Quality Mindset of MFS-Team

Discussion Hub General Discussion
41

Well, I think Asobo/Microsoft never intended that you can fly under a bridge - for example it is forbidden in real life to do so. I think this is a topic for the wishlist. I will gladly vote for this wish, even it is not my urge to fly under a bridge. Please go ahead, write this wish and I will vote for you!

Update: I made a little video about the topic “UK (world 3) update and fly under bridges”. See https://youtu.be/bzWbmEkVRqg and https://youtu.be/DWgHvVrTFB8
My experience: You don’t have to write a wish, it is already available.
Note: my little NVidia 1660 Super graphics card, AMD 3300X, London city, video recording and graphics setting Ultra do not work well together. Without video recording I have a pleasant 20+ frames per second.

42

Challenge accepted :sunglasses:

1 Like
43

LoL. Is this FSX or FS2004 or even older? Please indulge me!

44

It’s X-plane 11 actually. Without ortho of course.

45

Yes, I want to say: “Das war spitze (this was amazing)”. There is still a bug-list and a wish-list. But one big step forward for me is the MUCH better framerate in version 1.13.16.0 compared to 1.12.13.0. I am still unsure if I like the graphics style of 1.13.16.0 better then 1.12.13.0. But I am an animal of habit, so I need some time.

46

Really depends how you define “better”. MSFS2020 definitely is better looking, though not as much as selected screenshots would have you believe. More reliable, do the planes work ? No contest.

It is fair comment that too much is said about MSFS graphics, and World Updates are just more graphics. The market for X-Plane scenery enhancements is not huge, OrbX do a few but lots just manage with the free SimHeaven upgrades and Ortho scenery. The big sell in X-Plane appears to be aircraft.

It’s not a question of “works like I want it to”. It’s a question of works, period. Many people happily fly VFR in MSFS but abandon it for X-Plane, FSX or P3D for IFR/Airliners - because they work.

Sorry, but what are the “proper VFR abilities” that no other sim had ?

I mean, for VFR you need a plane, some scenery and some weather, that’s about it. In some ways MSFS can be harder, even though it looks nicer, because of the density of trees (set on “low”) can drown things out. Apart from, again, the graphics, I don’t see what VFR MSFS offers over VFR FSX. I actually find for non-cheat-map VFR flying X-Plane easier, that might just be because I’m more used to it.

The only thing MSFS has that is non graphical is a better VFR ATC (and that’s not great, just being slightly tarted up FSX ATC), but it does do traffic patterns now for example.

Standard aircraft in sims are not “barebones”. Even FSX and FS2004 could hardly be described as such. No-one would say FSX was study level, but most of what was there worked.

Comparing the stock X-Plane aircraft to the MSFS ones is absurd. Yes, they have “room for improvement”, but they have and always did basically work. In MSFS the GA bits, and VOR/DME/ADF seem to work fine, the Garmin is okay now.

The airliners are hopeless, better , yes, but still hopeless. (And as we aren’t including mods apparently, you can miss out the A32NX and CJ4 that were done for free by others …)

47

I was disappointed you couldn’t fly under the bridge at Millau in southern France. X-Plane and MSFS do not make a good job of rendering that :frowning:

Does flying under the bridge work if you turn the collisions off ?

48

Okay, I know that you will not believe. I write my post for other people to read: The FS2020 airplane core (flight model) is VERY DIFFERENT from the FSX core. I know it, because for six months now I make flight model mods and convert freeware airplanes from FSX to FS2020.
I have several flight sims on my hard disc (FSX+addons, X-plane, Aerofly FS2, Acro Fly) and I am again and again amazed by the POTENTIAL of FS2020. To see this potential, I think Asobo has to work for another 6 months or even a year. But if nothing stops them (like a new pandemic that is as letal as the pestilence) they will make it. Some critics will never say “fine”, because they like critique too much.

1 Like
49

The “Xbox crowd” - what an ugly phrase. My definition of a simulation: within the limitations of the simulation, things that are easy in real life should be easy in simulation, and things that are hard in real life should be hard in simulation. This is my motivation for my TBM930 flight model mod for example: To make flare possible and therefore landing more realistic and easier.
And I hope that somebody playing a flight sim first time in his/her life on a Xbox does like and accept my definition, too.

1 Like
50

Nothing is stopping you from going back and enjoying your other sims. if FSX was better then go back and enjoy it.

4 Likes
51

No, you’re absolutely right. The flight model is still in there, I believe, called “Legacy” (OTOMH) but there is a new improved flight model which is still being tweaked. However, a fair chunk of the FSX core is still present.

I agree the potential for MSFS is exceptional, if the rest of the sim - planes (avionics mostly) and ATC can be got up to standard, the bugs can be rooted out, and tidied up generally.

Six months to a year, well I would probably agree if they weren’t potentially working on the X-Box as well. It’s not the porting so much that should be the problem, as the different requirements of the X-Box gaming category. This is different to me and probably you. Some people like GA/VFR which MSFS is now great at (or will be when the ruddy trees are thinned out a bit …), some like Airliner/IFR which should be sortable.

I remain to be convinced that XBox gamers fit into either category - beyond the initial flying round your house kind of stuff.

One thing I genuinely still don’t get is why there wasn’t more effort to import the Missions and the Tutorial stuff from FSX/FS2004, which were very good (possibly copyright with Machado ?). AFAICS it’s a scripting language which monitors the flight simulator - so start in position XYZ in plane A, read out instruction, wait for event, there must be something very similar driving the IFR/VFR mission pack I’ve seen as well as the tutorials.

52

I’m not sure they will. The “XBox crowd” - or whatever you want to call it - wants to have fun , you want it to be accurate (I thought my TBM930 landings were a bit weird … now I know why, I thought it was just my lousy flying !).

This is always going to be an issue with game crossover. Do you make the sim accessible in an easier way than normal to make “fun” easier, or do you keep the accuracy levels up.

I’m right behind you, but then I suspect you, like me are a “simmer” more than a “gamer”.

Probably long term it may belong to us. I can’t see the ‘gamers’ spending money on other planes and the like, so much.

53

In some ways it is. If someone was saying “I want to learn to fly the A320” it’d be quite tempting to say go back to FSX, because the tutorial/missions stuff is way way better. The Machado stuff from FS2004 roughly parallels the Tutorials 1-8, but it’s more detailed.

And obvs. if you want to fly a helicopter then at present FSX is a better option :wink:

54

You are the third one I see posting this. And that’s not an excuse. Because most of bridges are procedural, like in XP, they should create a solid road over them, and enable some collision for vehicles to drive through.

And about POI‘a, considering all of them are hand made, shouldn’t have that kind of issues, except for the lack of detail of the devs.

I don’t know why so many of you feel personally attacked when someone criticize MSFS.

55

I think it is possible to have both. Games have settings like “easy”, “hard”, “insane” and whatever. MSFS 2020 can have settings like “Mario cart flying”, “real flying”, “insane”, too. And I know I will not fly on “insane” …

56

Server issues are causing this

57

And you’re here because…??

58

Some people should watch the (Twitch) videos of Asobo/MS. The way I understand, a lot of problems/issues are already solved but they are not rolled out immediately.

I would also like to see those bridges above the water but I can’t be bothered with it. It’s an ongoing process and it will be fixed, among all priorities your or my issue is not the highest.

The only way is to get your issue to be voted up.

1 Like
59

Well said sir

60

There’s a fair bit of that already with the crash avoidance and assistance and what have you, I suppose. Maybe they could beef up the AI co-pilot.