Whats up with this payware stuff? Payware is not the solution

Discussion Hub General Discussion
23

Genuine question, what is your definition of a ‘fully operational VNAV’ function?

Let me make it clear, I agree with everyone when saying basic, fundamental sim and aircraft functions need to be complete and bug free. This is not my argument.

I’m just stating that by half implementing an advanced feature they will not replicate 100% accurately, Asobo have dug them self a hole. A hole that maybe by omitting the feature entirely, would actually help avoid all the cries of “VNAV is broken” or “specific sub feature XYZ” is missing.

24

Havent freeware & payware significant part of the current ecosystem for a long long time? How many of us fly with default aircraft,AI traffic and scenery on FSX/P3D and XP? I do agree the platform needs to be fixed and made stable for features that are there in first place to work, and work properly.

I have FSX and I don’t even remember flying default aircrafts with default scenery. Most of us had tremendous addons to the point that these caused CTD due to 4 Gb limit on FSX and till v3 on P3D.

Asobo’s strategy is clear and reasonably transparent

  • They provide the platform and hooks (SDK)
  • 3rd party devs (free and payware) build the next layer

Where is the confusion?

1 Like
25

Thought id try and take a 747 for a trip. Nope, half the EICAS screens just turn off as im powering up and the APU wont turn back on. This is emabarrasing and a deplorable waste of a program. Wait til its fixed everyone will screma. Its been out for over a month and its a f***en mess, even the GA aircaft are rubbish with AP that doesnt work, cant get trim to work properly. Cant believe I wasted $180 AUD for this. At least the default XP and FSX had some resemblance of working a little bit. Give up on this ■■■■. Frustrated as hell.

1 Like
26

On a lighter note - simple things work best :laughing:

27

At this point in time MSFS2020 is like an evening out at a restaurant not recommended by your friends. The chef cooked food you did not order.

1 Like
28

reread the original post I think you got lost in what I was trying to say.

I have nothing against payware/freeware devs what I was saying that when things are not working right or down right broken. dont suggest a payware fix. MS/Asobo need to be held liable for the software. they are the ones that need to fix it.

2 Likes
29

I’m sorry, your right. I may have got a little side tracked.

I’d just read one to many “sub feature XYZ of VNAV/FMS is missing or wrong” posts, when previously those features have only ever been available in high fidelity payware aircraft, and now some people expect them implemented perfectly here.

Back on topic, there should never be a case where payware is the only method of of making a basic fundamental function of the sim, or it’s default aircraft, work. Asobo are completely responsible for ensure they raise the standard of the core sim to a point where everything works correctly for everyone.

1 Like
30

I wasn’t aware that VNAV was a study level feature… I can use VNAV that works correctly in the default 737-800 in X-Plane. Wouldn’t call the X-Plane default study level.

6 Likes
31

I will welcome payware and freeware in my copy of MSFS once it is working like it should. minor bugs and or glitches I can deal with. but if I can not complete a single flight… .well you get the idea

1 Like
32

Payware has been the solution basically for any flight sim in the last two decades, though.

33

I did say that whatever features are the must work and work well - that is where I am coming from and is a given. That is where MS needs to close the gap.

34

solution means the fix for a problem. Like I want to see more detail. I want me sim to be more realistic. things like that. Pay/freeware should not be a have to have to fix it.

@xisumervoid that is the point I have been trying to make here. then I will look forward to other avenues to increase my gaming experience

35

Depends on what you mean by solution i guess? If you mean performance issues, game breaking bugs etc. then yes, Microsoft and Asobo should be working towards fixing (they do).

If by problem you mean lack of details on default scenery or aircraft, payware and freeware addons will provide the solution. Its always been like that. We learned not to expect too much from default aircraft or scenery. Im saying this as a long time flight simmer, default aircraft including airliners are great quality (once asobo and ms fixes them ofc). You also must know that default aircraft is usually meant for casual gamers while companies like PMDG are creating study-level aircraft for enthusiasts.

36

Welcome to Siming.
The business model for this and any other successful sim is what you are seeing in the early phase. Most recently is DCS.
The purpose of Flight sim is to provide a stable playground or world. DCS calls it world.
To get things going, they provide some default aircraft that work ok but that’s it.

Once the playground is established, 3rd party developers offer specific aircraft that have all of the bells and whistles that act like the real thing, or close. A portion of the cost of the 3rd party products goes to the sim creator. This is the continuing revenue stream in the long term.
Don’t expect the updates to go on forever. At some point things will be locked down and updates will be significantly less frequent. This is necessary because of the effect each update has on 3rd party products.
So in the end, the aircraft provided in game are working exactly as intended. They are basic and give just enough functionality to get you going. Once you find your favorite aircraft, you’ll buy a full featured, 3rd party plane.

Happy Flying

37

I could not possibly disagree more. X-Plane has an extremely good VNAV implementation that comes with their default G1000 and they’re a small team! It’s also a fairly complete and extensible system. And they have their own GNS530 and 430 which work well. They have highly functional Nav systems out of the box and it has spurred the growth of it as a serious simmer platform. And, on top of that, they have the Reality XP GTN750/650s. They’re practically swimming in excellent navigation systems. By comparison, FS2020 doesn’t even have one…not even the Reality XP stuff. I think it would be a gigantic mistake for Osobo to not put serious effort in nav systems otherwise they’re going to be stuck with Carenado level GA aircraft all over the place and it would eventually devolve into a VFR/Airliner sim only.

Having said that, I love it. I love flying in it. I’m not here to bash but simply point out what an incredibly bad choice that would be. I’ll also add that the G3000 system in the TBM isn’t terrible, it’s just riddled with bugs and missing some what I would call minor things. If they just fix the bugs they’re a long ways there. VNAV itself is, largely, math intermixed with restrictions and events. It’s a challenge but think of all the decent quality 3rd party aircraft that could use it rather than having to home-grow their own. Osobo do NOT leave that to aircraft developers!

4 Likes
38

What might help calm tempers is if Asobo write manuals for the sim, explaining what functionality is, and is not, available. FSX has many pages on the just GPS and Garmin alone, there is no reason that this version should not have that too.

If the documentation says X works this way, then that is how it works, beyond that it is a wishlist. None of this nonsense about downloading real manuals from the manufacturer, unless the simulation does everything correctly, because that way lies frustration.

1 Like
39

That depends on what you consider correct.

This is just one tiny, detailed function of Boeing VNAV:

When above the first speed constraint, VNAV varies speed to maintain the path up to the following limit:

- with greater than VMO/MMO minus 16 knots, the scratchpad message DRAG REQUIRED displays. The aircraft may accelerate up to VMO/MMO minus 11 knots to maintain the path. If further correction is required, VNAV may allow the aircraft to rise up to 150 feet above the path. If VNAV can no longer maintain the aircraft within 150 feet of the path without further acceleration, speed reversion occurs, the pitch mode annunciation changes from VNAV/PTH to VNAV SPD, VNAV resets the target speed to VMO/MMO minus 16 knots, and the scratchpad message DRAG REQUIRED displays again.

Is that exactly how the VNAV in XP works?

I’m not saying this to be a smart-■■■■, but to try and illustrate that advanced features such as VNAV, FMS’s etc, can’t be defined simply as working/complete or not. There is such a large, grey area where each individuals opinion of complete & functional sit. Some just want the aircraft to start descending on its own, and others want almost, level-D sim level accuracy. No mater where the ‘complete’ line is drawn, some people are going to be unhappy that their standard hasn’t been met.

edit: (I’m talking default aircraft here, as this determines each users point where they become happy for payware to complete the rest of their sim experience)

My standard is quite low, I don’t expect a lot out of default aircraft. I’ll leave that to payware. I’m not saying that is right or wrong, it’s just my opinion.

I’ll also state that I’ve never flown XP so don’t have a frame of reference regarding other sim’s default navigation systems.

Now I’ve probably harped on about VNAV way too much, so I’ll try and end it here. The same could be said about the G1000, G3000, the Proline Fusion. What is complete to one user might not be to another. I don’t have the answer to that, but it’s part of what makes it an interesting discussion. chintz14 makes an excellent point. Without any sort of documentation on MSFS’s implementation of these nav systems, we have no idea if some systems are designed to be functional, but not completely realistic or are just incomplete.

I think we all agree that what ever is implemented in within MSFS should be bug free and work correctly, as Asobo intended it to.

1 Like
40

Things like VNAV have never interested me and i fly airliners only! Never understood the fascination of pushing lots of buttons in the FMC and then sitting there watching the plane do the work for entertainment. Use the V/S and other autopilot controls and make the plane do what you want it to when you want to do it - thats my approach.

I suspect that’s how the vast number of msfs simmers use autopilot controls and therefore these sophisticated autopilot functions are being championed by a small minority and thats why msfs don’t regard it as worthy of improving over other things like seasons or vr or world data.

41

They have to as VNAV doesn’t exist. If it did, they would likely use it.

42

just because you don’t understand it doesn’t make it unimportant. why are you using autopilot at all if you’re such a purist?

some of us want to operate an aircraft in a realistic manner. airliners are operated on lnav/vnav 90+% of the time.

a small minority that has an entire industry (pmdg, fslabs, etc) dedicated to it.

5 Likes