2 hours ago, Chuck Dreier said:

Yes, this is a big disappointment given all the hype.  Thankfully my P3D is installed on a dedicated SSD and so there are no worries.  I feel for the people who uninstalled P3D expecting something special.

There are loads of issues, it actually is a beta! But none of these issues is fundamental. This will still be the #1 sim. It just needs more time.

Edited August 18, 20205 yr by tweekz

4 minutes ago, robert young said:

NDA's which block honest assessments by some quite capable people are a bad idea. NDAs originated through the desire to protect genuine innovation or methodologies that needed to be protected. But the methodologies here have been fully publicised, except that some of them turned out to be not quite so revolutionary.

It will mostly be ironed out in time, but it is just another example of marketing overwhelming objective observation.

NDA's for software development testers are standard and necessary.

1 minute ago, tweekz said:

There are loads of issues, it actually is a beta! But inone of these issues is fundamental. This will still be the #1 sim. It just needs more time.

The foundation here is really something special. Plus it's got a 900 pound gorilla standing firmly behind it. I'm crossing my fingers that Asobo pulls a coupe off here by surprising us all with some quick bug fixes. If they go months with no word then things will get ugly. We'll all know soon enough, but as it is, I'm still impressed. Sure 100 different things aren't right, but I really get the sense that it's just a time issue. Understand, this is from someone who owned the largest QA company in the games industry for two decades. I do NOT impress easily and can smell BS a mile away. Aces was at that level with me. Asobo doesn't give me that vibe at all.

4 minutes ago, Agrajag said:

 I'm crossing my fingers that Asobo pulls a coupe off here by surprising us all with some quick bug fixes. If they go months with no word then things will get ugly.

Asobo has been providing us with nearly weekly updates for almost a full year now.

No one should have any reason to believe they're going to go silent on us now.

6 minutes ago, rtodepart said:

You knew exactly what i was trying to say . No need to go back to 1995 or wait till 2045 . I personally say give it a year from today and it will be another story.  And this is The opinion from someone who wants to see this being successful ...

 

I want it to be successful, too. Unlike quite a few simmers, I actually like MSFS - I was first in line to download it with the Kiribati crowd, and I've done very little except fly it since that time. As it's 1am now, I'm having a quick break from my experiments with long-haul MSFS (got about an hour out of KMIA, and then it crashed).

Someone else mentioned "minimum viable product". MSFS does have a bit of that feel to it. This sim is compared in some of the general gaming sites to Euro Truck Simulator in terms of concept. The difference I see is that MSFS has very little content in terms of missions. If I was running MS, i would have made sure there was a little bit more defined content/sense of progression before RTM. Minimum viable product sometimes works, but MS Flight is a good example of where it doesn't.

So far, the wider gaming world seems happy enough with MSFS, so with luck it will survive and prosper. 

While I understand some disappointments (missing airports which have been there in FSX f.e. is a rather annyoing thing), I still do not get it why it is bad or incomplete compared to the base version of FSX or P3D..?

If you pay 200$ (or even 60$) on P3D, how many detailed Boeing/Airbus planes do you get? How many GA aircraft do you get that are modelled well? How many detailed cities or overall scenary quality do you get..? How is the flight planning in P3D more realistic than in MSF or where is the superiority of P3D ATC, where is live weather in P3D (should be a must-have in today´s sims - and I do not accept that the core is still FSX because FSX has had live weather and they sell their V5 full price in the year 2020...)? What change brings V5 other than optical eye candy stuff and DX12 to justify paying a full license again? It still does not look good or has great planes/physics by default, what use does EA have without live weather, how much better is the performance really compared to the competition (and after everybody installs again their add-ons), how with all their autogen issues which is still not loading correctly in V5...?

Not my intention to bash P3D down to death as I will continue flying it when I want some serious IFR,  but I think you are misled when you compare a 200$ Base package + several hundreds $ in add-ons with a freshly released 70$ sim with no add-ons at all. 

Do not get me wrong, I also like flying in P3D, but it is actually not because of P3D itself, but it is PMDG, FSLabs that keep me entertained, while ORBX makes P3D look somewhere near to what the world looks like and then you still need GSX, Active Sky, ProATC or the like just to get it on a level that it can be called a sim in first place...

I love the new sim base. I think the GA models are great and work well enough to please, the Airliners (747/320) are useable at least and flight planning, weather and scenary (even in the lower quality areas) beat anything else out there so far.

I really had lost my interest of simming after mastering PMDG and the like as the most interesting parts left to do was the start up procedures and programming of the FMC or watching GSX people board the plane. Then I watched my plane cruising while listening to music or watch Netflix until it was time to descend. I actually did not enjoy the FLYING itself anymore as there was nothing of worth going on outside the plane.

This has completely changed with MSF as I want to explore and see lots of areas I have not seen/cared in P3D/XP11. It has put back the fascination of FLYING into flight simulations for me, while P3D and XP11 remain on my drive for the more technical simulations (at least until this will be covered in MSF in one or maybe two years).

Yes, it has faults, but why the surprise? There have been enough videos on YouTube which clearly showed up issues like autopilots in Airbus/Boeings, which showed that the FMC and G1000 were basic versions good enough to be used but no additional system depth for the pro simmers should be expected.

Nevertheless, I agree that missing airports like EDDS should have been prevented no matter BING quality. The SDK allows developers to add airports over the base scenary, so ASOBO / MS could have easily compared FSX database versus MSF, identify missing airports and place default layouts available in FSX on top of their blurred/censored scenary as FSX, P3D and XP11 do. And I was a bit surprised of the control assignment menu, which is flexible but a bit complex to set up. Especially when compared to the other menus which have this huge accessibility, the control area is a bit of a pain to go through for each controller and a lot of rather standard HOTAS sticks are recognized but not mapped by default... And when setting it up manually, why not have a list of actions and you can assign every controller directly there instead of having several configs for EACH controller type...? And I do not want to go throught that install issues again... but when it works it works great.

Been flying for several hours and changing regions and planes all the time. Not once did the sim crash on me. Performance is great on my I7 7700k / 1080TI, even Ultra in 4k is working for most parts without any issues despite only having installed 16GB of RAM at the moment (and in heavier areas you can easily adjust literally "on the fly" (f.e. setting render scale to 80%). Loading times are far better than in in the other sims (not fair to compare of course due to the loads of add-ons I have in P3D/XP11), and overall experience is smooth as XP which is masterpiece especially when compared to the insane level of details.

I think Asobo did a great job and brought lots of details into the sim, I did not expect that they deliver planes with every system detailed to the last. Give it some time to mature. Let PMDG / FSLabs release their products to MSF, and once we have a good working IFR and autopilot implementation, then we will have the best of both worlds in one sim. I am very happy to be simming again!

See you in the air!

 

7 minutes ago, Agrajag said:

Sure 100 different things aren't right, but I really get the sense that it's just a time issue.

Same here. With all the stuff not right, it still feels special in most aspects.

10 minutes ago, Agrajag said:

Understand, this is from someone who owned the largest QA company in the games industry for two decades.

Are you talking about yourself? I am curious what company you are talking about? 🙂

11 minutes ago, RobotRock said:

NDA's for software development testers are standard and necessary.

Really? I was approached by Dovetail to help them improve their aircraft. They sent me an NDA form which asked me to sign something saying not only could I not ever discuss anything relating to methodologies (which was perfectly fair) but an additional pledge that I would not even reveal I had been approached. Of course I refused but to be fair to them they still asked me to help them even though I had excoriated their business model in public.

NDAs like this have almost zero legal weight. If a developer is perfectly ok to publish starry eyed approval videos but is not prepared to take a little bit of flak from sincere and well-meaning people possessed of critical faculties then such NDAs serve merely to encourage the fable of the Emperor's New Clothes, where something is nakedly not right but no-one is allowed to say so.

After spending 24 hours with it now, the excitement honestly wore off after exploring my hometown (which looks amazing) and boredom kinda sank in. This is probably due to the lack of 3rd party addons right now, but it will not be my main sim (although I won't stop playing it, either).

The Good:

• The sim has amazing scenery, lighting, and weather... the best we've ever seen and it's not even remotely close.
• The flight modeling is also top notch and the possibilities of 3rd party developers looks bright
• The default GA planes are fun and beautiful (despite a bunch of INOP switches)

The Bad:

• The UI is complete trash when it comes to usability; although it looks nice, it's completely unintuitive in a lot of places. For example, when binding a key that's already bound, it doesn't unbind the original, leaving you with 2 actions bound to 1 key. In what world was this missed during the alpha/beta?! Then there's the camera system which could have a 200 page manual written for it and you'd still not know how it all functions. 
• There's no (obvious) way to change your plane or airport other than exiting out to the main menu and restarting your flight, which is a 2 minute endeavor just to load in (hint: the dev menu allows you to change your plane mid-flight).
• The sim stutters and textures are slow to load, with blurries appearing all around the aircraft. As mentioned in the OP, the autopilot is a complete crapshoot on whether it even works depending on the plane you're in. 
• I was unable to customize weather mid flight while in a Group which sucked. There's no way to see on the VFR map where my friend was when flying, so we had to enable the large and ugly nameplates despite the world map showing their exact location

The list goes on and on with very basic things that I'm sure were reported during the alpha and beta. This game was simply not ready to release but I have to think Asobo knew this but was under pressure from MS to get it out the door.

2 hours ago, UAL4life said:

Really it’s all the downgrades in functionality from FSX that get me. 
 

-Remember when you could open the map mid flight and make a whole new Flightplan?

 

-Remember when you could open the map and click any airport and get all the frequencies/runway information etc for said airport?

 

-Remember when we had a replay function? (Yea I know it’s on the list)

 

and the list goes on... my personal belief is that any sequel should have at very least the features of the previous iteration, but alas I’m alone in that belief. 

They added a new AI created world at a detail never before seen. An actual weather simulation. Not enough new features for you?

1 hour ago, mtr75 said:

The problem is, we were told endlessly how this game would be the death of P3D, that it would make all other flight simulators obsolete. Granted, this was from the bozos on this forum talking trash in the P3D forums, so it's not really Microsoft's fault, but all the jerks over there trashing P3D and telling us all how you're quitting flight sim until this comes out did not do MS any favors. Just saying.

So what you’re saying is - some trolls got under your skin and you took their word as gospel?

Trolls do nobody any favours. 

2 hours ago, Colonel X said:

Still an achievement how Asobo tricked all major gaming outlets, even the most respected ones, to shell out the 10/10 reviews. I mean of course a regular gamer can't grasp a flight simulator, but there are many, many issues that go unnoticed in the reviews.

The height of flight simmer arrogance. Only you can see the truth and everyone else is a sheeple.

10 minutes ago, robert young said:

Really? I was approached by Dovetail to help them improve their aircraft. They sent me an NDA form which asked me to sign something saying not only could I not ever discuss anything relating to methodologies (which was perfectly fair) but an additional pledge that I would not even reveal I had been approached. Of course I refused but to be fair to them they still asked me to help them even though I had excoriated their business model in public.

NDAs like this have almost zero legal weight. If a developer is perfectly ok to publish starry eyed approval videos but is not prepared to take a little bit of flak from sincere and well-meaning people possessed of critical faculties then such NDAs serve merely to encourage the fable of the Emperor's New Clothes, where something is nakedly not right but no-one is allowed to say so.

You lost me at "Dovetail".

Sounds like your issue with the concept of NDA's expands far beyond Microsoft/Asobo/FS2020.

9 minutes ago, RobotRock said:

You lost me at "Dovetail".

Sounds like your issue with the concept of NDA's expands far beyond Microsoft/Asobo/FS2020.

An NDA is not a "concept". In this context it is usually a gagging order spiced up to be something else. Dovetail is a company that published train, fishing, and latterly flight sim software. You can look them up on google/wiki and a hundred other places.

Edited August 18, 20205 yr by robert young

4 minutes ago, robert young said:

An NDA is not a "concept". In this context it is usually a gagging order spiced up to be something else. Dovetail is a company that published train, fishing, and latterly flight sim software. You can look them up on google/wiki and a hundred other places.

You're missing my point, which is that NDAs are both standard and necessary in software/hardware/product development. FS2020 wasn't the first software to ever require testers to sign an NDA, and it won't be the last. FS2030 would also have one during development.