You could have requested a refund.
3 Likes
I could, but I believe that something more will come of it on this 24th. I have a secret hope.
Well I wouldn’t hold your breath unfortunately. Asobo released su16 last August, then after 3 long months in October they had a live stream where they admitted removing support for 512 aerials was not intentional and agreed that new aerial maps where not as good as prior ones. As we approach a year since su16, it would appear their strategy it seems is to hope that we forget how good the sim once was.
11 Likes
Not much of an incentive to upgrade to 2024 with this kind of behaviour, I can only expect the same again.
More likely upgrade to xp.
9 Likes
I am fairly sure it was a Microsoft directive to use the new maps both for 2024 and then 2020 su16. Assume it was cost savings driven.
But taking away support for 3rd party high res 512x512 aerials at the same time, now that really was rubbing salt in the wounds.
Can only imagine what 2024 would be capable of if they had ever allowed these. Would be spectacular!
11 Likes
Well the wishlist I created earlier in the year out of desperation outlining all the wrongdoings of su16 and asking for a rollback to su15 has been closed and set as ‘By Design’. I guess after this long they don’t need to hide anymore the true intentions of su16, but is certainly disappointing nonetheless.
7 Likes
Good for MSFS2024, I guess?
I have been reading these posts for a long time but I have to ask anyway. I am on fs2020 and I started flying on it in 2024, determined to let it develop and get most of the bugs out that I heard over and over on the forums. Forgive me if I’m ignorant or blind, which I don’t think I am, but what is it about su-16 that is so much worse than before that many are actually talking about going back to an older Sim? When I fly over cities or airports that I added on it looks spectacular. Even much of the default landscape looks fantastic, and the water, with its Ripples and motion, looks incredible.
When people complain about the degradation in aerials, are you all just saying at higher altitude things don’t look as detailed or clear, or are you saying that applies to all the photogrammetry and detailed cities and airports as well?
I don’t see a change in those things. The only thing I can notice is when at higher altitude the generic landscape may be a little more blah. Is that what the main complaint is?
I am on PC and a very good, if not stay-of-the-art, AMD system running a wide screen monitor at 3440x1440.
I tried Xplane not too long ago and, visually, I didn’t think it compared to the realism of the experience in FS2020, even after su-16.
Microsoft and Asobo Studio have acknowledged the visual regressions and blurry textures associated with Microsoft Flight Simulator (2020) Sim Update 16 (SU16). Developers confirmed the downgrade was primarily caused by adopting the new, updated Bing Maps and structural aerial imagery shared with MSFS 2024.
Developers explained that MSFS 2020 began utilizing the same updated Bing Maps data source as MSFS 2024. Because Bing phased out select high-resolution tiles, the base scenery in areas where this data was changed looks different and at times less sharp
The new world streaming methods caused third-party map-enhancement modifications that previously relied on higher-resolution caching to stop functioning.
The development team acknowledged user frustration regarding these regressions and promised to investigate and refine the color grading and environment dynamics.
9 Likes
You can see some comparitive screenshots in this older wishlist thread. Not every area was affected as drastically, but some were, and if that’s where you enjoyed flying most, your experience under SU16 felt like a forced downgrade.
4 Likes
Well, not a short read but start at top of this thread and work down! 
To clarify this has no affect on photogrammetry or TIN areas (they are mapped in high resolution by default), we are taking about the 99% of the planet that is not these
Another Wishlist here with before pictures: Provide a MSFS 2020 SU15 / Legacy Option
But in summary:
- Default aerials were MUCH better prior to aligning to 2024. At same time they lowered quality of default they removed support of a solution that had 4x increase in the resolution of aerials which was available via a 3rd party. So basically couldn’t have our cake nor could we eat it. Especially with the latter, the difference is rather a 10x decrease in the experience
- Heightfield was aligned to 2024, so now many areas that have cliff faces or vertical drops look like smeared oil paintings.
- TLOD curve was tweaked so now not as good out to horizon as it was prior. The world seems softer and smaller.
- Some have reported popping in of terrain has massively increased.
That’s the big 4. Would not have been so much of an issue if Asobo had done anything in last year to try and recover or revert these, rather we get comments of it not being intentional and empty promises in live streams about one day working on a “best of both worlds”.
If we don’t stand up to the true injustice to the community that was su16, it will show there is little reason for Asobo to be concerned when it’s 2024’s time to face similar “non intentional” downgrades when the next sim version is released.
12 Likes
Thanks for the clear explanations to my questions. Like I said, I do see the more…hard to describe… “generaic” or less “clear” landscpe when flying at 8000" or higher but was wondering about the more detailed areas. I agree there is no excuse to revert or lessen resolution after a sim is released and sold based on how it looks initially. You should “get what you paid for”.
4 Likes
RoadSpider…welcome to our world where we sit and ponder of what once was an amazing piece of software, now we’re perplexed and frankly let down by the development of this project.
Aussie says it perfectly with
you also hit the nail on the head with your last 5 words…we should all ‘Get What We Paid For’
Personally, I’ve lost all hope and believe Asobo or MS have no interest in helping the 2020 users regarding this issue as their continued silence speaks volumes.
7 Likes
Well perhaps some clarity as to cliff smearing issue (at least clarity / confirm for myself) can be seen in moderator provided info here: 2026-07-02 Weekly Briefing Discussion - #21 by SmotheryVase665
I very much appreciate the hard job the moderators have on this forum, and when at least from them if not from Asobo direct I can at get an understanding of the problem. No closer to a resolution for our poor 2020 sim, but it’s something..
4 Likes
Anyone waiting for SU17 beta?
With apprehension rather than with excitement for now. Mostly waiting to see what’s on the change log for it, and then going into it knowing that feedback about aspects impacting quality-of-play are likely to be ignored.
Would love to be proved wrong.
8 Likes
I get the same feeling—I’m terrified they’ll deal us a final blow by downgrading things again, just to push us once and for all toward FS2024.
3 Likes
…..there’s also the possibility of pushing people out of ms altogether if they persist in downgrading. X-Plane sits waiting.
6 Likes
I’ve spent a small fortune on add-ons to build up my world (and aircraft) within MSFS so it would take one heck of a regression to move platform. That doesn’t excuse Asobo in any way shape or form though - I expect/hope/demand/pray-for continued progress.
1 Like
But, after reading many posts from users on both platforms, isn’t the degradation of visuals and the lower resolution of tiles common to both 2020 and 2024? And if that is the case, what incentive do they have to lower things further? They certainly don’t want sales on 2024 to start slowing down. So I don’t see an intentional lowering of quality … of course that doesn’t rule out incompetence, short-sightedness, or unintentional glitches leading to regressions with any update.
All that notwithstanding, we still have an issue about not exceeding the hardware capabilities of current consoles which I am pretty sure has led to compromises for PC users.
3 Likes