59 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

It's not the programming/coding that causes the CTD in "almost" all cases, nor the add-ons.  AVSIM has a great document/source for resolving CTDs, 99.9% of the time it's not the add-on and it's not the platform, it's the end user:

1.  Overclocking
2.  FS platform wasn't updated correctly (boggles my mind at how many people still don't know you have to uninstall a P3D component BEFORE you install the newer one)
3.  Using an add-on not compatible with an updated platform
4.  Reading install instructions, FAQs, AVSIM tips/guides, and README files seems to be taboo even when they contain the answers to avoiding CTDs
5.  Manual hacks and file copying in/out and/or registry changes without understanding what they are doing and why
6.  Corrupted graphics drivers
7.  Corrupted OS (and/or OS update)
8.  3 add-ons that do the same thing all running at the same time
9.  installing the wrong platform add-on (FSX into P3D V4, or install an add-on that says P3D V4.4+ into P3D V4.1 or XP10 aircraft into XP11)

Now I'm getting confused. In your last post you said (with your emphasis):

Microsoft's ESP (aka P3D), and the "new" Microsoft Flight Simulator ... operative being "" in both cases.  Do you think your CTDs will magically go away with code from the same company?

Now you're saying that it actually has nothing to do with the sim code but that CTDs are a user problem: "99.9% of the time it's not the add-on and it's not the platform, it's the end user". So even with the existing old code, CTDs are (almost) nothing to do with the sim code so it's not unreasonable to assume that the new sim will not automatically become the source of CTDs and even that it's not Microsoft's fault, after all. Or am I reading this wrong?

Edited July 13, 20196 yr by vortex681

1 hour ago, Noodle said:

Perhaps people are just suffering from addon fatigue. I dont think I should have to pay $59 for aftermarket ATC, and $79 for aftermarket weather generators, and $19 for aftermarket networking/configuration utilities, just to get the base platform up to a particular standard. 

I concur. I'll happily pay a few bucks for detailed regional scenery, super detailed airports and aircraft, but some addons should have been part of the base package. FSUIPC, PTA, REX xxx, Active Sky, FTX Global, HD Trees to mention a few, are all brilliant, but should have been part of the base sim IMHO. 

2 hours ago, Noodle said:

Perhaps people are just suffering from addon fatigue. I dont think I should have to pay $59 for aftermarket ATC, and $79 for aftermarket weather generators, and $19 for aftermarket networking/configuration utilities, just to get the base platform up to a particular standard. 

 

I would like to us get to a solid platform where the only addons that I will need are additional aircraft to fly in the base sim.

9 hours ago, Flamingpie said:

Which is why I spend some of my time flying in Aerofly FS 2 and aiwating Deadstick. I can't stop flying for over a year...! P3D is history though. The thought of reinstalling everything from scratch again alone makes me shiver... No more, thank you. I'm done with it. And I don't expect P3D v5 to be some sort of MFS: it will be P4D v4 with a few changes and a new price tag. Again, no more, thank you. I'm done with old tech.

I hopped into P3Dv4 so I dont know the past but reading ur post it seems LM charged extra for every new version?

1 hour ago, FlyBaby said:

I would like to us get to a solid platform where the only addons that I will need are additional aircraft to fly in the base sim.

Aircraft and Airports. Thats pretty much the only thing I am willing to spend money on. The rest should be there out of the box. AI used to be freeware before utl and can be freeware in the future.

weather addons will be a thing of the past after seeing the trailer. Rip rex and hifi.

atc will hopefully be massively improved 

LC data from MS should make all orbx stuff obsolete

4 hours ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

I added the complexity so I could have a PC to do weather and report weather  real-time on a separate monitor, I also have a PC that tracks my flight and does flight planning on another monitor ... all displayed real time.  I don't "have to have" this complexity, I chose to have this complexity and love it.  BUT, with complexity comes the potential for problems.

I think many people are incredibly passionate about flightsim and will go to insane lengths to get a realistic experience, but the middle class of flight sim is getting beat up pretty bad by the current experience, and most of them feel like P3D and it's developers don't care.  Of course, there are ways to make it work but if developers want more sales pedantic long-winded explanations of how it can work aren't helping those who are frustrated.  The general feeling is that if you can't OC a 9900k and put a 2080ti in your system and upgrade it again next year, well then you don't deserve flight sim, nor are you dedicated enough.  Warranted or not that's P3D and the addon worlds PR problem.  XP11 has benefited soooo much from this and it's crazy to me that the P3D world just kind of says it's the user, not us, we provided the explanation in a 55-page manual, not our fault you didn't read it.  Should have posted in one of the 15 forums, waited for a response, searched the posts instead of worrying about flying your plane in the 2-hour window you have once or twice a week between raising a family, working a job, being a part of your community, and mowing the lawn.

I don't see how P3D developers can't wrap their head around the fact that what is draining the user base and limiting sales isn't necessarily the cost and quality and ability of the addons but the ecosystem and general performance.  People want to read manuals about planes, not manuals about file management and forums for a .bgl so the scenery loads.  They would be fine dealing with CTDs from time to time and other annoyances if they felt confident the problem could simply be turned off and turned back on when it was fixed by the developer.

 

1 hour ago, FlyBaby said:

I would like to us get to a solid platform where the only addons that I will need are additional aircraft to fly in the base sim.

Highly detailed airports also would be ok to be delivered throught add-ons. You shouldn't expect every airport being detailed on the base sim.

Default airports should be good, but not at the same level of the payware/custom/handmade add-on airports. Something based on real data + something like the X-plane gateway (freeware airports made by the community, using the default art assets from the SDK) would be good enought to have as default.

Also Microsoft can improve some/a few of the major/most important airports around the globe, like they did with KLAX.

7 minutes ago, DaWu said:

LC data from MS should make all orbx stuff obsolete

In my opinion, there will be space for Orbx on the airports and some aspects of the regional sceneries.

They could generate cityscapes and use their own data to fill places (if they exist) where the Microsoft data isn't good enought. I still hope they will be limited to the airports (just because the default scenery would be good enought), but if the scenery has flaws, would be nice to se them filling in the spaces.\

 

We will see.

52 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

I get what you're saying, you want more in a base product, and it looks like that will happen, but there will always be improvements to anything ever created on the software front (from games to flight sims) ... it's the inevitable march of progress ... you don't need to embrace it, but that's not going to stop it.

That's all I'm saying. The rest is just word choice (the phrase "separating me from my money" wasn't meant as a pejorative).

I've had a 20 year career in civil aviation, and 35ish years of experience as a flight sim user and amateur developer. So I'd argue that I generally have at least as good, or perhaps better, understanding of the complexities of both real-world aviation concepts as well as their simulated counterparts compared to the next guy. 

I purposely didn't specify product names, or what my particular standards are, because I think my personal preferences are immaterial to my point and I dont want to impose my views on others. I just think there's a reason why there seems to be a measurable amount of pushback regarding the current landscape of the third party ecosystem. 

It shines through in the protestations of those arguing MSFS will be no real improvement over their current installation of [simulator] with [multiple addons].

Speaking for myself, I'm tired of applying dozens of spot fixes to an aging and decrepit platform just to make it palatable enough to muddle through. I look forward to what I hope is a revolutionary iteration of the franchise, and a what could be a welcome change to current standard practice.

Again, assuming there's going to be an SDK and favorable terms, the third party ecosystem will have plenty of space in which to operate. But I hope it won't be the same space as in FSX and its derivatives. Meaning you guys might need adapt.

Or maybe I'm wrong and none of this matters. It is, after all, just a game.

Edited July 14, 20196 yr by Noodle

34 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

But if you think XP11 doesn't suffer similar problems then you don't have enough add-ons for XP11.

I'm surprised that people don't realize this. P3d4 and XP11 provide the same level of performance, given similar settings, add-ons and hardware. Gee, I wonder why?

So much unloading going here...nice to see so much FS passion happening again.  My reaction to this topic was "click bait", and here I am!  BTW, though I think FSX looks like "pants" (whatever that really means), I still find FSX a great way to relax: just kick back in the VC and enjoy the flight NOW...the future will take care of itself (right?) 🙃.

3 hours ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

I'll disagree with you on this point, how many Microsoft developers posted here or anywhere during FSX and FSX SP2 development?  As far as I know, just one Phil Taylor (maybe a few private lurkers with obfuscated UserIds).  If you go over to LM's forums you will see at least 5 or 6 actual P3D developers interacting with and listening to end users.

You are right.  They do respond to most reasonable posts in their forum thoughtfully, intelligently and with good intent.  And to your credit and Simbol, you have both put up with a lot of garbage and still pushed to make the flight sim experience better for a lot of people.  I use the proverbial "we" loosely, but I do get the feeling there is a frustrating gap from top to bottom or barrier to entry that needs to be addressed in a better fashion.  Not sure if that makes sense, but I don't feel like P3D trajectory is going to quite get us there as it is now.  

 

3 hours ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

I know you don't want "details"

I spend some of my free time writing on a simulator message board as a hobby, of course, I want details!  All the respect in the world for another perspective, no matter what my amateur baseless ranting opinion is on it 🙂

Edited July 14, 20196 yr by TravelRunner404

This is all exciting to me all this banter and to see which will be the top dog simulator. Oh and to the op, not flying either until MSFS 2020 arrives.  Saving a ton of money too!  Just finishing up repaints for few aircraft and use MCX to check for errors.

6 hours ago, DaWu said:

Aircraft and Airports. Thats pretty much the only thing I am willing to spend money on. The rest should be there out of the box. AI used to be freeware before utl and can be freeware in the future.

weather addons will be a thing of the past after seeing the trailer. Rip rex and hifi.

atc will hopefully be massively improved 

LC data from MS should make all orbx stuff obsolete

 

6 hours ago, ca_metal said:

Highly detailed airports also would be ok to be delivered throught add-ons. You shouldn't expect every airport being detailed on the base sim.

Default airports should be good, but not at the same level of the payware/custom/handmade add-on airports. Something based on real data + something like the X-plane gateway (freeware airports made by the community, using the default art assets from the SDK) would be good enought to have as default.

Also Microsoft can improve some/a few of the major/most important airports around the globe, like they did with KLAX.

I agree with the airports, I left them out because I rarely buy them myself.

However, I can certainly understand the demand for higher quality airports than what would come in the base sim.

 

On ‎7‎/‎12‎/‎2019 at 4:48 PM, byork said:

The problem is that unless FS2020 is highly backwards compatible (and I suspect it won't be, but who knows), then you could very well be waiting for YEARS before you start seeing the PMDG 737's and FSLabs Airbuses, etc., ported into FS2020.

If you want a glimpse of the ghost of Christmas future, just take a look at the PMDG Jetstream.  They still can't get it running in P3D v4 with all its system running properly, and FSX and P3D are very similar.

So I hope you like your default planes 🙂

My personal guess as a developer is that most people will be using P3D V5 in 2020 and 2021, and then once PMDG, Aerosoft, FSLabs etc., start figuring out how FS2020 works then people will start moving over.

 

 

This is exactly the point: to be sure, there might be a release of a new stock sim in 2020 - but it will be another 5-15 years before MS 2020 has the same Level of addon support that FSX Steam and P3D now have.