17 minutes ago, rjfry said:

The Dev stated very frim it gives the user VFR anywhere they wish to fly that`s the big difference from previous FS, and that was the focus and to me it`s moved closer to XP than FSX legacy, the only aircraft available to the testers was GA they never got hands on a jet but a A320 will be in the sim they said so. again I can`t help thinking they are going to leave most of the big aircraft to third party`s like FSW was intending.

What's wrong with that? How many of us serious simmers used the default A321 B737 or B747? There is a difference in not providing airliners and not providing the tools to create proper airliners. It's all about providing the potential. And they said this is supposed to be an evolving sim. There is no way they can provide all real world aircrafts on day one. Think of it as an aircraft and the available repaints it's shipped with. Give it time and you'll see repaints all over the place provided. 

9 hours ago, Noodle said:

VFR CAPABLE...not focused. If that were the case, they wouldn't have added SIDs and STARs, or an Airbus, or all the major airports, or VORs, or GPS, or G1000/3000, or...

Exactly, why would they have added SIDs and STARs just for a R400? I suppose liners are still under development, but I am pretty sure they will have an airliner event in half a year or so. They will have to keep us entertained over the next year anyway.

Kind regards, Michael

SID`S and STAR`s may well be part of the subscription model.

I don't know but why go through all the trouble trying to bring the most realistic sim, show us footage of an A320, but neglect proper airline procedures. And I am not talking about actually bringing an high-end A320 on day one. The potential to do so (and let the 3rd party take care of the details) is more than enough for me. That's all that really matters... Bringing a base world and let the community pump life into it. They said realism is their top priority. And quality is going to need help from the community. Think of the base quality of FSX/P3D and what was possible. Now imagine what can be done out of the base of the new MSFS. 

11 minutes ago, OSJJ1985 said:

I don't know but why go through all the trouble trying to bring the most realistic sim, show us footage of an A320, but neglect proper airline procedures. And I am not talking about actually bringing an high-end A320 on day one. The potential to do so (and let the 3rd party take care of the details) is more than enough for me. That's all that really matters... Bringing a base world and let the community pump life into it. They said realism is their top priority. And quality is going to need help from the community. Think of the base quality of FSX/P3D and what was possible. Now imagine what can be done out of the base of the new MSFS. 

Completely agree. 

Create a solid world base and sim infrastructure to allow third parties an unincumbered,  experience to create the best and most realistic representation of any aircraft - with everything that involves.  Effects, animations, displays, performance, flight models, textures.  A great SDK should make this process easy for those who know how, without unnecessarily long-winded, complex workarounds to achieve simple things.

47 minutes ago, OSJJ1985 said:

I don't know but why go through all the trouble trying to bring the most realistic sim, show us footage of an A320, but neglect proper airline procedures. And I am not talking about actually bringing an high-end A320 on day one. The potential to do so (and let the 3rd party take care of the details) is more than enough for me. That's all that really matters... Bringing a base world and let the community pump life into it. They said realism is their top priority. And quality is going to need help from the community. Think of the base quality of FSX/P3D and what was possible. Now imagine what can be done out of the base of the new MSFS. 

True but people don't want to another year to get there hands on this but they will have to then maybe another how long to get what you want, I can see the forums now with rants about when are we going to get ??????

16 minutes ago, rjfry said:

True but people don't want to another year to get there hands on this but they will have to then maybe another how long to get what you want, I can see the forums now with rants about when are we going to get ??????

You'd prefer they scrap/delay the project, because the the community won't want to wait another 1,2 or 3 years? I'd gladly take it earlier and enjoy the VFR for the time being (enough to explore there) , rather then wait another 5 years so they can get every single premium aircraft to transfer to MSFS. 

Edited October 3, 20196 yr by OSJJ1985

2 minutes ago, OSJJ1985 said:

You'd prefer they scrap/delay the project, because the the community won't want to wait another 1,2 or 3 years? I'd gladly take it earlier and enjoy the VFR for the time being (enough to explore there) , rather then wait another 5 years so they can get every single premium aircraft to transfer to MSFS. 

No that not what I'm saying today users have no patient's they want it now that was my point we are not going to get it, I have a flight sim and will be using it after MSFS is released but it seem some don't want to wait that long.  

7 hours ago, rjfry said:

SID`S and STAR`s may well be part of the subscription model.

What subscription model?

After all that we've seen, I can't help but think that people predicting MFS failure because of lack of seasons or ATC at launch, are gravely delusional.

Me, give me VR before seasons!

2 minutes ago, Murmur said:

Me, give me VR before seasons!

No way!  Seasons before VR!   

Or, I want it all.  How about that.

Well after going from FSX to XP11 when the beta was released, I noticed that the main difference between both simulators is mainly the difference between two tradition of developement processes. One being a big corporate with a solid budget to deliver a comprehensive software and another, an indie group...  

As we know FSX out of the box had a comprehensive set of features delivered to the users by MS (ATC / Weather with precipitations / Seasons based on location and time of year / AI airplanes, cars and ships / etc etc). By doing so, MS set a sort of (a risky and ambitious?) standard as for what features a PC simulator should have natively.

This sort of (generous) software development strategy that MS tried to change with MS Flight did not work for MS...And this is something that MS will have to deal with in my opinion with MSFS 2020...

Now on the other hand, Laminar Research had a different tradition with X-Plane. As an indie group with limited resources and budget, they always released an MVP and for the 4 or 5 years after the initial release, multiple updates add some features and polich what's there. However, the updates of any version of X-Plane, never managed to match what FSX had (out of the box) and it was always the job of Add-ons to fill the gaps.

For example X-Plane 10.0 was like the beginning of a concept and like some bits and pieces of experiments of technology and features. But the best of all, XP users were OK with this. It was just after 10.5 that the simulator started to become a solid comprehensive software in my opinion...

And it's the case of X-Plane 11 today: with its 11.40 iteration, it still does not deliver natively many of the features FSX had. Add-ons fill these gaps... Yet again, the users of X-Plane almost never complain about this the way MSFS users do, simply because they come from the tradition established by LR of indie style of developement (MVP + updates)...

In fact, it's us, ex-FSX users who migrated to XP11 who find LR tradition strange and we complain about XP11 still not having what MSFS had many years ago... And XP users do not like this attitude obviously 🙂

So I think, MS is trying again ,in my opinion, in a way similar to what they did with Flight, but without the mistake of reducing the world to one region and closing the sim to add-ons, to shift the development from the tradition of a feature rich FSX and to deliver a basic product that could be eventually updated to possibly match what FSX had... Perhaps using more advanced techniques and technology the new engine allows...

This is why I have the feeling that when users will get used to the new engine's beauty and realism, they will no doubt start complaining about the lack of this or that feature that FSX (or other applications of ESP) had.

And MS will have to find a way to deal with this... Maybe they will observe how this new title will be doing and then will decide if they will bring all the features that FSX had...

Or, by opening the sim to add-ons, they might simply wait and let 3rd party developers take care of the missing features and fill the gaps (Seasons, ATC etc.) just like Laminar Research did.

Or maybe not, we will see...

Edited October 3, 20196 yr by Claviateur

43 minutes ago, Claviateur said:

Yet again, the users of X-Plane almost never complain about this the way MSFS users do, simply because they come from the tradition established by LR of indie style of developement (MVP + updates)...

Well - we/they complain..

Its’ just that many of us have finally abandoned XP as we have accepted that a lot of it will never happen, simply due to how things are run and what Austin prioritizes, etc.

We don't even know what features MSFS will include or what they will keep open for future updates. They haven't even reached alpha yet. It's way too premature to speculate what people might complain about or might be left to 3rd party right now. 

 

The idea of "let 3rd parties provide stuff" is not really the best.  A lot of people never buy any add-ons, they would much rather have items available out of the box.  Provide a 737, a 747, etc.  I would love to see tons of aircraft, even if they weren't at the same level the 3rd parties use.