no FS2004 patch ?

[ulisses 1]

Hi,FS2004 has problems like OVERCAST and others, why microsoft doesn't release a patch ? A true overcast (no terrain view) worked fine in FS95, 98, 2000 and 2002.Ulisses

[Guest cw1011]

If you do a search on "patch" in this forum, you will find hours of reading on the subject - some intelligent, some less so.

[JimmiG 244]

Yes, FS2004 needs a patch IMO. Several things are wrong with mesh, autogen, textures etc. resulting in memory leaks, poor performance and even crashes. But, it seems Microsoft has decided to wait and only fix those things with the release of FS2006.

[John_Cillis 2,406]

The issue with overcast is likely the penalty for the new cloud/weather engine. Every sim has its quirks, and if Microsoft could update FS2004, I would welcome it. But not at the expense of the next version of the sim.The litmus test for a patch--are there any issues that keep FS2004 from running? The Seasonal CTD might be one, but the fix offered on the forums likely would have been the same thing applied by Microsoft. Other than that, it is rare you hear of a CTD that isn't caused by an outside issue--3rd party scenery, etc...That leaves us with cosmetic issues, like the overcast, that would more likely fall under a service release than patch.So, Microsoft hasn't patched a sim since FS2000... What gives? What gives is that you have code many times more complex than FS2000 now. A patch, and even more so a service release, would require a long beta, possibly delaying FS2006 (or whatever) until much later. With any program update you risk breaking something. That means you test everything, top to bottom. That would mean recruiting more beta testers, and dedicating resources to management of the project.What I would like Microsoft to look at in the NEXT release--~Overcast~Haze.... Haze in FS2002 was more realistic I think at all visibilities. In FS2004, you have to chop the vis to 30 miles to get haze to look like it did in FS2002. A good test--look at the horizon with 40 miles vis towards the sunset, and then do it at 30 miles vis. Make sure you are in the vis layer.~A special display menu, which could look at a loaded aircraft and allow a user to choose what pieces would be seen in external view and internal view. No longer would a user have to worry about dynamic wing views--they could choose whether to have them or not. Or, they could remove parts of the aircraft which kill fps. Doubt we'd see this, but it would really be nice.~Lifting the 100,000 foot cap and at least allowing earth orbit (likely wishful thinking, but one can dream)... ~Expand the FDE....~Create a FSUIPC like utility to allow programmers using VB or C++ access to ALL state data in MSFS.My wishes are likely different from yours... That's the challenge of this thread--to keep it civil, and brainstorm ideas however odd that might be doable for the next MSFS...-John

[ulisses 1]

I think I undestand the resource x time factor, but why a large company like microsoft can't release an update and a single guy software like x-plane can release one update/weekUlisses

[kerosene31 349]

Overcast is not a bug. I agree that it is a step backward from other versions, but there is nothing "wrong" with it. I agree with you, but it isn't something that is going to get patched most likely. My guess is to make overcast in the new weather engine would bring the performance down considerably.The CTD thing has been discussed over and over again. The only way to get MS to look at it is for someone to get it to happen consistently with an out of the box version of 2004. I'm talking zero addons. You really can't expect MS to support the sim once we have added a few gigs of 3rd party software to it.

[John_Cillis 2,406]

"but why a large company like microsoft can't release an update and a single guy software like x-plane can release one update/week"Two reasons--Microsoft may be large, but the MSFS team is even smaller than my programming team (and we service a user base of just 1500, all internal). You just can't throw an O/S progtammer onto the MSFS team and expect them to churn out code. It took two years for our programmers to learn all the nuances of the application we produce.Second, X-Plane has a much simpler graphics engine in my opinion. That. and a more generic "world" to fly in. Much of MSFS's development is found in the huge coverage it has worldwide. IOTW, comparing MSFS to any other sim or title is comparing apples to oranges, and the resources aren't as big as one would think...

[ulisses 1]

Maybe overcast is not a bug, but it is a basic feature in any civil flight simulator. About performance, I'm pretty sure there are some ways to fill a level with clouds with good performance since we won't see anything above or bellow it (when working correctly)More about performance, it should be an user option (level of clouds) and not a software default. True overcast in IFR approches is a must in my opinion. Activesky tries to improve it as it can, but FS2004 weather engine has a fail both in overcast and fog.Thanks,Ulisses

[John_Cillis 2,406]

"The only way to get MS to look at it is for someone to get it to happen consistently with an out of the box version of 2004."Referring to the CTD, someone did set up a scenario where an "unretouched" install of FS2004 received the CTD every time. It is indeed a bug. A close second to that is the issue with Autogen, which is also repeatable.If you search back to late fall/early winter, you'll find the scenario where it was proven the CTD is an issue in MSFS. If anyone at Microsoft doubts it's a bug, they are in serious denial :) But I suspect the patch is simply what we've already done. It would be to much to ask Microsoft to redo the code, which could very well be needed to resolve the issue. Or, it could be a simple fix. But you need just as many resources regardless to research and resolve the issue.-John

[kerosene31 349]

John - were the results of that test sent to MS? Just curious.

[Guest SoarPics]

"The only way to get MS to look at it is for someone to get it to happen consistently with an out of the box version of 2004. I'm talking zero addons."I did just this sort of test last winter. Virgin install of the sim. Computer running just fine. Filed reports with MS... and was given the standard "reinstall drivers, reinstall O/S, reinstall game" blah, blah, blah. Frustrating! It wasn't until I did the Terrain.cfg editing that I was finally able to fly again... and of course that fix came from this forum.Regards,Greg

[John_Cillis 2,406]

All I can say is Microsoft is well aware of the problem, along with all the issues we've reported on here over the past year. How serious they consider these issues, that I can't answer. I do believe in the absence of these support forums, and a fix as we found, they would have patched this issue. But user produced fixes quite often suffice vs. a fix from the developer, especially when the community at large accepts the fixes.

[Guest]

FS2006 is a patch for FS2004 :)It's a shame that there is no patch for FS2004. The last patched FS was FS2000...This MSFS is probably one of the very few games that isn't patched :S Jani

[John_Cillis 2,406]

I believe I commented on why I thought the "no patch since FS2000" is the case. I still challenge people replying to this thread to get beyond that, and offer some real improvements for FS2006.Part of that challenge is in realizing there may not be an FS2006 unless the community can get behind and support the MSFS team. There's those at Microsoft who would rather see the MSFS franchise be retired if we as a community demand "mission critical" status to the genre.I also noted that comparing MSFS to other entertainment titles is comparing apples to oranges. No title in my opinion even approaches the complexity of this one. Some may have fancier graphics, etc... But no title has a flight engine, display engine, worldwide database, etc to the degree this one does... That's a lot of balls to juggle compared to say, IL-2 which is confined to one region of the world, or to X-Plane which is more aimed at flight modelling than any other feature.-John

[kerosene31 349]

Well said John - I think sometimes people get hung up on a patch. I mean, patches take a long time to make (speaking as a MS beta tester of for a patch for another game). People are quick to say that there hasn't been a patch since 2000. What exactly was wrong with 2002 where it needed one? Although I don't think there is reason to give up hope yet. I know that MS has patched games a lot less popular after a long time to deal with other issues. It probably won't happen, but you never know. The CTD thing seems like a fairly widespread issue, although I myself have only had the fortune to have one. I applied the fix mentioned and I haven't had one since. Not sure if I fixed it or if I just haven't had the fortunes to run into it again.