This sim may not be doing enough to make sure casual users are not excluded or left behind

[Jimrh1993]

@Mooncatt3953

Aiming for realism and immersion isn’t a bad thing, but the way you put it sounds like gate keeping and expecting developers to tailor a sim to a specific subset of users. Maybe I’m misunderstanding you, but it’s the impression I get. We all have to start somewhere. If simulators were only about absolute realism, where would new users get a start… Going for a real pilot licence first?

@Mooncatt3953

As for the return on investment, I think that is a backwards way of looking at it. It’s great Microsoft is open to to the add-on market (both mods and peripherals), but you shouldn’t buy into such things with any expectation that the sim will be adapted to make them run better in the future. We see this point made all the time when it comes to promised features and improvements to new products. Wise consumers know and advise not to buy based on promises because those promises often go unfulfilled. This is no different. Buy your add-ons based on what the sim can do now and any future improvements is just icing on the cake. Microsoft doesn’t really owe you anything beyond how well the base sim performs with stated system requirements and standard peripherals (mouse, keyboard, and/or a regular controller).

Besides, can you really expect the world at such a low price? I think what it offers is great for the most part. People can play it on Xbox or low end pc with a simple controller, all the way up to VR or fully mocked up home cockpits. Sure it has some core issues and bugs to work out, but it is playable for the most part by people across all skill levels. If you know nothing, you can still get in the air and knock the sticks around for fun. Any time I think I may be taking it too seriously, I think about how Microsoft doesn’t even take itself very seriously when it added the fictional Halo Pelican and Top Gun Darkstar as official first party aircraft.

 

I could not have said it better.

With respect to what it is and what it does, I think MSFS has done a bang-up job.

If you don’t think the aircraft physics or modeling is good enough, I would heartily recommend X-Plane 12 or the latest release of Flight Gear.

X-Plane emphasizes realistic physics over an overall realistic experience, especially with regard to scenery.  (It’s a common thread within X-Plane that the scenery looks best at 30,000’.)

Flight Gear, when last I used it, wanted to be the go-to choice for professional simms and anyone who wanted anything less than absolute, uncompromising realism was not welcome.  Scenery?  I never got that far.

I am glad that MSFS allows me to tailor the experience to meet my needs.  Now, while I am fighting with my cockpit layout and crummy controls, I have many realism settings turned down so that the sim is, at least, usable.  Later on as my rig improves, I can turn up the realism.

It’s like The Golden Age of Ham Radio in the 50’s and 60’s - you didn’t expect to reach other hams half way around the world on a single-tube set and a dinky antenna.  As the rig got better, (and your skills improved), you could accomplish more.

I don’t expect MSFS to be any different.  I appreciate its ability to “reach me where I am” regardless of where I might be, and grow with me as I grow.

Is it perfect?  No.  Does it meet my needs?  Absolutely!  Do I regret the money I’ve spent on it?  As my ever expanding hangar attests, I think it was an excellent spending decision. (Then again, maybe not?  )

You do you.

As for me, “Give me MSFS, or give me death!”