1 hour ago, Bobsk8 said:

I can remember when MS flight was around, and people whined and complained about every little thing they didn't like, day after day. I posted a few times back then that sooner or later, MS was going to get tired of reading these endless negative comments from all the "experts", and pull the plug on the entire thing. Guess what, that is exactly what happened. My feeling now  is if you are that unhappy with MSFS, move on.. Go to X plane or P3D, or DCS world, and let the rest of us enjoy what we think is a good sim. 

This . 

1 hour ago, Bobsk8 said:

I can remember when MS flight was around, and people whined and complained about every little thing they didn't like, day after day. I posted a few times back then that sooner or later, MS was going to get tired of reading these endless negative comments from all the "experts", and pull the plug on the entire thing. Guess what, that is exactly what happened. My feeling now  is if you are that unhappy with MSFS, move on.. Go to X plane or P3D, or DCS world, and let the rest of us enjoy what we think is a good sim. 

Disagree.
MS Flight failed because the business model was flawed and no-one, neither add-on developers nor consumers, liked or wanted anything to do with it.

MS and Asobo appear to have understood the needs of the flight simmer, gamer and add-on developer better this time around. It should be a success, so long as they keep improving elements of the sim that make it undeniably a vastly better experience for everyone.
It's well within our rights as customers to want what we were led to believe with the pre-release build-up.
It's not a million miles away from where the sim needs to be, however, some of us are vocal to ensure that the development team know that certain aspects of the sim are not acceptable. This is especially true when we've seen how things looked at launch compared to now.
 

I see it as mostly the same, with the live weather bug not working after the first flight still in place, but with some brand new bugs introduced by the various updates.

56 minutes ago, F737NG said:

MS Flight failed because the business model was flawed and no-one, neither add-on developers nor consumers, liked or wanted anything to do with it.

Exactly. Its development was completely misguided and they were not open to feedback from third parties. All that mattered was whether it would sell or not.

It's also worth noting that around the same time Microsoft had started their plan to terminate the Games For Windows Live nonsense, and Microsoft Flight had a very tight integration to the service. Detaching the game from that was probably deemed not worth it considering its mediocre success.

This new simulator has a much stronger base and a development team that are actually willing to listen and are putting lots of love and passion into it. Although I am disappointed by some of the hiccups along the way and I'm not getting the same enjoyment I did back at launch, I think it is our way into the future so I will fight to make it better, no matter how much complaining it takes. Those who would rather have me and others silenced for discussing its issues, well you can just ignore these threads and enjoy your flights? We are doing the hard work for you. 😄

2 hours ago, F737NG said:

MS and Asobo appear to have understood the needs of the flight simmer, gamer and add-on developer better this time around.

"appear" is most likely the only important word in this sentence to me... otherwise putting "some of" between "needs of" and "the flight simmers..." might better reflect reality at this stage.

Edited February 24, 20215 yr by RXP

What came out in August was not a total surprise when you think back to the 6 months prior to release. The deafness of Asobo to the feedbacks from the serious alpha testers about aircraft  and the alpha screenshots showing flaws were worrying . Add to that a half-baked product almost going straight from alpha to release.   If there was an alpha. More like server telemetry.  

What was not predictable was the reprehensible downgrading of some aspects of the game since for unclear reasons. 

What should we expect in six months from now ? I don't know 😁.  Yes there is a lot passion and will to do good in the team. But there also is an apparent lack of rigor in managing the updates and needed corrections which borders carelessness, and contrary to the common wisdom of this forum, I do not think that they listen much to their customer base.   A little bit maybe, not much anyway.

 But as our friend says

1 hour ago, ChaoticBeauty said:

I will fight to make it better, no matter how much complaining it takes.

 It is worth it. The sim is already quite decent and has potential. 

And to the worshippers of the Holy Asobo Church, yes we are here to stay. Get used to it. To get a better sim of course and also, maybe, just to annoy you 🤣

 

Edited February 24, 20215 yr by Dominique_K

"Think about what we have!"

"Think about what is missing!"

"It's beautiful!"
"It's buggy!"

"Look at how good the default scenery is!"

"Look at how bad the default systems are!"

"But what about FBW? Working Title? Salty Simulations?"

"They're broken after every update!"

etc, etc, etc...

 

Where do I see MSFS in a year? Better than it is now, hopefully better performance from DX12, annoying bugs (tree density, spikes) completely taken care of, community addons (FBW specifically) integrated into the marketplace* (or even the sim directly!)...

 

*Asobo is already trying to do this.

 

I hope I can get a GTX 3080 with 20GB VRAM by then. 🙂

1 hour ago, RXP said:

"appear" is most likely the only important word in this sentence to me... otherwise putting "some of" between "needs of" and "the flight simmers..." might better reflect reality at this stage.

Well they are trying at least. They still have much to learn, but slowly they're getting there.

1 hour ago, Dominique_K said:

The deafness of Asobo to the feedbacks from the serious alpha testers about aircraft  and the alpha screenshots showing flaws were worrying . Add to that a half-baked product almost going straight from alpha to release.   If there was an alpha. More like server telemetry.  

Unfortunately this seems to be quite true, considering what some respectable members had to say about the Alpha testing process. I suspect that Microsoft wanted to rush the product out though towards the end, there was no real Beta process and with that maybe some of the more terrible issues like the installation manager could have been prevented. Hopefully the Steam review bombing taught them a lesson. As for Asobo, it appears that after launch they are slowly coming around and trying to listen to feedback more. I think that they initially underestimated the knowledge of the community.

1 hour ago, Dominique_K said:

But there also is an apparent lack of rigor in managing the updates and needed corrections which borders carelessness

I'm sincerely hoping the new beta testing initiative will help new updates go better and put an end to this whack-a-mole situation. A massive project requires a massive QA team, and clearly their current approach is failing to deliver even with the one-month cadence.

1 hour ago, Concodroid said:

community addons (FBW specifically) integrated into the marketplace* (or even the sim directly!)

Jörg said that they will become available in the Marketplace. Although they will continue fixing bugs, they want the default airliners to remain at entry level.

52 minutes ago, ChaoticBeauty said:

they want the default airliners to remain at entry level.

that's it though isn't it, no one wants to admit it or accept it but at the end of the day "entry level" is just a nice way of saying we want it to remain a dum-down simulator where anyone can simply take off on a taxi way and be part of it.

Hopefully better dynamic weather because this sim is a little dull compared to the old MSFS series where you can change the weather and wind in different parts of the world and the rate of it instead of the same type of weather globally when you fly around.And hopefully 3rd parties adding AI planes and traffic plans if Asobo allows them access to it.

12 minutes ago, FPStewy said:

that's it though isn't it, no one wants to admit it or accept it but at the end of the day "entry level" is just a nice way of saying we want it to remain a dum-down simulator where anyone can simply take off on a taxi way and be part of it.

Why would that apply to the entire simulator? They specifically said they do not plan to go deeper with the default airliners and would rather leave study-level aircraft to the third parties, which is one of the current goals for the SDK's development. Does any other consumer flight simulator feature a default study-level airliner?

1 hour ago, ChaoticBeauty said:

Well they are trying at least. They still have much to learn, but slowly they're getting there.

Sure they are, and they are learning from the best I have no doubt about it, otherwise they wouldn't spend so much time, daily and even late on Saturday nights, helping Aerosoft developers and implementing what's needed for the CRJ. I can tell you with same treatment you'd been flying the RXP GTN for 6 months already with FS2020 😂

22 minutes ago, FPStewy said:

that's it though isn't it, no one wants to admit it or accept it but at the end of the day "entry level" is just a nice way of saying we want it to remain a dum-down simulator where anyone can simply take off on a taxi way and be part of it.

As @ChaoticBeauty points out, no flight sim comes with a default 'study level' airliner. The FSX A321 and B747 were basic, simple introductions for beginners and non-study level simmers to heavy metal flying.
I know that if I were presented with a PMDG or FSLabs standard of aircraft when I first started, I probably would have found it far too complicated and prevented me from enjoying flight simming for nearly 25 years.

If the FBW team can fix the autopilot logic, the mod could turn the A32N into the MSFS equivalent of the Zibo 737 mod for XP.
That would be something very impressive for a free aeroplane.

8 minutes ago, F737NG said:

If the FBW team can fix the autopilot logic,

If I'm not mistaken, they are not fixing it (in the sense Asobo could learn and implement the fixes), they are re-coding it and directly controlling the aircraft control surfaces instead. It is not dissimilar to how every other airliner of "study level" quality is made, but this is also unlike the Zibo which if I'm not mistaken, is using the XP11 autopilot system because at least in XP11, it seems to be properly done enough to do the job correctly for such airliner. I sincerely hope supporting FBW and WT won't be limited to just placing these in the maket place, otherwise, what's the fuss behind all the PR they do around "their support to FBW and WT" ?!

Edited February 24, 20215 yr by RXP