Key things MS Should Not do

[sightseer 895]

its been said already in this thread but id like to say also that a flight planner is much needed and as accurate as possible GPS and FMC should exist.  Its fun to learn how these things work and its even more fun to use them properly. there should be an easy mode but functionality should exist so learners can progress.

 

what I dont want to see is a set of flying lessons that fail you for ridiculous reasons like doing 6 knots down a taxiway or a landing where some imaginary passenger complains you hit a bump.

my idea of learning centers more around airport and airspace procedures.

Edited July 29, 2019 by sightseer

[Paraffin 2,197]

5 hours ago, Flamingpie said:

1. A flight planner IS a core sim feature...! You can't have a flight sim without a planner. That would be ridiculous. It doesn't have to be an FFPX-like planner (in fact, it shouldn't be!) but it also shouldn't be as basic and clunky as the FSX (or P3D) planner. 

FYI, there is no flight planner at all in X-Plane 11, and yet it's relatively successful in this niche hobby of ours. 🙂

In XP, the assumption is that you'll do your flight planning in your preferred offline or online software like real pilots would do, before you hop into your aircraft and load up the GPS or FMS with your plan. There is also a technical limitation in XP, where you can't see anything in the map beyond the currently loaded Lat/Long scenery tile. That might be a legacy RAM limitation, making it difficult to include a flight planner without re-working the entire way the scenery engine works. Anyway, the point is that people manage without one in XP, using outside planners (LittleNavMap in my case). 

I'm not saying the new MSFS shouldn't have a default flight planner, because it may help sell the sim, and might be required for included features like missions. I don't think it has to be full-featured, and it probably won't be. 

[irrics 1,517]

Let's not do everything the way X-Plane does it please.

We could run a whole forum subsection just picking nits at the strange design decisions and tradeoffs X-Plane has made over time.

[cepact 517]

this topic is brought to you by the treasonous money hungry addons developers lobby, they want a flight simulator with the least features so that they can steal more money from you. Remove this topic and ban these thieves.

Edited July 29, 2019 by cepact

[Paraffin 2,197]

52 minutes ago, irrics said:

Let's not do everything the way X-Plane does it please.

Nobody here is asking for that. 

[irrics 1,517]

Just now, Paraffin said:

Nobody here is asking for that. 

Good

In fact there's very little I want from how XP does things if I'm being honest.

How 3rd party stuff gets installed and managed is nice - I will say that.

I want MSFS to chart its own course.  If people want XP stuff or design philosophy, they can actually just use XP.

[roarkr 104]

I do not want MS to NOT give full support to modern multiprocessors. The more cores the better FPS and fluidity

Edited July 29, 2019 by roarkr

[F737MAX 5,535]

Quote

Key things MS Should Not do

Listen to people telling them what not to do.

We can't even get a majority consensus on whether the new sim should be backwards compatible or not.
I'm all in favour of making positive suggestions on what we'd like to see, even if I don't necessarily agree with a specific idea that has been put forward.
 

Edited July 29, 2019 by F737NG

[n4gix 4,947]

7 minutes ago, F737NG said:

Listen to people telling them what not to do.

It's ironic that I just came back to this thread to post nearly the same thing as you just posted.

[F737MAX 5,535]

1 minute ago, n4gix said:

It's ironic that I just came back to this thread to post nearly the same thing as you just posted. 

Great minds...?

[Greazer 1,320]

To be clear:

Core (high priority):

GUI, Graphics engine and rendering, flight modeling/systems/data, physics, scenery loading, hardware config, sound system, environments effects etc. 

Non Core (low priority):

Utility tools, advanced flight planners, moving maps, flashy plugins, charts, phone/tablet apps, bears, giraffes, ultra realistic planes. 

They should focus on the Core features first.  Now if they master the core features and build an insanely good multi-core engine with RTX ray traced cockpits, Hdr, ambient occlusion, DLSS, high fps, then sure spend some extra time on the flight planner!  

[goates 576]

11 hours ago, F737NG said:

Listen to people telling them what not to do.

Sometimes ignoring users and others is the best thing a developer can do.

https://www.polygon.com/features/2019/7/2/18651880/the-time-i-tried-to-ruin-halo-2-user-research

Edited July 30, 2019 by goates