Some reasons why I rate this game 2 out of 5 stars after playing for 9 months

Clouds are random. For the most part.

1 Like

FSX is superior on many non graphical points.

Camera was better for a start.


Well said.

I did not play once for a whole 7 weeks.

I just uniantalled it.

Gave up.

I literally rage quit the game to unsintall.

It was just problem after problem after problem after crash after bug after lag after instability after poor graphics.

Three times. I uninstalled it three times. And reinstalled.

I was really determined to get something out of it.


I think my rating comes down to inconsistency. The game is great in some areas and Terrible in others. Great at times and terrible at others.

It’s just not enjoyable for that reason.

I also do not like the focus the team has on little novelty planes and stuff. I want to see an f16, or a 777. Not a new Pitts special variant. It’s soo frustrating.

The priorities of the team seem upsidedown.

If this game had another year work before releasing it may have been close to perfect but the rush and the lack of urgency to fix the corners cut in the process seems to have completely unbalanced the experience


Let’s talk about flying then.

The amount of glitches and bugs and issues with autopilot is absurd. Insane I would go so far as to say.

Autopilot at times was just unusable.

The stalling physics is really unrealistic.


Are you an real world pilot, that allow you to talk about what real is and what is not real i nthe msfs 2020?

1 Like

What was the retail price for that package?

Have done…

This review sounds like you’re from the future. Your expectations exceeds any simulator in existence. I’d give MSFS 2/5 stars because I can still tell it’s not real.

I would choose 1-2 stars - my reason is very simple. I spent more time in the last five months of trying workarounds that it will work, rather than flying. I had several month without flying only CTDs, after the last update my CTDs were solved, but a few days later I`m not able to start the sim. Always the Windows store appears on startup. Found a workaround, after a week of flying, still again in the Windows Store on startup.

How can rate features, when I`m not able to the simplest thing - flying. For me it is unansble and no one will pay the which I invested to find workarounds.

I´m pretty sure the guys make a great job and the idea behind is in my opinion brilliant. but the simulator for me it self it is useless. Like buying a car without any keys.

1 Like

I will not challenge your 2 out of 5 rating as that is entirely subjective and differs person to person. Your rating is as valid as any other.

But let’s balance some of the arguments…

Your house and town are represented by autogen buildings chosen based on a satellite view of the roof. About the only accurate information available is the colour.

Again trees are chosen based on a ‘top down’ sat image. If it is a green patch that has a shadow then it is a tree. A local ag operation tells me they pay about $50,000 per year per user for species specific sat foliage tracking software. I, for one, am not prepared to pay even a fraction of that to have the right tree show up in my city parks.

Dreams are a poor choice for comparisons to reality. I too have been simming a loong time. I too dreamed of the day I could fly VFR through remote mountains, following an accurate representation of the streams and terrain to allow proper eye ball navigation. I live on the approach to my local airport and have often dreamed of seeing my boat parked in the driveway as I turn final, just like in real life.

Sadly, it has been said that we should never meet our heros. They seldom live up to our expectations. Dreams don’t usually match reality. We were given exactly what we asked for but we want more accuracy, more detail, more reality. No matter what they give us it will never live up to our expectations. It will never match our dreams.

Correct me if I am wrong but the development roadmap for MSFS 2020 was pretty much etched in stone before Covid19 was ever on the books. A release date was already planned. Unless you are suggesting that Microsoft engineered Covid to increase demand of MSFS, I can not imagine any scenario where the pandemic was part of the release strategy of MSFS.

Unless you have worked as a programmer in a game studio, I would be very careful about suggesting these folks don’t care. The hours poured into this sim for years leading up to release and since by everyone involved would boggle your mind. I would put that comment in the ‘very insensitive’ box.

Clouds are a long way from random. The math is a bit daunting but if you ask a glider pilot if thermals, updrafts and downdrafts are random, I am pretty confident in their answer. Clouds form when the air can not hold the water in suspension due to a drop in pressure or temperature or an increase in moisture. (over simplified) The sim can produce clouds based on the weather modelling used from MeteoBlu. If you turn of Live weather then, yes, you will get clouds at the layers you put them and a random number generator will decide where they go. If you want real clouds, use Live. If you use Custom them don’t be surprised when the sim gives you just what you asked for.

Just an observation, but, I have not found an aircraft in the sim that will allow me to cruise at 100,000 feet.

To many of us an F16 is a novelty. I am a licensed aerobatic pilot and absolutely love carving the sky in a Pitts Special. The sim offers that. I mentioned earlier that there will be tons of aftermarket aircraft available eventually. You can fly whatever you want when that day comes. In the meantime, you can fly anything from a 747 to a Cub. I suggest they tried pretty hard to offer something for everyone.

I understood from your previous post that you had flown sims in the past. I have to ask if you are using them as your baseline for how an autopilot should work or the stall characteristics of various aircraft? Other than some early glitches with the AP and the fly by wire modelling in the airbus, the autopilot has been pretty solid when compared to real world operation. When set up correctly and activated within the envelope it was designed to manage, I have never encountered any surprises from the AP. The nav system? That on has surprised me a few times when it decided to head off on it’s own. Using real world techniques, however, I was easily able to return to my original plan and continue.

Some of us here are fairly experienced pilots. Some of us have spent quite a bit of time comparing real world performance to sim performance of various aircraft in our sphere of expertise. Other than some questionable modelling methods of the actual aerodynamics, we have found most aircraft perform as they should, in general. Ground handling has been a challenge in some. When flying inside the normal operating envelope they are pretty much bang on. Get outside the envelope and stuff can get a bit weird, but, stalls and spins are pretty well modelled. Not sure what you are expecting but I can perform just about every type of stall one would expect to see and they are fairly predictable in the sim.

I am not defending anyone. I am pointing out “the way it works”. And NO Microsoft is not responsible for a 3rd parties product. No more than the grocery store is responsible for pupae cases in your cornflakes. The developer creating the content is the ONLY one responsible for that content, no matter who gets a commission. If a developer routinely misrepresents their products and refuses to make good on their promises, I am pretty sure MS will drop them from the marketplace. Association with a known felon is not good business. If you honestly think that being dropped by MS will have any effect on the 3rd parties conscience you are about to be disappointed.

You seem to be missing the whole point of the 3rd party issue. Buyer Beware! When thousands of people gather in a public market wanting to spend their money. Everything from pick pockets to scam artists will show up to get their cut. The mod community is rife with basement programmers porting pirated FSX airframes to fleece you with. When we know from experience that really good aircraft models coming from reputable developers traditionally sell for $100+, what did you really expect to get for $29?

I completely understand that you have been frustrated by the sim at times and wish it could be better. I also noted that most of the complaints you have referenced are things that are either impossible or not economically feasible with today’s technology. You have met your dream and like most that have materialized it falls short of perfection. The sim you want is a million dollar sim with an annual subscription running into 100s of thousands. The hard part will to get the developer to name it Notidentity’s Advanced Flight Sim 24.


About £50.00 and I know what you are implying but that’s not really relevant because in some parts of the world such as Japan they are using data that ensure that the correct tree types are displayed. Look around Fuji for example, very clear areas of just conifer and other areas of just deciduous as per the real world. Some areas have just not been given the same treatment including the UK.

Clouds are not in any part random in real life.

They are specifically dependent upon pressure, temperature and dew points. Nothing random about Science.

Every software can be bashed with a wall of text of nitpicks if one tries hard enough.

Yet, not only this is by far the best flight simulator ever released a year from its launch, but its developers are also the most active in consistently improving it. And not by a small margin.

But hey, feel free to nitpick away, as long as you understand that this is a massively successful and largely appreciated software and that you’re in a vastly overwhelmed and grumpy minority who can’t appreciate good things :sunglasses:

Some will throw around terms like “fanboys” and all that, because they can’t fathom that people like what they don’t like without an irrational element in the picture, but the reality is simply that this is a product that’s highly appreciated by critics and most users alike, consistently on the improvement, overwhelmingly dominant against all competition, and extremely successful under every point of view. We’re not getting a GOTY edition for free for nothing.

So one can throw around as many “stars” as they want and as much spite as they want. They can preach as much as they want that they know better than the developers, but ultimately, they can’t stop this train.


All I am implying is that 50 pounds will get you improved trees in a specific region. Imagine what the whole world would cost.

Again Japan is a region. The data was available and the scenery team took that local data and integrated it into the sim.

These are relatively small regions we are talking about here. Global data of what tree is growing in every square mile of the earth’s surface, does not exist, at the commercial level. Most government agencies guard their data pretty dearly. Even a decent government aviation VFR chart will cost you a pretty penny in Canada.

There seems to be a belief that all the data on everything is readily available world wide and Asobo is just being lazy for not using it. I am sure they are using everything they can lay there hands on. Most data available is core to a multi trillion dollar industry. The information and data industry. Private companies don’t launch entire constellations of billions of dollars worth of hardware into space so they can provide free scenery to a retail simulator selling for $100.


2 out of 5 stars? I think your being generous

It is pretty laughable that you want to “balance the points” when his post in flagged and hidden. If you like the sim so much why do you spend so much time here defending it tooth and nail. Seems like you get more enjoyment out of trying to argue with people. If you can’t win the argument then you resort to calling people derogatory terms. (seen it first hand myself, though it was quickly edited and removed.) Of course you can do all those things without any reprocussions.

1 Like

I always thought that it what a discussion was. ??

What post? I responded to a number of @NotIdentity24’s posts, none of which were “flagged and hidden”.

OP probably doesn’t mean that clouds don’t follow predictable laws of physics, but that they’re also subject to highly chaotic systems like turbulent flow that are effectively random. So in the sim you get more of a “you’ve seen one cloud, you’ve seen them all” type of deal, rather than something more toward the diversity and complexity seen in nature.

Even as a weather geek, that issue is way down on my list, but it would be nice to see some more fine scale turbulence in the cloud structure (and large scale in the weather patterns themselves too). Probably hitting some performance bounds there though. I definitely want to see them pick up the diversity in the weather though. That would really make this sim feel more alive than any animal or AI traffic could.


Their own data on Bing shows the areas populated with trees and if they are Conifer or deciduous too so its not as though they needed to source new data, they already have it.

1 Like