More realism in navigation systems

MSF2020 urgently needs to correct or update all navigation systems of all Simulator aircraft. Because it is very frustrating not to have the level of realism that this new version of Flight Simulator deserves. If they don’t, this simulator will be just another Arcade game. If it is true the graphics and visual immersion is impressive, but what a Flight Silulator was designed and used for is immersion and realism in all navigation systems and procedures. That’s what Flight Simulators are for. If not, this new version of Flight Simulator should have been released only for the Xbox game console and not for the PC platform. The MSF2020 team should not underestimate those of us who actually use a flight simulator to practice procedures and Navigation systems very close to real life and not just like a console game.

I totally agree with your comment. I have been very disappointed with the lack of navigational operation with many controls marked inoperative or made to fiddly to work during flight

3 Likes

I would be very interested if the Micorsoft Dev Team has this point on their agenda?

1 Like

If you want people to upvote this request, and i might well be one of them, perhaps you could provide more detail about exactly what it is you would like to see changed.

As it stands, most of your OP appears to be just about lamenting what the lack of your desired functionality does to the simulator, rather than providing any details of what that functionality might be.

4 Likes

i also totally agree. I ask me, if there was only ONE Pilot while they create this SIM. No question, the platform including Graphics are awesome! (apart of the performance issues - but i hope they will fix it)

I am a real Pilot and i also want to use the Sim to keep current in procedures etc. But I´m very dissappointed that they don´t involved more Pilots in the development. (it seems like it wasn’t like that)

Fully agree with : (andrejetcat) … A flight simulator should not only serve for the entertainment of an aviation enthusiast but should also serve for training in real piloting procedures and techniques. Of course, each user at their own level of experience will develop these skills. At this moment this new version of the MFS2020 is virtually an arcade game sadly. We are not going very far, how is it possible that in the FSX simulator the planes by default can open the doors of the aircraft. Here at MSF 2020 you can’t even have interaction with the default planes. That is totally unacceptable. The default planes here at MSF are graphically superb, but what is the use of not even having a basic interaction of the aircraft. Now it is not said inside the cabins of the MSF default planes, where 20% is clickable and the other 80% INOPERATIVE. It is totally unacceptable. It is as if you only have a shell or a crude attempt at interaction. That is for any console arcade game, NOT for a decent flight simulator (and I say that with respect) from what I already explained about the impressive improvements that this MSF has. But all these SIMPLIFICATIONS are unacceptable. Now as for the immersion and realism in the navigation systems, I will put as an example the ADDon: Citation Mustang of Flight1, where the level of realism in the representation of the Garmin G1000 avionics was exceptional.

HawkMoth9135 : The level of realism that I ask and I think most of the users of this new MSF2020 ask for is that if you are going to try to replicate an avionics like the GARMIN G1000, it should be minimally close to how it is in reality. Not an ARTISTIC and unreal representation of this navigation technology.
And as for the relism of the aircraft flight envelope, at a minimum it should be possible to allow that if you carry or stress the aircraft fuselage too much, the control surfaces such as the wings can break, or at least you can NOT do a pirouette of high Gravity forces with a Cessna 172 as if it were an Extra 300.
Because right now it seems that GTA 5 is being played instead of a Flight Simulator

1 Like

How much does the addon cost and how much would you have to pay for a flightsim with 40 aircraft of this kind on top of the basis that we get?
Please stop comparing costly addons with base game, it’s simply impossible. Also all the flightsims were limited in their default aircraft. Name me one sim that was released with multiple study-level aircraft…

Yes, I think Asobo should fix issues and improve the systems of the default aircraft.
But no, I wouldn’t expect them to come to the same level as you get with addons.

1 Like

Coppersens:

We are not going very far. Xplane 11’s Default planes are much more realistic. That without representing an additional COST for the platform. Without necessarily being specific addons. The whole set from aerodynamic realism to the G1000 is more realistic on Xplane11.

…were improved from version to version and not always were on that level. You’re comparing an entirely new sim to a product that evolved over multiple years with increments that had to be paid.
Also you can’t compare the flightsims with only the aircraft systems - graphics, online features etc. have to be included as well.

I for one would rather like Asobo to improve the platform (graphics, stability, features, navdata,…) and leave the study level aircraft development to 3rd party. So you’re not speaking for “most of us”. It’s your point of view/expectation, not mine.

Coppersens:
Well then, because it was announced with such a stir that this MSF would be a new generation in Flight Sumulation, when it was only a graphic improvement of a Simulator attempt. That would have been explained from the beginning, so that we real fans of Realistic Flight Simulation, would NOT have so many expectations in this new MSF.

You have/had the possibility to try the sim with the game pass for a few bucks.
What did you expect? 30 aircraft on study level for 60usd?

Maybe you should question your expectations.

I too would like to have higher depth in the systems, sure. But I wouldn’t expect it at that price point.

Also I don’t agree to your statement that the sim shouldn’t have been released on PC if the default aircraft are not study level.

30 standalone Aircraft´s on a study-level? No, i agree, thats not possible "for 60/90/120 Dollar)

BUT most of the Aircrafts uses the Garmin G1000/3000/5000. You don´t have to create 30 standalone Aircrafts BUT you can make the Garmin system more accurate and working. If this would happend, nearly all the Aircraft were more near to the real ones. Its not that much work for a professional to add (only for example) the sattelite-status page to the Garmin.

andrejetcat.
Exactly. It’s the same as I’m saying. It is the most obvious that one would expect from this MSF. That would give it a higher level and now if more professional. Of course and Obviously if we want more level and depth of realism, that’s what Addons are for. That’s why I used the CitationMustang from Flight1 as an example.

I don’t see why the previous versions of the MSF did have this minimal notion of realism. And because in this NEW and graphically MSF2020 version they passed them by, or simply did not take them into account.

I bet there are many simmers that don’t care about those Garmins and would rather say the Airbus or the Boeings are more important.

But having a list of realistically to-implement features for the different Garmins (or the Airbus etc.) would help a lot more than such a rant-like post that MSFS is too arcady and should only be released on XBox - that wording hurts the purpose.

Coppersens:
Well, it’s not derogatory or insulting. Things are as they are. It is simply obvious that at this stage of digital technology, design and computing cannot or should not be put aside.

And even more so taking into account the time it took to develop this new MSF 2020. Because this MSF 2020 is directly the evolution of FSX. Because others like Prepard3D are just plain copies of the FSX with very minimal changes.

BUT Airbus and Boeing systems are more complex and specific to just one Aircraft! I don´t expect a highly simulated Airbus-system on a default A/C. As i said before, it would be much less work to optimize the Garmins. I know what i´m talking about. But it is naturaly a thing of perspective, for sure. You will see things different if you are flying in real life or being “just” a simmer.

a game is just a game is just a game :wink: