Trust me, I am not picking on anyone though you might understand why I made my comment.
Having the ability to set a wide range of variables in all aspects of flying and conditions is what a SIMULATOR is about. From safe/tame to extremes. I look forward to more capabilities being added including extreme storms. Those not interested in the same settings need not use them. Each user can pick how easy or difficult a challenge they want to set for themselves. You can choose to fly into a storm or avoid it or delete from your options for flying that day. I like to have choices.
Personally I’d like it to be as real as it can get. If the data doesn’t exist with regards to air movement and precipitation in large Cb’s then not much can be done about that. Either don’t model or use a simplified solution.
Unknown but happened after an SU, since then there has been no thunderstorms to match real life conditions. I haven’t seen one in a year of flying in the southeastern US….a location in which thunderstorms happen year round and often.
Strawman argument. Crashes can be due to many causes that are out of the pilot’s control. Those that are due to pilot error, like checklist complacency, are things a pilot can (should) learn to overcome. Flying into a violent thunderstorm is a reckless decision.
You don’t get the point, by your logic they shouldn’t simulate anything, because ‘‘pilots always make the right decision and never do mistakes’’, besides the fact that you can also end up in a thunderstorm by accident.
You clearly don’t understand this right here is not a wishlist item, it’s just me asking a question for the Dev Stream and people can decide with votes if it’s relevant or not.
Sorry, I was under the mistaken impression that you wanted to have a discussion. I’ve given you my opinion, and delineated my reasons for having it. If what you really wanted was a ‘vote/no vote’ thread, then I’ll bow out and leave you to it.
Did a few FAA wings classes online. They show MSFS.
My logic is, what happens if the sims is super realistic and a student pilot says “I’ve got this, done it 1000 times in sim” and nature goes mental on him? He dies.
While I absolutely want realistic weather, I don’t want a 17 year old kid to die because of the idea that he can do something. I try to think about the whole picture from all points. When is the line of too realistic crossed? Is that something Asobo thinks about?
Side note I think all the G and weather effects in game are cool, and of course weather can be improved. I believe MSFS can be a great tool for teaching and as an amazing Sim to just have fun with.
Yes I saw your opinion and reasons:
‘‘Pilots that end up in thunderstorms are terrible, it’s not fun to have realism in the sim, you can’t learn from realism in the sim, you believe 90 out of 100 don’t want it, this isn’t GTA5.’’
Very helpful, thank you for leaving
Currently the 17 year old who believes in MSFS would die because he would think he can fly through any big dark cloud without consequences
There is a country song with the line, “you’ve got to know when to hold em, know when to fold them”
My point is this - if the sim lets you fly through a towering CuNim in a Cessna without penalty then it’s just an arcade game. We as pilots have to learn when we can safely traverse an area and when we need to re-route. Personally I would remove all the pilot assists and the ability to turn off crash detection. I would also have the sim pull your wings off if you exceed VNE instead of leaving it to the individual aircraft devs. Then there could be one 2-position master switch “Realistic/Arcade”. Take your pick
Really want this too.
There was turbulence in clouds at launch. Now its missing, and is the nr1 thing that dumbs down msfs imho.
Some update on this Asobo? Whats the point of good looking clouds if they are only for…ehh
…looks? Add some light bumbiness at the bottom of cumulus clouds while you’re at it.
Logged:
Seb said, now when they has implemented options they can really focus on making cloudturbulence realistic. I think the turbulence setting will bring realism. They couldn’t do that before they had options available. Because not all of the users want realism. Some users just want to relax while using the sim. Be able to please all users requires options.
Yes nothing wrong with having options, as long as one of them is called realistic.
I’m glad they are taking the optional approach, because otherwise it wouldn’t be possible to move forward in the simulation.
People who complain about everything or have the constant ‘‘it’s overdone’’ opinion can reduce it or turn it off and everybody who wants realism just selects that and never looks back
‘’…As soon as we get the UI to control turbulence, then we can really go free and say there is 20.000 fpm upwind like you could get in the worst storm.
But users have a way to turn it down, when you want to fly live weather but there is a giant storm, but you don’t want that much turbulence because you wouldn’t be able to fly in this situation with certain planes, we need that additional control to limit turbulence…
So now we have the turbulence UI and it was said the up & down draft limitations are gone, but the described behaviour with ‘‘20000 fpm in the worst storm’’ or ‘‘you wouldn’t be able to fly there’’ can’t be found anywhere.
Everything even the smallest aircraft gonna do is shake a little bit, even with the worst possible weather preset… would be nice if they could explain why we still can’t get realistic weather physic simulation.
Trust me, I am not picking on anyone though you might understand why I made my comment.
