Just a random thought here- What if Microsoft capitalized on Asobo’s strengths, which is creating a dynamic world, by letting them focus on improving on that while letting another development house build the flying aspect of things.
It seems to me that Asobo can really perfect the world/environment they’re trying to create with little difficulty over time. But the flying part seems to be consistently problematic. Maybe let developers who know aviation inject the flying, then we get the best of both worlds, no pun intended…
19 Likes
My personal preference is to deal with a one-stop shop where I might have some confidence that an engineer could simply cross the hall to resolve a problem than to trust that various disparate factions will coordinate and cooperate without relying on that all-to-human tendency to say: “That problem is in the other company’s code…”, leaving the customer stuck without recourse somewhere in the middle.
(How’s THAT for a run-on sentence?)
3 Likes
Or, hey, just an idea; let the programmers that created the sim work on it more and improve it.
Third parties can only operate within the limits built into the sim itself. Don’t fool yourself thinking that a third party that has been successful in creating nice aircraft within the boundaries of earlier sims are the correct people to build a sim from the ground up.
If it was that easy, they would have created a sim by themselves years ago.
1 Like
I wasn’t thinking about a third party. Rather a partner at the top level for the future development of the sim. Maybe Asobo could focus all of their attention on bringing the world and ecosystem to life. Another company could manage the flight and aerodynamics and stuff. It sometimes seems as though Asobo got in over their heads with this. I’m not trying to besmirch the company, rather just pointing out an objective observation…
2 Likes
I think you need to look up that word… your observation is completely subjective, not objective.
That said, nothing wrong with musing a bit.
Personally, i feel that getting an entire new development studio on board, letting them analyze and optimize the current code would be a process of months, if not years. I’m pretty sure Asobo will be able to bring the improvements we look for in less than that timespan, especially once they expand their team and (hopefully) we can get rid of all these Covid restrictions.
3 Likes
In my fantasy mind right now, I envision a hybrid between the beauty of Asobo and the brains of LR…but pure fantasy mind you.
2 Likes
In that case please have a look at this:
I believe they have the people with that mindset / those brains already.
Does it currently result in a flight model that’s accurate for all planes? No, I don’t think so.
It seems pretty good for GA, and lacking for tubeliners currently.
They do (in my opinion) seem to have the right mind set though, and don’t seem to be cutting any corners.
3 Likes
I think that ASOBO has done a great job and should continue as is.
I do fly the WT CJ4 via the WT CJ4 Mod.
This seems ok.
5 Likes
They already do. Notice all the third-party aircraft?
Asobo still have to do the physics and basic systems though and for that it is useful for them to have default aircraft. There is little point in them having default aircraft and hiding them from us.
I think they cut a lot of corners tbh. I’m not faulting them for doing so, but there are a lot of generic threads that link each aircraft, and I have yet to come across stellar reviews by actual pilots about how accurate these aircraft are. The base ATC is also mind-bogglingly similar to erlier sims. The sound logic, at least how the files and cfg is structured is also strikingly-similar to earlier sims too. The way scenery loads. The airport lighting at night from a distance- all of that is what appears to be carbon-copies of what, fs2000?
That being said- the world that Asobo created is spectacular, and there are no limits with how far they can take it or what can be injected to give it life. I just don’t think flying is their strong suit. I know it will be fine over time- but there is a really big piece missing from the comprehensive package of the sim. Maybe it’s the full-force of third parties, I donno, but it just seems that so many basic, obvious things that are foundational to aviation and obvious to pilots simply don’t exist in here yet.
1 Like
All I’ve ever expected was a reasonable and stable simulation of the takeoff, flight, and landing characteristics of an aircraft commonly flown in our skies in the 21st century… say the C172 or Cirrus SR22.
That has not happened.
6 Likes
I get that from the WT CJ4.
I started with the Cessna 172 Skyhawk (G1000) but changed to the
WT CJ4 for the AP functionality.
Haven’t tried the default CJ4 since. But the posts here indicate a lot of changes
for it by Asobo.
1 Like
That’s exactly my point. We’re 6 months in, and we still have goofy problems that leave us scratching our heads. There was a point last week when technically, EVERY airplane in my hangar was broken to one degree or another. Every. Single. One.
3 Likes
Climb and maintain FL270 expect 12000 ft and I was at 16 K feet. ATC works ok right? SageGoldfish543 watch out for the Defenders of Asobo. Never say anything bad or have a opionion. Me, everybody knows they are a software company trying to produce something over their heads. Dont count on a 3rd party source to help as they dont even invite any other weather programs good info on their SDK. I already bought the Sim what is the problem in letting someone else work on it to improve. PRIDE i guess?
1 Like
In an ideal world we could take the flight model from XP11 and place that into FS2020.
1 Like
Like so many of us, I’m still looking for things we expect in a flight simulator. I don’t need study-level default aircraft nor hyper-accurate specs. But we still have no working mixture in the Baron, backwards torque logic on turbines, ATC that ‘sort of’ works and other little bugs. I know those are on the honey-do list but it’s unfortunate that core functionality of flight is still broken 6 months after release. Scenery development seems king. It wouldn’t be acceptable if only some weapons worked in Call of Duty or if cars were buggy in Hot Pursuit. But I’m sure the code in MSFS is vastly larger and interconnected in a way that makes changes very difficult.
2 Likes
Erm, what? That all sounds a little strange.
The main issue with ATC and FLs is that they generally need you to get to where they told you to be, before they issue a new FL. It is entirely possible that there were other aircraft between 12k and 27k and they wanted you to go over them.
What does that ALT 37,300 refer to in your pic?
Were you supposed to be at 37.3k?
Were they reducing you to a reasonable mid-point between where you were, and where you were supposed to be going to … (37-16)/2 = 10, and 10+16=26
That would (sort of) make sense, especially if there were other aircraft around between 16k and 25k
And no, I am not a “Defender of Asobo”.
I was at 37200 and was decending to make a landing. Another game bug as you see my airplane setting was 3900 ft. They had me desending to 16K and then ordered me back up to 27k before landing. Sim ATC does this all the time.
I heard that they have hired the Working Title Team.
Working Title team will improve the quality of the flight model ???
