What are your "must haves" for MFS2020

[MikeT707 1,181]

It has to support VR. 

[andyjohnston.net 617]

I hope to see more ai!  Using P3Dv4, I fly into the NYC area, I'm the only one for miles around, with my sliders all set to max.

[LHookins 3,102]

Andy:  I have airline traffic set to 30% in P3Dv4 and I see all sorts of aircraft.  I don't see that many out the window, but they all show up on Active Sky's weather map.  There may be more than you think, but not enough to cause you to have to hold for a couple of hours as might happen real life at a crowded airport.

I'm hoping to see wing flex, not only available in the sim but implemented where appropriate.  Not really a "must have" though.

My only must have is the ability to run the sim without having to use significant bandwidth as I'm on a limited satellite connection.  

Hook

[mccracken 26]

I'd really love ATC voice accents to be more local to the region you're flying, rather than an American accent globally.

[FireRx 18]

 

On 6/25/2019 at 7:01 PM, Paraffin said:

A helicopter.

Preferably both a light trainer like a R22 or Cabri, and also a medium twin engine like a Bell 412 or AW139 with the fancy stuff like force trim release and 3 or 4-axis autopilot.

The minimum flight model requirement would be entry and exit from ground effect, and a realistic simulation of single engine failure and autorotation to the ground for recovery.

It would be nice to have more advanced flight model features like vortex ring state, retreating blade stall, and mast bump. Because I can get that in XP and DCS. But that's not a deal breaker if the rest of the flight dynamics are good and there is a compelling world to fly in, with good scenery and weather modeling.

I won't say it's "no deal" if there are no helicopters in the initial release. But seriously... if you're gonna call it a "flight simulator" and there are no helicopters? That means you're either making a very pared-down sim, or else there is something close to the ground you don't want us to look at. 😄

Would be the perfect opportunity to introduce the Bell 505 Jet Ranger to the Flight sim world as far as Helicopters.   the 206 and 407's are older frames now.  To the best of my knowledge no one has made a Bell 505 yet.  I've been looking for it. 

[Paraffin 2,197]

1 hour ago, FireRx said:

Would be the perfect opportunity to introduce the Bell 505 Jet Ranger to the Flight sim world as far as Helicopters.   the 206 and 407's are older frames now.  To the best of my knowledge no one has made a Bell 505 yet.  I've been looking for it. 

That's a cool new entry in the "light single turboshaft" category as a replacement for the venerable Jet Ranger series. I agree it would be good to have something like that in a new sim. 

Ideally, I'd like to see a range of models from light piston trainers, to the 505 and Hughes 500, then up into the medium twins and eventually into the heavy stuff like Chinooks and the new CH-53K King Stallion heavy lift military helo.

We're not going to see all that right away though. So my vote (not that we're voting) would be for a Calibri or R22 for light 'n easy sightseeing with minimal systems modeling. And then one medium twin of their choice, to show off the ability to model more advanced flight controls, turbine engine management, and autopilot.

[jcomm 5,912]

Having a completely new flight dynamics model for rotary wing would be great, but we already have at least to very good platforms for that - X-Plane and DCS World - so, MS FS will have to get it at least as good as that...

 

[vortex681 806]

5 hours ago, jcomm said:

Having a completely new flight dynamics model for rotary wing would be great, but we already have at least to very good platforms for that - X-Plane and DCS World - so, MS FS will have to get it at least as good as that...

 

XP is better than default FSX and P3D but it's still a long way from how a real helicopter works. DCS is probably the best effort so far.

[aleex 551]

28 minutes ago, vortex681 said:

XP is better than default FSX and P3D but it's still a long way from how a real helicopter works. DCS is probably the best effort so far.

I love how Huey is handled. And I can't event touch the default XP11 helis... so yeah. At least for me, DCS is one of (if not the one) best out here right now. Something similar would be great. 

[blueshark747 1,843]

 

I’m hoping for missions like we’ve had in FSX. Thats where MSFS stands apart from the rest imo. The immersion, the voices, the scenarios. The multiplayer life and community it creates...FSX multiplayer ATCs, formation teams,VAs still continue to breath and thrive from the 13 year old sim. I’m still actively enjoying FSX everyday.

Xplane11 and P3D are great for what they are but they could never top being as fruitful as FSX in impact and duration.

I’m praying for

in depth systems

Complex and very immersive missions

even smoother multiplayer network code

solid optimization on modern hardware(even though i find cfg tweaking interesting and fun would be nice for others not to have to worry about any)

optimized VR capability of course

the same open ended software freedom as FSX(doubtful if its gonna be under windows games store..those titles are drm layered and restricted as ft knox)

open world features such as first person avatars, operable ground vehicles, actual smoothed ground road/pavement elevation, non clipping through static bridges etc etc 

[ark 1,288]

I will need a FSUIPC - like tool, especially the capability to write scripts. Without that I'll likely stay with P3D.  My sim interest is in flying IFR procedures since I can no longer do that in the RW. As such I have written many Lua scripts using FSUIPC to enhance my flying experience. For example, I have a script that lets me enter radio frequencies, altitudes, vertical speeds, headings, courses, etc using the keyboard number pad instead of having to hunt for elusive mouse click spots while bouncing around in the clouds. While I understand the excitement over the improved scenery it seems MS2020 will provide, improved scenery is of secondary importance to me since I'm typically in IFR conditions for 95% of most flights so my focus is inside the cockpit. And my flights usually start and end on the runway -- I'm not particularly interested in taxiing around an airport anymore. The only addon scenery I use is FTX Global, and I find it more than adequate for my needs. On the other hand, support for improvements in a/c flight dynamics, ATC operations, navigation systems and weather modeling would be nice to have.

Al

Edited July 28, 2019 by ark

[irrics 1,517]

22 hours ago, ark said:

I will need a FSUIPC - like tool, especially the capability to write scripts.

It honestly sounds like you should just keep using P3D, no?

(not being snarky at all - just really sounds like you already have most of what you want - at least the really important parts.)

I'm curious why better flight dynamics would really be of that much interest if you're 95% IFR, which is so much about procedures and the flow of operations and interaction with avionics and so very little about actually "flying a plane" (I say this as an IFR pilot myself).

I guess I'm just a little weary of what direction things might go if scripting tools and the like are a thing here.  Are we at risk of ending up with hard to troubleshoot add-ons and performance issue black holes, etc?

Edited July 29, 2019 by n4gix
REMOVED EXCESSIVE QUOTE!!! Please stop quoting the entire post you are replying to!

[ark 1,288]

2 hours ago, irrics said:

I'm curious why better flight dynamics would really be of that much interest ....

Simple -- I prefer to mainly hand fly, rather than watch "George" do it,  so realistic a/c flight characteristics are important to me.

 

2 hours ago, irrics said:

I guess I'm just a little weary of what direction things might go if scripting tools and the like are a thing here.

I understand your concern and hopeful expectations. However,  I expect the new sim to be on the order of 70% evolutionary and about 30% revolutionary (mainly in the areas of scenery and perhaps weather, and the delivery of such). As with any large software development MS has defined a set of performance specifications (goals). To the extend existing code or algorithms will support those goals I think they will be reused. There is little to be gained, and it's expensive, to try and reinvent something if what is in hand is deemed by the developers to do the job. I also think that if the new goals can be achieved while still providing some degree of backward compatibility it is in MS's interest to do so. Being able to salvage part of one's existing sim investment will appeal to many potential users.

Others, I know, have a vastly different view, which is fine. After all, none of us really knows the direction things will go at this point. It will be quite interesting to see how it all eventually turns out.

Al

 

Edited July 28, 2019 by ark

[irrics 1,517]

1 hour ago, ark said:

Simple -- I prefer to mainly hand fly, rather than watch "George" do it,  so realistic a/c flight characteristics are important to me.

 

Hand flying IFR on a home sim?

oof. 

Do you have force feedback controls at least?

Edited July 28, 2019 by irrics

[ark 1,288]

1 hour ago, irrics said:

Hand flying IFR on a home sim?

oof. 

Do you have force feedback controls at least?

What?? Use force feedback controls -- and take all the challenge out of that double NDB approach !?  😉

Edited July 29, 2019 by ark