Not replacing X-plane 11 with FS2020

Discussion Hub General Discussion
,
1

Dear all,

I have to say I have been very impressed at first by the stunning graphics and visuals. My opinion has shifted a bit however after performing some flights. I have the impression that a lot of development and effort has been put in the graphics and not so much into the “simulator” part of the product. A couple of findings so far:

The camera system too complex and doesn’t feel very “snappy”. I don’t know exactly what causes this but the X-plane camera system for example just feels more responsive, its easier to just quickly check something, the field of view is better and for sure is easier to use. With headshake or whatever it is called disabled I still get headmovement (bug?). The custom camera is buggy, eventually after some flights in different airplanes my custom camera views where outside the cockpit and I was unable to reset.

Its unfortunate that the ATC system is a copy of the FSX system, not utilizing standard ICAO ATC phraseology, using tower frequency to ask for ground services and start / end pushback… Come on guys, is it so difficult to make an intercom option to talk with ground crew and a little window to plan pushback? This is supposed to be a simulator, this is not how it is done in the real world. The ATC system does not correctly respond with the COM 1/2 frequencies manually set (at least on the Airbus). Further the ATC system is buggy (FL320 for a short flight? Not taking into account terrain etc., being cleared for take-off while live traffic is cleared to land). Altimeter setting system is set for USA not for Europe, no options to change from inHg to hPa, transition 18000 ft. Also not possible to switch from lbs to kilograms, it doesn’t feel like flight simmers on the other side of the pond have been taken into consideration. For me this is very basic functionality missing. The green/white aerodrome beacons everywhere are also very American…

Couple of automatically generated airports are years behind, new terminals, taxiways, building are not there. No heliports, military or joined civil / military airports missing. And of course I knew this before I bought the sim but still there are not many available aircraft types like helicopers, gliders, classics. Most of the aircraft are single engine piston, and it does feel to me like that is where FS2020 is indeed designed for, single engine piston, VFR flying. Most aircraft have G1000 which I guess is useful to pump out a lot of single engine piston aircraft, not having to design a full cockpit, some more planes with standard analogue flight instruments would have been nice…

The Airbus A320, of course not study level but basic functionality is just not there. No ECAM displays except the fuel page. Autobrakes MAX (RTO) disengaging during taxi when hitting the brakes. SIDs very basic, missing waypoints etc. Flight model does not feel realistic, it is supposed to be a fly by wire aircraft, it doesn’t feel like that, it does not keep loadfactor, it just autotrims very slowely. Only three checklists with very few items.

Basic options as replay and flight analysis missing, no option to change meteorological visibilty but able to change snow depth (nice but not very useful), in the current state this a GAME and not a SIMULATOR.

It seems to me most effort has been put in creating stunning graphics (and those are far ahead of anything on the market indeed) but in my opinion this is just a very small part of a flight simulator. When flying an airliner from A to B you won’t see most of those details anyway. I guess it all depends on what you look for in a flight simulator. For VFR flying I think nothing beats FS2020, for flying an airliner I’m gonna stick to X-plane for now. I’m sure FS2020 will get things sorted in the future but for now it feels like an uncompleted product which should have stayed in Beta testing for a little longer.

Greetings Nijntje,
(Real life ATR & Embraer captain)

61 Likes
2

Couldn’t have said it better myself, although I do prefer VFR general aviation flying anyway so I am enjoying that aspect. Haven’t even bothered to try the airliners or any IFR flights because of the poor reviews I’ve read on these forums

5 Likes
3

Exactly, I was so impressed with everything until I tried to actually use FS2020 as a simulator instead of fooling around and trying everything out.

11 Likes
4

I myself couldn’t find a final verdict yet, but this could be true (P3D for IFR on my end…)

3 Likes
5

I’m wondering who they have chosen as Beta testers, or haven’t they done much with the feedback they’ve received? I find it hard to believe nobody has been noticing things like this during beta testing.

9 Likes
6

As far as I noticed, at least on youtube, much beta energy was focused on being amazed by the beautiful parts of scenery and weather..

7 Likes
7

Don’t blame the testers. Asobo didn’t bother fixing a lot of stuff. We knew this would happen. lol

15 Likes
8

I was thinking the same thing. I feel like a lot of ‘gamers’ were testers, and not many real pilots or actual true simmers with true and correct knowledge.

From other posts I’ve read on here, it does seem a lot of the feedback wasn’t listened to or inplemented anyway,

I’ve jumped on and hardly had time for any hours just yet because of work, but I could easily list 50 suggestions that need changing from just a few short flights on face value

5 Likes
9

Yeah I can’t believe these things haven’t been noticed by the beta testers, not blaming anybody

3 Likes
10

Since you mention Asobo not bothering with feedback, renown 3rd party developers claim just the opposite.

3 Likes
11

Just going off the feedback I’ve read on posts on here, I have no other knowledge. I just find it hard to believe that some of the things I’ve seen weren’t picked up on immediately and changed

4 Likes
12

They should have put some energy in developing missions like in FSX, I remember those were awesome :slight_smile:

13

I found mapping all of the cockpit look options to my hat switch made looking around the cockpit work the same way it does in p3d and fsx. You need to unmap anything else thats mapped to the hat switch though. It pans super smooth and you can hit all the switches when need be. Make to only map the normal look options and not quick look. If quick look is mapped to your hat switch unmap it otherwise you wont be able to pan.

1 Like
14

I partly agree with this. The part I don’t agree with is in regard to the flight model. It’s too early to say, from the perspective of a user, whether the flight model is realistic or not. For now, it handles alright with small aircraft but we all know base planes are just meh in every simulator so it may not be the flight model itself but the parameters used for such a complex aircraft like the Airbus. I’ll wait to get some decently implemented, study level aircraft to tell.

15

If an aircraft isn’t modeled accurately it doesn’t matter how good the core simulation is, it feel still feel inaccurate. At least that’s the logical conclusion on my side. I only have P3D as another sim so compare to, but to me the core simulation seems more accurate than P3D’s core simulation. At least when flying the C172 (the one I have real life experience) , comparing it to FSX’s version (which P3D is based on), the MSFS feels much more accurate. Or put it another way the MSFS version comes closer to what I remember flying the real thing than the FSX version did. Especially when things get bumpy… It’s not the random shaking around a single point like it was in fsx/P3D. Flaring works much better with GA aircraft than it did in fsx/P3D. Considering all that I find it safe to assume that the core simulation is better and there is more “simulation” going on than in FSX/P3D.
But accuracy isn’t a one-way street. If the performance data isn’t correct and the general “airframe” model is not accurate and/or just simplified the best core simulation won’t be able to help it.
And that’s where I see the most improvement is to be made and where 3rd party aircraft from premium payware will shine. PMDG said themselves the platform offers a much better world for them with this platform, as they don’t need the hacks they previously needed.
The only thing I feel the core simulation might require is fine-tuning, but at least the “building blocks” (the simulation of various things like air, etc..) are there and more abundant than in P3D. But again as I am no content creator and expert in software mechanics, it’s hard to say if it really is the core simulation that needs more fine-tuning or the C172. That’s why it’s so important for people to be specific. If you’re a real 747 pilot but have no software developing experience and feel the 747 is broke than say the 747 is broke and don’t assume the core simulation is faulty as well. That doesn’t help bring this simulator forward if the devs start tampering with things that probably don’t need fixing.

To conclude all this I feel msfs is a better “simulation” in its core than FSX/P3D and has more various simulations going on, that probably need minor fixing and fine tuning. What really needs more attention are the various airframes themselves. Especially evident as some aircraft are much more accurate than others. And the main thing I see people complain about are aircraft systems rather than handling and handflying (which honestly should be the main focus and priority).

Newcomers are more interested in learning how to fly and not how to program an FMC.

6 Likes
16

Your assumption couldn’t be further from the truth. And that’s all I’m going to say about it.

15 Likes
17

Well I have flown some of them in real life, indeed talking about the base airplanes, I don’t find them realistic…

18

I did the same indeed, it is alright ish, I have some weird issues with custom camera positions not responding sometimes. I’ve unmapped everything and started from scratch indeed.

19

Some valid points. Although the sim still have the issues you’ve highlighted, I would find it difficult to go back to my P3D + FsLabs combo. I personally find this simulator, even with WIP items much more pleasurable.

1 Like
20

Not agree at all.
They did lot of work for simulator aspect. It’s just the graphics is what you see and shines most. But Flight model was reworked from scratch with the correct approach every simmer wanted. Default aircraft flights different from the real thing ? That’s another story and we will see true potential when good 3rd partys aircraft start to appear. Then, they wouldn’t have lost a minute on ATC, SID/STARs, AIRAC updates, SDK, interacting with FS community addons developers,etc.

3 Likes