HERE is where general discussions happen. You don’t like the choice of bugs that were addressed with SU1. I get that. But the SU1 feedback section is for testing of the bugs that were addressed, and making sure that they don’t effect anything else.
So no one is trying to shut you down with your feedback. Its just HERE, this will stay past SU1. When SU1 is released, all the different sections related to SU1 will be dropped, and then a new section related to strictly SU2 will come up. We are near the end of SU1. I presume you don’t want this discussion of the priority of bugs addressed to be dropped, I presume you want the discussion to continue and perhaps find a better way to pick which bugs get addressed in which SU. So don’t be upset. This is the right area for that discussion.
EDIT: Whoops. Sorry. I replied to the moderator and not the original poster.
I see the point you’re making, and honestly, that explanation does make sense. I get why they want the SU1 Beta section to be strictly for testing fixes in SU1 rather than discussions about what wasn’t addressed.
That said, I was asking the moderator directly, and they’ve already split the topic and are explaining things.
What blows my mind is that FS2004 (FS9) and even before were able to provide radar vectoring for approach, but somehow 20 years later it’s not possible to figure that one out anymore .
Interesting topic and my experience so far has been painful. Been into FS nearly 40 years and I have to say setting up this version is just atrocious. I got a new pc for XP12 and MSFS 2024. Firstly installed XP and with hardware rudders, yoke and throttle set up was intuitive and fairly straightforward. MSFS2024 has a nice intro screen and then it’s a mess. Have to refer to YouTubers to get anything done and still 3 days later have not done a flight test. Yes I’ll get there but with all their resources they came up with this?
Took me two weeks to get to grips with the new controls/keyboard bindings interface. That was two weeks doing very little flying and a lot of banging my head against a brick wall. I’m all set up now, but I still have bad memories. Controls should not have been that hard to set up initially for users.
I get where you’re coming from. Setting up controls in a flight sim can definitely be time-consuming, especially when you have a bunch of buttons, switches, and axes to bind. But personally, it’s not something I found unexpected.
With my Honeycomb Aeronautical setup, they at least had some generic profiles available for download, and it even installed them directly into the game for me. Of course, there were still tweaks to make, and I’d be lying if I said I haven’t spent hours mapping controls—but honestly, that’s just part of the experience when you’re setting up complex hardware.
Would it be nice if MSFS had better default profiles? Sure. But with the wide variety of controllers, drivers, and hardware out there, I don’t really think this is something MSFS should be responsible for—it’s something that controller manufacturers should be handling by providing proper profiles.
The one thing I will say is that this community is large and loud, so if you’re able to provide more specifics about your setup, someone may already have a configuration you can just copy over. Might be worth checking!
Hopefully, once you’re past the setup process, you’ll be able to enjoy the sim for what it does well!
Hello,
Ya I get it about setting up hardware. I am using Thustmaster TPR pedals, Fulcrum Yoke and Honeycomb Bravo Throttles. By way of example these units were a doddle to setup in XP, within 25 minutes I could get up and do a bit of a test flight. MSFS, still trying to configure. It really shouldn’t be so difficult to do a rough and ready setup. I will get there but the initial experience so far is frustration!
Chin up!
Yes, I do load the aircraft via the EFB and I do note the CG changes. That does not mean the CG is set properly in the aircraft cfg file. The EW CG should be set at 1/4 MAC, then it moves back and forth due to loading. Like I said, I’ve been doing flight modeling editing with FS for years and I have seen many cases where the CG is initially set improperly, for example at 1/2 MAC or even worse. FS then moves it according to loading, but it ends up in a wrong position for proper aerodynamics where one ends up with a nose heavy or nose light condition.
Another area where the flight modeling goes awry is in the moments-of-inertia for the 3 axes. Often people just set them by “feel”, but this again results in bad performance. It’s not a hard calculation to do to set those MOIs properly. The good producers such as PMDG do it, but many others don’t bother. And these default planes are the worst as those who are writing the code for the sim in general don’t know what they are doing with regard to flight dynamics.
If Asobo/MS would just give access to the flight_model.cfg file we could check this ourselves and correct it if needed.
Hi, so I can agree with everything you’ve said. I’m in it mainly for Career mode and some free flight. With Career mode, it’s a coin toss if you’re gonna make it through a mission and advance…not to mention all the flickering graphics and bugs…what really upsets me is the horrible ATC (like you pointed out). Here’s the problem with replacing it with something like BeyondAtc. The third party ATCs are more immersive in that you have to have a much more comprehensive knowledge of the life of a pilot and it doesn’t support the built in EFB so you have to learn how to use SimBrief or Navigraph or stuff like that. There’s nothing wrong with that, but if you are just into this to be a casual pilot and want to just dive in and enjoy a quick flight,you are still stuck with the built in Microsoft/Asobo stuff, for better or for worse.
I’ve waited, somewhat impatiently, for the first update. I read through the release notes, and about 90% of the fixes have no impact at all on my game play. I was hoping for some “easy” problems to be fixed, such as PC-12 pressurization. Not only was that not fixed, but now the PC-12 auto throttle doesn’t work in cruise.
It seems like many of the fixes were under-the-hood stuff that most users wouldn’t even notice. The most disappointing, frustrating, and infuriating bugs were not addressed at all. And why do we have to wait months for a big release instead of frequent individual fixes as they occur in an agile manner, i.e. the PC-12 pressurization?
I would like to see some focus on many of the sim’s problems that are not critical, but are annoying.
Some examples:
I started a career mission and my co-pilot introduced “himself” with a male voice and name, but the person sitting in the right seat was most definitely a female. Maybe so trivial that it’s not worth addressing, but gives the game an amateurish feel.
Absurd AI dialog and speech. In this age of AI, one would think a company that touts AI could do better. “Cessna one hundred and seventy two.” Really?
Unrealistic ATC lingo. Game says, “Cleared for takeoff, runway 34”. Real world controller says, “Runway 34, cleared for takeoff”. Runway then clearance, not clearance then runway. Again, trivial, but someone should have noticed and spoke up during alpha testing.
Maybe not so trivial: Why can’t I buy and use any plane I want for career missions. If I want to use the PC-12 for VIP charters, why can’t I?
The critical stuff, like completely broken airplanes, e.g., B737 MAX are game breakers. I almost wish everyone would demand a refund. We have paid full price for a product that is not finished. On the Steam platform, reputable developers tag their work in progress with an “Early Access” warning. I guess Microsoft is too unethical for such a courtesy.
Confused on the update, is this for the Beta or the main release? I’m on the main release, if it is for that how to tell if you have it? I did not see any patch or update downloading on launch?
I find fs2024 lighting is terrible, with blown-out clouds and daylight. Cockpit glare and lack of contrast during daylight hours is not good, compared to fs2020. I have tried hard to find improvement in Ultra clouds over fs2020.
.
