sorted out over time. This is a ten year project after all. It’s only gonna get better from here on out.). For example prepar3d and xp11 don’t simulate mechanical turbulence. MSFS 2020 does.
And simulation of flying is not accurately present in any sim. if you’re really serious about accurately simulating flight, you need to be looking at multi-million dollar motion platform flight simulators, not a $60 MSFS 2020, Prepar3d or Xp11. Even the multi-million dollar sims do not simulate flight model 100% accurately. At this point I’m not sure what exactly you are expecting from home desktop flight simulators.
And that according to your own admission is just an opinion with exactly zero evidence to support or prove it. Anyone and everyone can theoretically have any number of absurd opinions, but without empirical evidence they are useless. Like I said, several highly qualified real world pilots will disagree with you on that and even show you proof for that.
Wrong. Absolutely wrong. According to MSFS 2020 producer Mr. Jorg and the developers, MSFS is first and foremost a simulator for simmers, yet it has to be accessible to all, both novices and pros, and not just some few hundreds of magenta line chasers. You and I don’t set the goals for MSFS 2020. The publisher and developers do. Read and learn what the devs said.
Several real world pilots who tested MSFS 2020 disagree with that. And if you’re looking for a “very realistic but still not 100% realistic flight simulator”, you need to be spending $30-40 million dollars, not $60 for your base simulator and $150 for your cute magenta line addon on your $3000 home desktop PC. Technology is not that advanced yet.
And that’s exactly what the OP said. I merely pointed that out to you before but for some unknown reasons you got triggered:
I have too much respect for scientific and empirical evidence to care about what a baseless, evidence-less opinion is supposed to look like, but I respect people’s right to have and express an opinion freely, no matter how ridiculous and absurd that opinion might be.
Pretty much spot on, couldn’t add much to your statement. I wouldn’t worry too much about helis but if the above 2 were satisfactory then sure that would be great.
I disagree the OP was referring to study level aircraft. The default aircraft are not even on the same level as default FSX aircraft. I believe most of us requesting this just want the aircraft to be fixed to that level.
SteamSpy says the opposite, most of the user base reduced a lot the time playing the game, so many have left the game, and some have stayed. I understand many could come back in the future.
If you were the Team Leader and you were in the driving seat
the scope of the game is so big that making the focus on 3 things would take the project to a disaster. Right now they are more like an octopus mixed with firefighters trying to fulfill the boss’s wishes and at the same time stopping fires.
However if you ask me, If I were on their shoes, I would stop the big projects for a while and try to make the software stable, refactor it and clean all the bad code they have introduced while chasing the deadlines. That by itself could lead any project to a disaster if they don’t fix it on early stages. Of course I am assuming stuff here, but well, they stated they have been rushing the code, so nothing good could come out of that.
He’s referring to study level aircraft. Why do you disagree?
This is what the OP said in point number 2:
You don’t disagree with point number 2. I don’t disagree with point number 2. MSFS 2020 producer Mr. Jorg and the developers don’t disagree with point number 2. They even made a great statement and promise about it in the latest live developer Q & A:
“G1000/Garmin updates”
I’m not understanding your issue here. What exactly is it that you disagree on?
more real-world features, which is the main difference between this game and other platforms. It’s best to add in the changing seasons so that every place isn’t boring and monotonous.
More realistic flight simulation, no more to say, this is the basic.
More open environment for external developers to join, and suitable quality control (or purchase preview).
It’s a bit too ambitious, but I’m a customer after all!
