A well-reasoned and reasonable view.
Well said; needed saying.
Well said indeed. I concur with the views expressed above by RK1Hatty …What to do ? As of now this Sim does not provide the satisfying and stimulating experience that I expected or wanted . I am therefore going to put it aside,keep an eye on future “developements” and go back to my previous Sim for my "hardcore simming " fix. I have, fortunately, spent hardly any money beyond purchasing the top of the range version and will be spending no more untill FS2020 appears to me to have become a credible Simulator rather than a good looking aviation game.
2 Likes
IMO we are looking at three years until this stabilises. CTDs and other issues are not going away. The whole thing has got boring and I just can’t be bothered with it any more. In terms of graphics yes they are good but that’s not enough on its own. I keep asking myself why I enjoyed FSX so much more than this sim. For me I believe it comes down to reliability. Kicking myself for believing the hype. I’m not gullible usually. I haven’t bought a computer game since fsx and wish I had held off rather than experience frustration Over the last few months. Cheers.
MSFS has been a great intellectual joy for me learning how and what protocols are needed to fly a Airbus 320 together with the physics of learning new flight models for different aircraft Its a great and steep learning curve but to date its been great. Obviously I am not a simmer but purchased the sim to learn about flying and how planes actually fly and traverse the world. I have learnt a lot from real world pilots on this forum and very little from hard core simmers
PS I have not suffered a single CTD nor have I ever desired to purchase a sim until MSFS appeared
1 Like
As a multi billion dollar company (Microsoft) we should not expect a half baked very flawed simulator, and have to rely on reading future update messages in order to have an idea when we will get a working sim. so far this has been an oversold visual game based on lousy FSX quality flight models, ■■■■ AP and ATC. No amount of apologist’s musings and defense of Asobo and Microsoft can undo the gross inadequacies of this sim. It is a visual, Not even Google Earth quality, tour of the world, no more and no less, with all the substandard Bing map short comings. No one will admit publicly that they have been ripped off, well, I am not ashamed to say, I was. As of now this “awesome” sim is broken for me, won’t even load, a slow deterioration since the last update. So now I will be forced to uninstall and reinstall in the hopes that will get it working, and the SDK is worse than ever in this last version. very buggy with missing widgets. I develop airports and recently bush missions, I’m very aware of the issues including non existent Key assignments and keystrokes. This is an embarrassment for Microsoft.
3 Likes
Another example of not reading the press releases leading up to this sim. MS/Asobo were pretty clear from the outset that they would not be releasing the sim with all the features implemented. They were also VERY clear that the aircraft would have limited capabilities and were merely an example of the actual airplane, not accurate reproductions.
The model of producing a base for 3rd party developers to build on has been VERY successful in every sim that came before. The default aircraft have never been adequate for long term use and are there to give you something to familiarize yourself with the sim while the 3rd parties get their releases rolling.
You were told that this was a ten year project. You chose to ignore that fact and convinced yourself that this was going to be a polished product, out of the box. Those of us “apologizing for Asobo and MS” are not defending the sim. We are simply trying to put the current state in perspective. We were more than aware that it would take at least a couple years before the base package would begin to resemble a finished environment. The high quality aircraft will take time to develop as the creators slowly learn the capabilities and work arounds for the short comings inherent in flight sim.
We will be 5 years or more into this sim before the hardware begins to catch up and users learn to properly configure their systems to maximize stability. There will always be users suffering from budget hardware failing to keep up. To spout the extreme hardware specs you have while grabbing the best deals to prevent pocket shock is to set yourself up for disappointment. Many of us are running midgrade systems and have a stable, enjoyable experience not because of hi end specs but because we assembled a balanced, well matched system from the best quality parts.
To say something is broken because it does not meet imaginary standards is unreasonable. This sim was released exactly as advertised. So far there have been some minor hiccups in the planned developement path, but Aoboo/MS have stepped up to try to rectify those as quickly as possible. We have 30 some thousand members on this site. Millions have installed the sim and are NOT here complaining that they were ripped off. I can only assume that if the sim WAS in fact broken, the number of individuals posting their dissatisfaction would number in the many hundreds of thousands.
4 Likes
there are no imaginary standards only an expectation that I paid good money for a sim as advertised not imagined. I can understand laminar with it’s small team needing years to perfect a version of it’s sim, but microsoft with it’s fast resources can and should have done much better at, not giving us a full blown sim with instant third party support, but a stable sim that at least does not degrade with each update. I fully expected it would take years to get up to speed with 3rd party support and several cycles of bug fixes, but this is really just under developed, there is no other way to say it. It’s a launch wholly dependent on its supposed visual eye candy, and not a functioning flight sim with even a working AP.
So your opinion is that of just another MSFS apologist looking for excuses.
Not sure why people keep saying they did not get what was advertised.
I am not apologizing for MS/Asobo, (I notice that seems to be your goto whenever someone points out the facts). I am defending a model that has been used for every flight sim. Limited functionality of both environment and aircraft. The developers are working with 3rd party publishers to develop an SDK that balances the needs of those developers and the new reality of cloud based software security while providing as much functionality as possible to those creating new content. I defend that model because over the last 40 years I have seen it work for both the users and the sustainability of the 3rd party market. The needs and wants of the end user is what drives the 3rd party market. If a sim was to be provided that satisfied even half the users the demand for add-ons would drop to a precipitous level and we would never see the likes of PMDG, ORBX, Milvis and Carenado stepping up to provide us with all the toys.
I am going to guess, and may be wrong, but I expect you did not purchase FS9 at release. Microsoft used the same VAST resources to develop that title. Had significantly less functionality than MSFS. Far more bugs and took months to get bug fixes, not weeks. Also took many more months before any significant update. This sim has been out for 5 months and has had numerous updates including some that added a number of features. We are so far ahead of any previous flight simulator at this point in its development.
FYI: AP works. I use it all the time and have only encountered minor flaws, mostly related to the Garmin and FMS systems having minimal functionality. Let’s not create imagined bugs to go along with imagined promises.
No matter who tells you to stop complaining, what you said is 100% true. It’s FS2020, more than a decade since the last MSFS. At the very least, things like Autopilot, ATC, in-flight maps, etc. should not be worse!! Yes, there is much to enjoy and, yes, visually it is amazing (but so are many RPG “games”) and yes, it will eventually get there but… of all the software products (including simulations- sports and otherwise) that I have bought in the last 10 years, this was the least “finished”.
Good post.
Pete
1 Like
This!
Some people just can’t seem to grasp this logic.
If the MSFS isn’t the sim you want it to be yet, simply enjoy it for the things you like alongside your prior go to sim. Nothing wrong with flying more than one sim for different aspects and enjoyment.
Yet I see people here shaming others for still enjoying XP11,P3D and FSX.
Meanwhile the people enjoying more than one sim aren’t going through as much emotional roller coaster misery.
1 Like
My main thing has been updated that mess up things, and they then don’t fix their mistakes, or we wait months. Thank God for mods like FBW, that make a320 usable.
That being said, I wish they would give us more real traffic and I hrn I would be mostly happy. That’s the only thing I have better on. X plane 11. MSFS is ahead in other areas. The main issues ate fixeable and hopefully will be.
I just don’t get how it is possible to end up in the current state. Certain bugs / errors are so obvious and so basic that someone armed with nothing more than a little bit of knowledge about aeronautics would notice. Meanwhile nothing fundamental has been fixed since release of the sim in August. We have seen new stuff being added, VR, world updates, night lighting getting worse than better but nothing really important.
Just a simple example for the IFR pilots among us, if you take ILS approaches for example. There are no offset approaches in MSFS, all localisers are forced to runway heading and for some reason nobody at Asobo thought that having RMIs / bearing pointers pointing at localiser antennas isn’t possible in real life… Accurate control of visibility / RVR isn’t available for low visibility procedures, instead we have a “aerosol density” slider in % instead of meters etc. I know one thing for sure, this has not been designed by someone with knowledge about aviation, understanding the importance of accurate visibility / RVR control in a sim.
A new sim should be a step forward from the previous version, not a step back. Agreed we got top class graphics but that doesn’t make or break a flight simulator, realistic physics and flight modeling does. Even FSX had propeller slipstream effects and adverse yaw, use of rudder was required for coordinated flight, not so in MSFS. Everything with a propeller essentially behaves like a jet in MSFS.
Even the FSX G1000 was more capable than the MSFS one, at least you could program a flight from A to B in there without problems. The autopilot disengagement logic in MSFS is also wrong. How did we end up with an autopilot which does not disengage at stall warning and instead trims full nose up in an attempt to maintain the current vertical mode. This can only happen because of a lack of knowledge, it can’t be that hard to simply program the AP to disconnect at stall warning activation. Still the MSFS flight director is useless when the autopilot is not engaged as the lateral mode keeps commanding wings level on every plane no matter the active lateral mode.
The icing effect, apart from being way too aggressive, the visual effects are showing ground icing conditions. Arriving at the aircraft in the morning while it has been parked in freezing fog overnight will look like that, inflight icing will not look like that. Ice will not built-up on the side of the fuselage, fin, cabin windows and on top of the wing in flight. The question then is why? How did they come up with this?
Either the focus does not lie with accurate flight simulation and the planes and aeronautical basics are merely an afterthought, or there is a serious lack of knowledge and understanding about aeronautics within the Asobo team. They supposedly get feedback from real world pilots and are partnered with manufacturers, how is it possible to have these flaws? Daher or the TBM pilots advising Asobo didn’t notice the turboprop model is completely flawed?
If we all keep pushing and reporting it will eventually get there no doubt, but disappointing it is indeed.
8 Likes
What disappoints me the most is the downgrade from FSX in terms of systems. Visually, this game is more than I could have possibly asked for, but it seems everything else is worse than sims over a decade old. It only makes it worse that updates seen to get pushed to all users with minimal testing, and there’s no opt-out option.
I can forgive poor icing simulation since it’s a new feature (so long as it gets fixed eventually), but why does deleting a flight plan on the G1000 crash the whole sim? Where did approach vectors go when FSX, albeit crudely, had it? How did ATIS reporting non-existent clouds pass any internal testing? What makes it okay to make up taxiway designations? Things are getting better with the updates, but I feel there’s a severe lack of feedback and transparency from the dev teamas many of these issues remain from the beta. Instead of focusing on fixing things, we’re given scenery updates and VR.
I get upset because I want it to succeed, and not go the way of Flight. If this was the exact same underlying engine as FSX with the new visuals and flight model (even missing advanced things like slipstream), I would be a very happy boy.
6 Likes
All valid points also 
You said everything that everybody here needs to know and understand! 
1 Like
-
They actively remove posts such as this one.
-
Just because someone doesn’t come on here and rant doesn’t mean they haven’t gone back to something else instead.
-
I’m sure you can find youtube video’s of the recent 20 Hour cannonball run challenge. Everyone started restarting the sim at each airport due to CTD’s. Don’t tell me they aren’t happening, and in large numbers.
I remeber when I first time inpatiently waited for sim to load to test the flight dynamics, I expected a lot based on the hype, especially the part about aerodynamics and I found myself totally disapointed right from the first ground roll. My feeling from aircraft was something between arcade and simulator.
However the aircraft does reacts with the enviroment, you can feel turbulence near the mountains on windy day as you would expect them in real life, so simulation of airflow around objects seems to be working as advertised BUT there is lot of stuff missing or buged in SDK for aircraft like: no prop drag, jet engines are bugged, N1/N2 relationship can be adjusted through the min/max parameters provided but this is very buggy, N1 above 100% just does not work. Folds back to less than 100%.
SDK need more tuning otherwise there wont be any proper study leve aicraft at this stage of SDK.
I agree to that they should focus more on the other thing instead of adding or tuning the scenery. Which should be on the last place according to me but majority of the comunity prefer visuals it seems since flight model is not visible and not praised by youtubers.
Nevertheless I have faith in Asobo, they really do listen the community and they improve the sim with every update. Scenery is mindblowing, you can really see what you would see in real life, amazing experience. I really want badly correct aerodynamics, flight model/physics for this sim, that would be dream come true!
2 Likes
They are not some sort of church or sect; they’re out to make a business successful and will do the minimum necessary to achieve sales etc. The only relevant point here is that Microsoft is happy with them.
Any nuggets of “fixes” that end up in consumers’ hands is a bonus.
2 Likes
That’s a pretty pessimistic view! Clearly the only real way to sustainable business success is through keeping you customer base happy and engaged. In this case, that is all about developing MSFS to be the very best and accurate simulator (which is what Asobo have committed to as their ambition/vision). For that reason I also have faith in Asobo and their ability to deliver on that commitment. I will also add, even at this stage my personal experience of the sim has been first class. Blown my mind and so much more potential. Thanks and all the best.
3 Likes
You nailed it. It’s being prioritized for gamers, not serious simmers. The lack of dockable panels/multi-monitor support is another example.
The “wow, look at that” gamers will get quickly bored with a sim that doesn’t have weapons and adventures, and the true simmers will be the ones who keep it alive. I hope they get their act together and make this a true next-generation flight sim before they lose too many simmers.
3 Likes