preach it, brother!
ive been saying this all along
whenever i see conclusions drawn from a survey, the first thing i do is look to the methodology& assumptions because more often than not theres flaws that call the conclusion into question
2 Likes
I guess I will ask the question. What do you think IS an appropriate balance? You seem to want study level jetliners. Those each take like 1.5 years to develop per model (but then the different variants can be more quickly done). There are a number of jetliners in the stage of development now. But again, they each take 1.5 years to produce due to the complexity. Meanwhile there are helicoptors, gliders, GA aircraft, bush planes, E-Jets, fighter jets, retro jets, retro aircraft. 8 other categories, which are arguably easier to develop, and thus quicker. I’m not sure what you would consider appropriate balance. I’m not arguing, I’m just trying to determine exactly what is the ultimate balance that is being proposed. IniBuilds is doing a high fidelity AN-225. Its not a jetliner, even though we know they are very adept at producing high fidelity jetliners. Are you considering that as more of a system out of balance? I hear what you were trying to gather, and the summary is that while some feedback was valid, that they system is still out of balance. And I am just not sure what is the suggested correct balance.
3 Likes
What does this statement mean? More robust in what way? If you think it’s going to be less buggy, you are very mistaken. XP11 was never bug free. I got super annoyed by how many developers let their planes rot as new updates to XP11 were released and changes to the flight model, etc. were made and the planes no longer worked properly.
As @tgbushman asks, you’re not at all being clear about in what way the different types of aircraft being brought to market is unbalanced?
There are TONS of GA and bush planes being developed (you seem to imply they aren’t).
You may want to do some more research on what planes are available for MSFS and where they are sold, as well as what’s being developed. The in-sim Marketplace only has a very small portion of what’s available today. And, for whatever reason, Microsoft is quickly approving vendors who produce junk products, while vendors who want to sell quality products in the Marketplace are langoring waiting for approval to even bring a single product to the Marketplace.
But, as I noted, the Marketplace is a poor place to do market research on what’s available for MSFS. As a quick jump, take a look at Orbx, Just Flight, Flightsim.to, and Simmarket, not to mention the plethora of developers selling products directly.
No worries, we have barely begun to see the market for MSFS grow. As the SDK gets more robust, and it is, many developers will be releasing products more quickly.
(and btw, I love having a car to cruise the landscape and check out the scenery, although it seems like they are limited in their ability to travel far from airports? It’s been quite a while since I’ve tried to drive around (I was driving around Nantucket, but ran into a wall before I got to the center of town that I couldn’t drive beyond).)
2 Likes
In reality the obsession with study level airliners is a hangover from the bad old days when that was about the only thing a flight sim could do well.
Go back 10 or 20 years and the scenery was awful and the flight models not much better but yes cockpit flows and procedures were often spot on. It is not surprising the hobby gradually became a slightly elitist virtual airline and flow and procedure sim.
With MSFS 2020 it is possible to do fairly realistic VFR in GA and bush planes and for a whole new generation of simmers that is where the fun is. It is a good and positive change.
9 Likes
And, realistically, where a lot of people with the flying bug will move to actually learn to fly for real as well.
5 Likes
Happened to me. MSFS 2020 made it possible to fly believable VFR in a game, and I enjoyed doing it so much that I went out and started flight training in real life. I had wanted to learn to fly since I was a teenager, but had let the dream die. MSFS 2020 re-awoke the dream.
8 Likes
That’s amazing @LKFJP! We absolutely LOVE hearing stories like this. Be sure to post about your progress and let us know when you fly both your first solo and pass your checkride. 
MSFS Team
4 Likes
I’m looking for more classic and modern GA aircraft, e.g, a steam gauge Baron or a DA-50RG to name two, and more business jets. Where are those planes? Or at least a better variety of those types of aircraft; how many Piper P28 variants are devs going to release? Combined, we have 10-15, at most 20, solid GA planes and business jets (it would be less than that if it weren’t for those who have modded, i.e., finished Asobo’s work on, the default aircraft, e.g., CJ4) in the sim, and I love all of them. But the rest of the GA and business jet options on the market are just not good, even for the most basic level of simulation and immersion.
I’m certainly not looking for more airliners of any level but especially not the dime-a-dozen airliner like some of these devs are pumping out. I will only buy airliners from a few devs, namely PMDG and Fenix. I’m not saying that every airliner needs to be that high quality, as I also like the Leonardo Maddog and iniBuilds 310, which are good but not on par with the PMDG 737 or Fenix A320. But the last thing that I want, or that the sim needs, is more Captain Sim-esque airliners. So, ya, when it comes to airliners, I’m good with just PMDG’s and Fenix’s current and future products for MSFS.
It is kind of a pointless argument as “solid” is too vague to define and some of the stuff I list people will immediately deem “rubbish” - however just off the top of my head looking at what people think are reasonably good -
Kodiak and Floatiak
Archer
Warrior
various Arrow variants
152 with v2 mod and sounds
Steam 172 with enhancement mod
Honda Jet
Piaggio P149
Staggerwing
C310
C414
PC6
Camair Twin Navion
Stearman
Trinidad
Seneca
J160
J170
Seminole
Globe Swift
Tiger Moth
Mooney
Analog Caravan
Wilga
Optica
c140
Vision Jet
Grumman Goose
Cessna 337
Islander
Twin Otter
Zenith 701
Beech 18
Analog King Air
Sting S4
Widgeon
Beaver
Trilander
RV-14
Pac 750
4 Likes
Sounds reasonable. Are you suggesting 20 is not many? That’s a huge percentage of what’s currently available. And there’s plenty more of those types coming. For instance the A2A Commanche. I mean, if we’re talking about classic GA aircraft, there’s really not much complexity to develop. For instance, because of the release of the P.149, I hadn’t previously known of that plane, and I nearly bought one because I loved the model in the sim so much. And I learned a TON about flying the plane from the model. And that was one of the first releases for the sim. Only reason I didn’t buy the plane was that it needed an engine rebuild that would have cost at least the value of the plane (over $70K).
As far as business jets, up until a few months ago, MSFS couldn’t handle the level of complexity necessary to properly model them in depth, and it’s hard developing complex systems like that even if the support is there for them. As WT continues to add the necessary tools to the sim we’ll start to see those products. Until then, there’s not much developers can do. But, as you can see from the release of AAU1, it’s totally coming.
I’m with you on the Captain Sim products. The reason they’re here now is because it’s easy to develop junk the way they did, so of course they’re going to arrive first. MSFS is only two years old, and when released, there wasn’t much you could do except develop the same products as existed in the sim. But they have expanded the SDK enough now that better system modelling can be done, so we’re definitely going to continue to see more and more more complex aircraft being released. That level of complexity takes time to develop, and there are plenty of authors out there who are motivated to do that on their own accord. They were developing for P3D and FSX right up to the release of MSFS, so it’s a natural progression now that MSFS is finally starting to reach a mature level.
So I’ve got to say I’m really confused as to why you think that we won’t be getting more of them. And even worse that Xbox is being blamed for why there might not be. As more flight sim hardware is released for the platform, you’ll find plenty of people flocking to complex planes on Xbox.
That DHC-4 looks amazing, I can’t wait for it!
And I’m super excited for all the improvements in flight modeling we’ll be seeing over the next couple of years!
2 Likes
You’re right. That was vague. By solid, I meant that the overall quality and performance of the aircraft is proportional to the price. I wouldn’t include every aircraft on your list, but I do think that’s generally a list of good aircraft, in terms of price/quality.
Personally, I’m interested in quality over quantity. I’d rather spend $60 for one great looking and well-simulated GA aircraft than, for the sake of variety, spend $12/plane for 5 good looking aircraft that are all relatively the same from a simulation and performance perspective.
But my original question was more about why devs, in my opinion, are continuing to focus on things like military aircraft and warbirds instead of GA and commercial aircraft, which I’m using in a broad sense to mean more than just business jets and airliners, such as transport aircraft and cargo planes, since that is what a fair segment of the flight sim enthusiast market seems to be most interested in flying.
So, while I agree there are good GA planes and a few good business jets currently available in the sim, I just expect and believe there should be more of them in lieu of the 30-some fighter jets and 20-some warbirds (that’s just a guess as to how many there are) that are out there and, on average, look OK but have arcade-level simulation and performance.
1 Like
And again, just to be clear, my question and topic very well might be based on flawed or faulty assumptions, as many have pointed out. I recognize that, which is why I posted it.
I appreciate the critiques and retorts. Even if my opinion hasn’t changed, I’m now more informed about the issue and MSFS, as a whole, having debated and discussed the issue here. So, again, thank you to those who responded.
I am not trying to personally attack anyone or anything, other than the devs who are blatantly ripping off people, but I think it’s fairly well settled who they are. So, my apologies to anyone who felt attacked by my posts.
1 Like
The WASM fix coming to Xbox in SU12 should have a massive effect on development of aircraft. Without that, developers were really stuck in what they could make for the sim. It costs a LOT of money to develop these products, and cutting off that much revenue access really dimmed motivation for complex planes.
Of course, it’ll likely still take at least a few months to actually see any benefit.
1 Like
That’s an important point that I hadn’t considered much. Devs can only work with what SDK they’ve been given, which hasn’t been much. Some have certainly done some incredible things to date, but they’ve all been very limited to what they can and want to do. So, those SU12 updates are definitely something to look forward to.
1 Like
Check this out… (the whole post, not just this text, he gives his roadmap which I think you’ll find interesting).
1 Like
Not sure that’s accurate when it comes to the warbirds - many of those are labors of love, and the best of them (anything by Flying Iron, and, despite a few quirks, the Blackbird/Milviz Corsair) are quite detailed, feature-rich, and strive for authenticity. And many of the military jets are quite good as well - even those that, by choice, don’t offer systems depth (like DC Designs) feature good flight modeling. And some of the arcade-y ones simulate fifth-gen, fly-by-wire aircraft that are, thanks their computer assists and flight envelope protection, a bit arcade-y in real life. Its true that we don’t yet have a modern jet up to DCS systems standards - but that may change with the upcoming Heatblur F-14. There are really a number of good experiences to be had across the airplane spectrum.
3 Likes
You might have a point except that CaptainSim aircraft, arguably the worst of the worst, are on the Marketplace, which pretty much takes the sails (no pun intended) out of your argument.
btw, how many third-party aircraft are currently on SimMarket but not the Marketplace?
These are two developers who are doing great things for the sim. I love to see this. IMO, while yes, they’re developing another airliner, SWS and FSReborn have been doing things right since day 1.
They have both released excellent products for the sim, which are all incredibly diverse. Not to mention that the quality of their aircraft speaks for itself, and because of that, they have gained the trust and support of the community. That’s why they deserve to take on a project like this, and I hope they have much success with it. I look forward to the development and release.
That’s fair. There are some good warbirds. I own a few of them, and I understand the appeal of those for this sim. Hell, I even understand the appeal for something like the B-25 or B-17 for MSFS.
But I’ll never understand the appeal of fighters in a non-combat sim, even if it’s the best simulated fighter on the market. To each his own…
Many many real world fighter pilots will spend their entire career without ever shooting at anything other than a target drone so in some ways MSFS is quite realistic. Does not appeal to m personally, only fast jet I own in game is the Cold War G91, but if people want them why not.
2 Likes