Left and right toe brakes. Parking brake is fine. Dropped out to su2 and its fine.
1 Like
Sure, if you see a beta as a privileged gift rather than a successful collaboration.
2 Likes
Go back to 2020, you won’t regret it, everything in it works very well, I stayed in the beta until SU2 of 2024, but unfortunately I spent more time not playing than flying, I kept reporting crashes on the forum, such as: Rebar, nvidia drivers, FSR and DLSS etc. but at some point patience runs out, especially when I saw SU2 with so many fixes and still the simulator is not good. So I went back to 2020. And in it I saw that I had wasted a lot of time without playing a real simulator. Now there is no going back to being a beta tester in 2024. Good luck to everyone who still persists in helping the community, but for me it’s over.
5 Likes
Honestly, any self-respecting team would have at least a few QA cycles of smoke testing every feature, fixing regressions and then once things run ok, releasing that as a beta to the community.
That’s point 1. Ok, if you’re 5 devs, maybe you need more help from the community, but a product like msfs should have a sizeable testing team that should focus on these deliveries first before putting them out there in a public Beta to iron out the final kinks and then the submission and release.
Point 2, beta is for testing and not feature preview is true for a normal product, not for msfs 2024. I feel for Su1 and SU2 this was simply not true. The sim was too broken for users not to want to jump on SU1 or 2 and take advantage of the various fixes and performance improvements. I only bought msfs 2024 when I heard SU1 greatly improves the experience and then stayed on SU2 for its entire length because of the performance improvements (while also reporting bugs, etc. ).
9 Likes
It would make much more sense if the beta and latest release could be installed along side each other.
Even with the smaller download size, having to reinstall to switch versions is a pain. People are therefore having to chose between either using 2024 or testing it.
2 Likes
Yeah, betas aren’t for everyone, and I get your point. Sometimes you just want to fly, and enjoy the view.
You raise a valid point. There are a lot of people who beta test software in genera, just for the sneak peek aspect of early access. Those people often don’t temper their expectations enough, and end up getting frustrated, after losing sight of what a beta program is really for.
2 Likes
I’m not sure I understand the purpose of “I’m leaving the Beta” or “I’m going back to 2020” posts. While I get the frustration and the urge to rant, it does none of the rest of us any good that are staying and working through the issues. I’m very curious to know what the purpose of the postings are. Is it just personal frustration and a need to vent or are some of you trying to get others to leave as well and cause bad feelings against the developers? I would sincerely hope it’s not the latter.
I do commend the author of this though for clearly identifying what the thread was about. I could have easily ignored it but was more curious about the human nature element of it. I think the more damaging and disruptive posts are the ones embedded in other threads that are addressing concrete issues. I have made some critical posts lately about certain issues but I try to make it more constructive criticism and ensure that I also comment positively about the good experiences.
5 Likes
I sort of saw it as a statement that some feel the beta isn’t(wasn’t) ready for release to the general public and are frustrated by its poor behavior and feel more internal QA is necessary to weed out obvious show-stopping issues prior to posting it to us.
That felt like a run-on sentence.
Perhaps the patience level of many users is low due to the whole “thing” that has been 2024 up to this point.
For what it is worth, I’ve noted a significant increase in the “leaving the beta” posts during SU3 than ever before. Perhaps the dev team should take that to heart?
I, too, tire of the bash 2024 sentiment. Six months of that is exhausting.
8 Likes
I left again, it stressed me a lot sadly. I gave/wrote some workarounds and tested some vram situations, tested RdrThread ms increases, Limited by RdrThread (sadly it is really getting high on some airports, i am almost always at Limited by RdrThread). They really need to optimize everything more, aircraft, airports, everything.
3 Likes
Repeatedly reading ‘they need to optimise’ is really starting to grate a bit because it often has no supporting information or actual context. What is it you actually mean by ‘optimise?’ What exactly is it you want them to do? It would probably also help if people posted their CPU/GPU/RAM so we could all get an idea of what is a realistic expectation.
The frustrating thing (probably for Asobo as much as anyone) is that your experience is by no means the norm, but then nor is mine. I’m very aware that this isn’t the case for everyone, but SU3 is probably the best (and most stable) the sim has been for me. There are issues and annoyances which I hope to see sorted out imminently in future builds but other than that the actual sim is knock out. So in that context, for me, what do they ‘optimise’?
I recorded this for myself day one of SU3 but I think it amply demonstrates my point.
This is the Fenix A319, flying into iniBuilds LHR Enhanced. I’m running BATC with FSLTL & AIG models with the traffic injection at the recommended settings. I have Bijan’s Seasons Enhanced, GSX Pro, ORBX London City Buildings etc. this is in 4K, DLAA with Frame Gen on, and every setting possible is as high as it will go. Finally I use the nameless program (in lieu of dynamic settings working properly) to step up my TLOD from 200 at 1500ft and below to 600 at 7000ft and visa versa in the descent. This is also recording 4K at 100mbps bit rate. So all in all as demanding as it gets, particularly as the Fenix is not strictly 24 compatible and is still running off the 2020 SDK. Apart from the ridiculous LODs on the later stages of the approach to airfield itself, what exactly is it that so desperately needs optimising about this? SU3 is the only time in FS2020 and FS2024 that I’ve been able to do this and maintain 60fps the whole time. I also haven’t had a single CTD in SU3, whereas SU2 was a dogs dinner in that respect.
4090 | 9800x3D | 64GB RAM
I guess my point is this isn’t as simple as ‘they need to optimise’. I think they need to understand why different people are having different experiences. Maybe once they do that they can figure out a way to equalise that experience across the board. I’m really sorry to hear some people are having such a pants experience with SU3. I have a horrible feeling something will change and I’ll go back to how it was in SU2, that would be absolutely gutting to be honest.
9 Likes
As you know in my case I’m stuck with FS2024. If SU2 (stable) was the answer to my problem (not being able to land at heavy airports, due to a performance regression with SU2), then I’d happily move back as SU3 is as the title here suggests ‘too beta’ or perhaps would have been more accurately described as ‘somewhat alpha’.
It’s just frustrating 6 months in and yes seeing progress, but also with obvious regressions, one of which stops me using the sim completely. It didn’t stop SU2 being released as it was with that regression. There’s also no fun to be had with the CTD’s as previously noted. Too much time involved setting everyhting up to take off and CTD. It’s hours of my life going by on stuff like this.
How long are we all meant to wait before being able to use FS2024 as we did FS2020? Another year?
I think you are right it’s a patience thing. I’ve had chunks of simming time lost with FS2024 testing stuff. After 6 mo’s of this every day, my patience is wearing thin.
3 Likes
I don’t think your hardware represents the majority of simmers. It would be interesting to do a poll though. It’ can’t all be a you need the latest hardware to run it thing.
We’ve got DLSS, framegen etc to help out with users performance issues. The sim should run fine with those tools, indeed it ran much smoother on release and in SU1 than it has done in SU2 and SU3. The FPS drops at larger airports (even default ones) are real and large on some people’s hardware, when they weren’t there previously. The answer to that problem surely can’t be we now all need to go buy a 9800x3D + 4090 now can it?
1 Like
Like they said in the dev streams, they will slowly optimize all airports for vram usages. And today i experienced this while testing couple aircraft. 3gb+ vram difference on an aircraft’s outside and cockpit view is not normal. 5gb vram difference on two aircraft is not normal. Somethings happening and we can’t fix them by ourselves. FPS performance - VRAM bug? - #2980 by DrewmorKuZy Every bit every optimization on airports, aircraft and everything helps us all. Not everyone has 5090, 4090, 7900xtx. I also tested Ultra and low texture differences and i suggested 6-8gb vram owners to use Low texture quality for maximum vram gains. ı need to sleep, really tired, have a lovely day.
1 Like
No, but equally the visuals are much better now than they were in SU1, particularly ground textures which are night and day different. I’m sure many things have also changed under the hood that we’re not aware of.
Is there a case for saying that whilst people’s setups remain stagnant, the sim is moving on. Is the issue less that the devs must ‘optimise’ but that people might have to readjust their expectations? I’m sure they’re always striving to optimise the code etc but it’s become the war cry of modern gamers across virtually every game that devs are useless and that all games are terribly ‘optimised’. I don’t think many of the people saying that actually know what they’re asking for (I’m not suggesting that here btw, but in other games I play people certainly have no idea what they’re talking about)
I started on FS2020 with a 2080ti. I upgraded that to a 3090 because the 2080ti was no longer cutting it as the sim progressed, particularly with the number of add-ons I was running. In that same period I went from a 3900x, to 5900x to 5800x3D too. By the time 2024 came along I accepted that to maintain the level of fidelity I wanted without lowering the settings it was likely that the 3090 was probably past it’s best at that point too and it was clear that the 5800x3D was also being pushed to it’s very limit.
There would a couple of questions I’d ask, genuinely.
- Are you still seeing all these issues with a completely vanilla sim? No add-ons, no mods, no frame-gen hacks etc? Generic aircraft, generic airports.
- Have you lowered your settings and/or reduced the number of add-ons you’re using to see if the issue improves?
- Are you doing as suggested by Asobo as part of the SU3 beta launch and running the latest Nvidia driver?
Personally, I think software and publishing houses ought to start publishing realistic specs for the games they sell. In my opinion the minimum specs listed for this sim are wildly optimistic. Both sides need to adjust their expectations accordingly
1 Like
Regarding your VRAM issue, have you seen this?
In SU2 with ReBar ‘enabled’ I saw VRAM go over 24GB more than once. With the setting as mentioned in my post, and in SU3, it is never going above 20GB.
1 Like
My reasons were quite simple. The first is that this community is important to me, and I felt the need to say, “see you soon and good luck,” while feeling sad to leave.
The second reason, while remaining understanding and supportive of Asobo, Microsoft, and all contributors, is to say, “Hey, be careful, this release might be a bit rushed; you risk losing testers.” This could lead to a reflection on the minimum level of testing before releasing the beta to a community of volunteers.
And finally, a bit of frustration. After completing two races in the Challenge League with only three competitors, I wanted to test a mission in career mode. After starting the engine, I realized I had no brakes. Already 20 minutes had passed. I restarted FS, repeated the same mission, and then experienced a crash to desktop.
In conclusion, I repeat, read my previous post: I understand the beauty and complexity of this software and know what it means to engage in beta testing and am not complaining.
For the moment, and undoubtedly I won’t resist for long, I simply wish to enjoy a stable version.
Let’s be constructive.
3 Likes
NO NOT YET
NOTHING MUCH ELSE TO LOWER except output res and there’s no way I’m going there.
I was using it originally and saw the FPS issue, and switched back to my most recent favourte driver (572.83). Makes no difference though. I may upgrade them to latest again. I think I was on 576.40 rather than 576.52 (which I admittedly haven’t tried yet).
The trouble is all this testing of various vague things is time consuming. There are so many permutations of things that are moving from release to release.
All I know is the performance issues at larger airports weren’t there in SU1 or indeed earlier builds of SU2, and indeed there is an actual listed bug logged for the very issue. So they actually must have reproduced it.
Buying new hardware because of bugs just excuses them for regressions and sets a worrying trend for end users, as if we do so, developers will just continue to expand their code accordingly to occupy that headroom. We’ve all been there before with PC’s.
Keep in mind a key selling point for FS2024 was that all the CPU multi threading would ease CPU limited situations that led to FPS issues in FS2020, so would be benefical for older hardware. Now here we are 6 months in saying we all just need latest hardware? Dangerous thinking there.
2 Likes
Dare I say it, but isn’t the testing etc and feeding back part of being in the beta? If it’s time consuming and ruining your experience then just go back to SU2 and enjoy playing the game.
I get it though, SU2 beta was a dire experience for me in terms of CTD’s. The sim was constantly crashing and SU3 is like someone has flicked a switch. Not only is it stable but it performs very nicely as in that video.
I think if you stick with it you need to go to latest Nvidia driver and set Profile K in the Nvidia app. I would also strongly recommend doing as I’ve suggest in that reply I’ve put above regarding the ReBar profile. Without doing that you’re not running the sim in the recommended environment.
I can’t as the same bug is there in SU2(where it first appeared). There is no performance gain in being there. The only thing that would change for me is perhaps fewer CTD’s.
I note your point on Rebar as I curently have it disabled, but I wasn’t one who ever had any VRAM issues & still don’t in fact. I will go look for the FS2024 option.
Re DLSS profile, I think I have it currently set to ‘latest’ will give ‘K’ a go. Thanks.
I would like to add that as an end user I find it ridiculous that we have to be digging around that deep into card driver tweaks to get a game to run better.
1 Like