Nah, I don’t think that’s a thing. The game works. They just ‘optimized’ it. And let’s be fair: the less memory it uses the more people with lesser systems can run it.
Although if this is true, I now understand why they hád to optimize it: it wouldn’t fit in their XBox…
Also a reason I don’t pay a lot of attention to the marketing babble and those Q & A’s. This stuff they will never tell you… (if it’s true)…
To say the game works is too simplistic. Yes it works for some but one has to realize this game started on the PC and now people with a higher end PC have problems.
There are always trade offs in a good working simulator speed, quality and hardware.
It is a shame that we are now saying the game works fine for me and forgetting about the other players self interest at play.
I know. I was sort of playing devil’s advocate there… that will be their argument. I don’t think you can sue a company over sensible memory use in a computer game. Even if that lowers the experience for people with 128GB memory. However, if this is true, it would have been nicer if they had mentioned it somewhere between all the hoo haa over the greatness of SU5.
I also think technically it probably isn’t necessary. Just differentiate in code between XBox and PC or simply base it in code on the amount of memory actually available. So either way it’s a weird choice if they capped it hard. Then again… seeing all the other weird choices… it wouldn’t surprise me.
Again, I am going on a rumor here… so… if it’s true…
I get CTD whether I try to install or uninstall in Content Manager.
Initially everything works but later it will not follow heading and or altitude. Dev version buggy compared to stable release version on MFSF Update 5.
I hear what you are saying. Unfortunately you are correct Microsoft should not have lied as shown in their own video saying PC computers will not be downgraded for the Xbox.
Well they have but they went about it the wrong way. Your suggestion of having 2 versions makes sense on the surface but the reallity is that it is not that simple they would have too rebuild the PC platform because the changed all the graphics to run on the Xbox so you can’t just turn a switch. Other problems are companies that make study level aircraft which will take more memory we no longer have.
Thank you, yes it has many problems at the moment
I don’t totally exclude - if this is confirmed - that it’s a bug too…
You don’t have to have a big separation to say ‘hey, this system has 64GB, let’s have it’ and on an XBox the conclusion would obviously be different, and you can’t have it. Can be the same sharable code. Just smarter programming. That’s why I’m not sure about this hard cap and if it’s true. It seems a bit too stupid.
The simple answer is when you have gone down the road too far? It is difficult to turn around. This is the situation Microsoft is in.
I am seeing the same thing. I can only deploy the spoilers from the cockpit control. I am able to retract them with my mapped button.
Was this in the Release Notes or ZenDesk documentation? Do you have connections inside Asobo? If not, what is your source of this limitation statement?
Do you understand that SU5 has many performance changes that significantly impact how performance should me measured? The performance recommendations including LOD prior to SU5 need to be totally reworked. If there was a memory restriction as you state and if more RAM is being swapped out then performance would be significantly impacted like FPS below 15.
It is a REALLY GOOD THING that MSFS is using less RAM. This is one part of the performance improvements.
The Developers FPS Counter Tool was changed in SU5. There is no documentation that I know of available to us describing all the different counters. The FPS Counter shouldn’t be used like it was prior to SU5 because it is measuring different things.
Maybe because we are not developers? The Developers FPS Counter is not part of the main MSFS program which means the developers can change it to suit there needs, not ours. If this feature is essential to users, it should go through the feature request process.
If the GPU is running at 100% wouldn’t that mean the GPU is pushing out to the monitor the highest FPS possible? Performance improvements in SU5?
I am not going to spend any time “checking my system” until you post your information source. Just because MSFS is using less memory or CPU or RAM or VRAM or GPU does NOT mean anything except that there are significant performance changes in SU5.
I am not going to spend any time “checking my system. Your comment.
Then take the time to read and view the videos that are on this forum.
Or find the screen shot I posted showing the max memory usage on the new system.
Or download the Xbox specification and look at the GPU memory and Ram memory that will tell you everything.
I’m not going to spend any time looking for your Post.
I did not believe that you would.
That is funny. No quotes or @xxxxxxx to identify who you are
replying to.
A quick workaround is to use two buttons. Extend and retract work (or keep the toggle for retract and map another button to extend spoilers)
it seems it limits very hard, though not as much?
(rural area, after 30min flight)
exe … CPU … RAM … network… GPU
I’m not sure exactly what you are saying. Your 400Mbps internet service is only to determine if your ISP is delivering what you are paying for. It is not a measurement of internet speeds beyond your ISP. The download speed from Microsoft is highly dependent on probably a dozen different intermediate nodes that Microsoft or your ISP cannot control. And the Microsoft download speed is not an indication of MS server performance problems or congestion.
Attached photos were taken at about 22,000 ft. (LOD 100 and HIGH graphics settings).
Airport visible in the distance at about 1 mile away. (LOD 100 and HIGH graphics settings). No scenery popping evident.
What I am trying to show with the photos is that what works for me may not work for others and the broken things I find might not be broken for others. That’s all.
Wind Correction Angle
I think many users would think this is somewhat exaggerated. After all, you completed a fairly long flight in a high performance jet. I would agree that many problems still need to be fixed. But unusable?
IMHO no re-installing should be done unless there are hardware disk errors or disk failure. It probably won’t solve the root cause of whatever the problem is. And are re-installs error free all the time?
I agree the MS/Asobo communications are VERY poor. However, despite all the SU5 issues, some 3rd-party developers are stepping up to distribute any updates needed due to SU5. WT issued same day updates for their products and even added one to the MarketPlace. The WT CJ4 has been working fine with their latest update. Not sure why you are saying it doesn’t work. We should acknowledge the developers who are reacting quickly to SU5 publishing updates as needed
