Were the stunning visuals a HUGE trade off for everything else?

Totally this ^^^^
As much as I am dazzled by the amazing environment and graphics after that wears off a bit and you start to actually get down to some serious flying you notice just how weird some of the aircraft fly. This part oh the OP is spot on.
I also call for patience and this is not a post to just complain. I think what they have here is like nothing else ever before it but I really do hope the problematic flight models are up there on the list to fix ASAP.

This sim will get a bad name pretty fast once serious simmers get past the pretty face and start serious flying.


I feel its the opposite for the first point. Its possible you’ve been used to a more simplified model in different simulators and now are experiencing how an aircraft behaviorurs more realistically. Its also worth noting that I’m not a pilot so I have no actual experience when it comes to flying and you probably don’t either.

Well I am not a pilot either but I have been up in a small 152 and been flight simming seriously for 25 years. Was a beta tester for 3 versions of MSFS and I think have a pretty good understanding of how small aircraft operate and feel. Again not a pilot but I do know planes shouldn’t feel like the balancing act you have with a helicopter or constantly lose trim.
Having to adjust trim yes but not like this.

I was able to make it feel a little better with the sensitivity settings but there is something really off about some of the small AC.

Not saying the sim is bad im just saying there is something wrong with some of them and I hope they are looking into it. I am sure they are considering how many other simmers I have seen with the same feeling.


What? You’re exaggerating or you’re lying. Or you controls are knackered and you need to look at your setup.

All are bad.

“Flight Model, Flight Model, Flight Model: Simply put, most of the airplanes are almost impossible to control, and leave you so busy trying to fly the plane, that there’s no time to enjoy the scenery. On take off, the planes want to lift off before reaching takeoff speed (adjusting trim doesn’t help). If you somehow manage to survive the take off and make it to cruise altitude, you are now faced with annoyingly unending Pitch, Roll and Yaw oscillations.”

I disagree. The flight model is not perfect, but it’s a huge step forward from both fsx and all the p3ds. “Flying on rails” needed to go since a decade - I feel this model has little to nothing to envy to the xplanes.

“AutoPilots: too much to mention here, but I’ll capture a few: the AP is constantly “chasing” the assigned headings and altitudes when LNAV anf VNAV are turned on, AP doesn’t follow flight plan, AP pitch, roll and yaw oscillations during approach, etc…”

I agree mostly. The autopilots need tuning, and I still haven’t tested the airliners - only up to turboprops and gps so far.

“User interface: Ability to change planes without having to quit to main menu, Instant Replay feature, Ability to change seasons.”

On this I can’t really say. Probably there are more pressing issues. I prefer bugs and inaccuracies to be ironed out before features are added or changed, but that’s just my feeling; anyone’s opinion is as good.

1 Like

First, I’m REALLY disappointed that the Star Wars: Galaxy’s Edge scenery isn’t there!

But seriously, I was hoping that the IFR aspects would be at least useful for practicing, but alas, they have a LONG way to go to be even remotely useful. Hanging on to X-Plane for that. Loading and flying approaches is wierd - some transitions are missing, and many bear no resemblance to the actual ARINC coding of the real approaches. for example, I loaded the RNAV RWY 16 to KAIT and tried to load the BRNRD transition, but it wasn’t available. So I loaded the one from the intermediate fix. Instead of flying me to the IF, the FMS flew a big arc to the final approach fix. Not anything like the published approach.

Beautiful to look at, but for serious (real) IFR pilots, not useful yet. But I imagine they will eventually get that sorted out. I just wish they had gotten it sorted out on initial release. I was all excited that they said the navdata would be current automatically, but the way it’s coded/implemented in the aircraft FMSs, it’s just entirely deviant from reality - worse than useless for that purpose.

I’m still enjoying flying around looking at stuff and practicing aerobatics, landings, etc. The flight models seem excellent. And the view system is brilliant too. Doesn’t require much if any fiddling to get useful views in most cases.


I have all Assists off.

Try the Icon A5 at Cancun; what a blast! Try landing on one of the little, buried-in-the-jungle airstrips. No instruments, just VFR. If that’s too frustrating, just land in the lagoon. :sunny:

The relationship between stick and rudder (Langeweische) and throttle and trim are all great in this sim; they FINALLY behave as they should! I liked neither the rubbery bounciness of Xplane, nor the unreasonably slow responses to changes in throttle/trim input in FSX/P3D. Here, it all feels right. If you’re used to flying the other sims (I have been since 1980), this will seem “strange” to you.

DCS has been the closest so far I’ve found to real flight, until MSFS2020; it is credibly comparable.

My benchmark remains the A2A Simulations’ warbirds (P-47D is my favorite, then P40) in FSX. Their modeling is also spot on. Little else is. PMDG remains the benchmark for switchology simulation (their hydraulics simulation on the 737 is great!), and I’m sure Robert Randazzo & Co. will have their input on the heavies in MSFS2020 as well – or others of that calibre will.

Now that I have my Hotas working, the controller sensitivity is fine. But, with an Xbox controller – whoa! The controls were so ridiculously sensitive, even with sensitivity settings dialed all the way down. I was swooping all over the place!

Hardly surprising really when you think about translating what little movement a games controller stick provides into motion in the sims aircraft controls. Even a joystick is insufficient in my opinion for flying helis in a sim, the cyclic sensitivity is fine when cruising but in a hover the inputs are tiny and a near 1-1 control input makes life soooo much easier.

I have been wishing for a lifetime of simming that developers would include “templates” for various control configurations that are good, basic starting points. Say an “FSX” template for MSFS2020, or a “Thrustmaster HOTAS Warthog” template for those who have those.

But I understand the problem with geometric growth of testing issues and edge cases that could occur by doing same, so it’s probably best left for people to discover and share.

The DCS community has been excellent along those lines; I hope the forum here will stay positive and productive enough that people will be helpful like that here, too. It takes quite a bit of effort, but people are surprisingly good at putting that effort in to help others, when the overall tone of a forum is positive.

Part of it isn’t just the sensitivity, but the curve, the damping… it’s a far more complex issue than most realize.


Nope, I’m neither exaggerating or lying. My sensitivity and dead zones are giving me the best I’m gonna get. Oh, and by the way, I don’t appreciate being called a liar.

Yes, old habits. I totally agree.

Great input Joanne. Spot on.

I actually do have some experience in a Cessna 172. Also, on every previous version (I own every one ever released) I’ve always flown with the flight model realism maxed out. So I have to disagree.

Exactly this. Many don’t understand how planes fly, how lift is generated, how thermals and wind create changes on the lift and stability of an aircraft. Unfortunately, I see many complaints claiming something to be wrong when in fact it is being simulated correctly as you would experience in the real plane.

1 Like

This is sort of a ouroboros situation: Since so many things are slightly or completely broken, it’s really easy to make the assumption that something not working is a(nother) bug.

1 Like

Agreed - the problem is when people assuming something is broken, they’re asserting it as if they know the plane inside an out.

1 Like

Preface/Disclaimer: I do not blame the MSFS development team, they are only doing what this flight sim community wants/asks for.

The OP is correct - I have seen this for decades in this flight sim industry, they ALL do it, because this community lets them. I want MSFS to be great, but it will not be, because this community settles for less all the time. When we do get something good we pay for it too many times and its way over priced in the name of licensing or some other excuse.

Somethings for all to consider is, how many more times will we be compelled to buy (or go somewhere else for) a:

  • 737
  • C182
  • KSFO
  • A weather package and textures for it
  • An ATC package
  • A flight planner
  • and on and on and on…

Take a look at MSFS default EGGC and how terrible the terminal looks (apartment buildings!!!), all for Orbx to compel us to buy EGGC (on day 1) for some possibly 3rd or 4th time! Shouldn’t simmers be sick and tired of this?

Why 2 C152’s when this MSFS community has been crying out for a decent 757 for decades. Does anybody remember how LONG we were promised a decent 757 and NEVER got it !?! Does anybody remember the ARBITRARY price of $[75.7]0 for a 757 that still falls short of value?

Yes many things in MSFS LOOK good, but so much in MSFS needs to ACT good. Are these things being purposely made to be bad so we are compelled to buy the same add-ons over and over?

Everybody has to carefully consider this. Why aren’t add-on developers being compelled to move on to greater things, or is the NG3 going to have all circuit breakers functioning correctly? What is truly different about EGGC this time around, that simmers have to buy it again? Oh it’s because it took work to make it compatible with MSFS - YES we know, but aren’t there new simmers who will buy it to compensate for the cost? Isn’t buying the exact same thing twice enough??? Then when a new EGGC comes out next year it too will have a price tag, yet we still are waiting for other airports. MSFS was supposed to take care of the need for add-on airports, or is that reserved for 80 years from now? Who decides this? Don’t the consumers decide this? They do, and this community decides to overpay for the same thing several times, and for the life of me I cannot figure out why.

How can this community decide that seasons are not that important? Well they did and do. XP has survived and grew without seasons, so the MSFS team says seasons are not that important, and develop a flight sim without consulting the community, there was no need to consult, XP was very successful. Now seasons are important - I was one of (if not) the first to protest about the lack of seasons in MSFS (Avsim forums) …its common sense to me, aviation and seasons have so much to do with one another.

So in essence at present we have a nice screenshot taking apparatus.

I know there are a bunch of people who will continue to make excuses for this stagnant situation for the sake of patience or “group think”. So, how long will it take for any developer to work on live volcanic activity, or a NOTAMS system, even Pilot Controlled Lighting, HOW LONG!!! Never because this community submits to the waiting/stagnation that we have always been doing.

I truly believe the trade off is there on purpose - it has to be, so the waiting/stagnation game can continue for at least another 30 years. This is what the community wants- it wants to wait.

There was a time when development was fast, features all around were added, visuals, fidelity, everything. But ever since FS2002 this progress began to decline in speed, quality, and features. Graphics (for the sake of screenshots) continues to be at the forefront, but aviation realism has been on the back burner for a long time in comparison.

Microsoft Photography Simulator is what we have. Next thing we know airplanes will be omitted but a nice drone will be provided.


Such as? I fly in real life and can tell you that there is much that is wrong at the moment…