The future certainly looks bright for Microsoft Flight Simulator.
In my opinion, the 40th Anniversary Update/SU11 was a huge hurdle for the team to get through. I also looked at it as a starting point for the Sim to really “spread it’s wings”.
The parts I’m especially excited about are the “surprises” and when Jorg was asked about more ‘fictional’ aircraft, he just laughed in a “just wait til you see what we have” way.
It was also leaked back in September that Asobo will be adding more of the above, including a sort of jet pack. Now that we have a heli flight model, I still want the Falcon from Halo.
The avionics updates are looking great, too. Just hope us Xbox’ers can get native GTN750 availability down the road.
World and City Updates almost monthly. The same with Local Legends.
Again, there’s so much content coming in the next year, I’m blown away.
What are your thoughts on the roadmap?
EDIT: Let’s discuss the roadmap. Not “core issues with the Sim, blah, blah, blah.” There’s already enough of that on these forums.
for me this was one of the most shocking moments of the last Q&A
Only one Sim Update with so many important core features broken or missing is scaring me of what direction the platform is taking.
Its nice to have some marketing surprises, and surely other areas in the world deserve World and City Updates, but the most important and highest priority should be with getting the core done.
With only one Sim Update in a full year this will not be possible.
Keep in mind the AAU updates covers lot of stuff that used to be sim updates, also I wouldn’t be surprised to see one or two sim updates to be added. I don’t think they want to lock down those too early.
AAU are cool and highly appriciated.
But Weather, Traffic, ATC, DX12, to name a few are most likely not covered by Aircraft and Avionics Updates and with only a single SU scheduled for 2023 I habe reasonable doubt that those core features have any significant updates planned beyond one Update.
And when it isnt planned, there is not much to be expected…
We’ve been told long ago that AI Traffic will be completely rewritten, same for ATC. This 2 things alone would require much more planning than the schedule shows. Then there is still big issues with weather and clouds. Liveries and seasons are still missing as well…
And I doubt that those can be considered as “surprises” as they were announced to come long time ago.
We will see. Plans can be changed or overthrown but as it stands right now, the 2023 schedule is quite frustrating for me as it mostly focus on adding new features (but not those promised ling ago) and gimmicks and less on fixing/polishing what is already there but buggy, unfinished or outdated.
I would have prefered more “balance” between eye-candy and functionality.
But yeah. Thats MY opinion and as we can see here, there are different views as well.
At 1:06:00 in the Q&A, Jorg said that seasons, water physics, and ATC may not get overhauls in 2023 given the complexity of those three items.
“There are probably three topics…seasons, ATC, and water…yeah, it’s a short word, but the implications of it all are huge, and it’s going to take a good long time…don’t be all sad if it doesn’t happen in '23.”
Thanks to all the engineers, developers and testers.
Please consider, there are third party apps that specialize in ATC, scenery etc., Please consider applying efforts to getting the atmospherics corrected so those third party developers can continue bringing accurate systems online.
We need a weather system that is more functional so weather radar can be used accurately.
I’m in the same boat though maybe just more surprised than shocked. Earlier in the Q&A call, Jorg referred to FS as a “platform” when speaking about adding birds. This made GREAT sense to me — they will build strategic features that are reusable and extensible by others–not just thrown in content. Yet, this roadmap seems way more focused on content (aircraft, scenery, challenges, etc.) development than platform (weather, avionics, AI, ATC, flight model) development.
I suppose there are several business sound reasons for this: 1) new content keeps subscription users coming back for more (think Netflix) and 2) content is likely developed more scalably and cheaply than the innards of the platform. They can even outsource the work or purchase it from vendors like they did with the excellent A310.
I get there is a balance they need to strike to keep FS financially sustainable for the next 8 years, but I did find this mix to be surprising at a time when a couple of core platform functions (AI, ATC, interface, etc.) need a little love. Granted the AAU updates are really encouraging.
And at least for seasons he said so already in 2020.
This is telling me that they give it a very low priority and let me doubt if they even actually started working on it.
When MSFS was released it was presented as a 10 year project.
As it stands now, we better do not expect basics before it reaches 40% of it’s lifespan.
And for me, this is frustrating…
I can´t understand why the features that are apparently complex are parked over and over again. Indeed because they are complex they should get priority. It has no sense that we have to wait 5 years to get the most relevant things done and meanwhile they just dump more and more content on the game. Bug fixing and proper operation of core features are a must. If not this can just turn into a showcase of airplanes and world landmarks.
Jorg has repeatedly said that Asobo owns the weather engine and that’s it.
They’ve outlined a multitude of upgrades that are planned for the sim to improve the “atmospherics”. It will not be coming from 3rd party vendors. Unfortunately, they can’t improve it overnight and it’s going to take time.
Integration with MeteoBlue data is a core feature for the sim, and is I’m sure being used as a demo to sell other commercial products by Microsoft, just like their GIS data engines are being used commercially. I don’t see that changing, and I don’t see it being possible for third party vendors to be able to get in on that. I believe the roots into the sim are way too deep and those roots will not be exposed for programming as it’s likely proprietary.
As Jorg and Seb keep explaining, there are still tons of things they are planning on implementing to continue building out the “virtual world”.
I’m confused, you obviously watched the Q&A… did you not hear the fact that the AAU’s are Avionics upgrades (I forget what AAU actually stands for), did you forget that Working Title’s main focus is improving and adding Avionics systems? They just released a new 430/530 that’s nearly 1 for 1, they’ve announced they’ll be releasing the CJ4 with the actual avionics suite in that plane to great detail, and there are more unnanounced avionics upgrades and improvements coming. Asobo still continues to improve the AI, yes, ATC seems to be on the back burner, and they are full bore on improving the flight model. Heck, they just released a TON of improvements to the flight model. Sure, Seb said they’re going to step back on the flight model development for a moment… Why? Because they want to hear from developers and the community on what’s just been released, and then prioritize further development based on that feedback. I really don’t understand your complaint. Nearly half if not more than half of the Q&A discussion was on their plans for all the things you said are platform development that you would like to see.
The avionics and aircraft updates were, by far, the strongest part of that entire Q&A, and it isn’t a coincidence that it’s Working Title leading the way on that development.
Please re-read what I wrote. I included avionics (AAUs) as part of the “platform”. Yet, 3 of the 4 rows of the roadmap are still “content” not “platform”.
Also, I said I was “surprised” not “shocked” by the roadmap given his statement that FS was a platform. Seems very content heavy.
MSFS covers a lot of territory - I’m willing to cut them some slack on scheduling and priorities just for that reason. Just because their priorities are different than mine doesn’t mean I’m going to walk away.
Let’s see what they plan to do vs what they actually end up doing. Often those two lists come out looking very different to each other
