Re-evaluate Your Perspective and Expectations

[RudyB24 296]

Well, exactly this is what I find so interesting: you guys keep trying to convince me, and others, that 'we shouldn't expect much'. After just having shelled out €120 we need to buy additional stuff first before we may expect 'decent' planes? Funny.

 

Edited August 19, 2020 by RudyB24

[Marco Manieri 194]

1 minute ago, ErichB said:

This is so typical of every other amazing release.   Drama, doom and gloom for the first few days/weeks and then....'oh, this is really amazing.......'   Basically, people just don't like change that much.

You gotta love the flightsim crowd.

It's human nature. Not just flightsim crowd. You would think people enjoying watching wheat grow would be rather ok with slow paces... go look to Farming Simulator forums at each new release (each 2 years).... 😏

[Shack95 2,658]

29 minutes ago, RudyB24 said:

When I just payed €120 for a game that calls itself a Flight Simulator I think I'm entitled to expect the planes that are inside that game to be a proper simulation of the real thing.

From experience (it's never been otherwise) and from what the devs said themselves you could have known that you won't get "study level" aircraft. In the live Q&A Neumann said that it would take them several years to reach the quality of PMDG and the likes. They see the sim as a platform and their strategy with regard to aircraft is to implement the basics for new "big features" (helicopters etc) and leave the super detailed aircraft to third party developers (see link below).

By the way, nobody forced you to pay 120€. You could have got the standard version for 60€ or signed up for Game Pass and try it for 1$.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GM4fVwsEdaw&list=PLHHNa7e7hf9MqQB-RV6bxHYiLcTQkgGfi&index=1&t=886s (14:46-20:15)

 

 

[Paladin2005 426]

30 minutes ago, RudyB24 said:

Well, exactly this is what I find so interesting: you guys keep trying to convince me, and others, that 'we shouldn't expect much'. After just having shelled out €120 we need to buy additional stuff first before we may expect 'decent' planes? Funny.

 

Thats exactly how it works.

Or tell me, which FlightSim have you bought within the last 10 years, that came up with the perfect simulated aircraft for you that you did not buy additionally?

[RudyB24 296]

@Shack95 To avoid misunderstanding, I haven't bought it yet, I'm first building a new rig and then I'll get it. From the looks of it it will be a great experience and ... I will set my expectations for the planes realistically. I'm duly warned. 🙂

What I tried to express is that over and over again I hear this phrase that only payware add-on planes will be up to certain standards. I like to think that when you buy something that has a price tag of over €100 you're entitled to have certain expectations ... but in flight sim land it apparently already seems an accepted norm to not expect too much of the 'default' planes.

Edited August 19, 2020 by RudyB24

[Farlis 2,286]

From where I stand this is, at the current state, 3 steps forward and 1 step back.

I can live with the flightmodel of default aircraft not being the best, I see what the new model can do, and it is impressive.

I can live with little or no progress being made in ATC, with still the same quirks and inadequacies that plagued the original program in MS Sims since, FS2002.

I can live with many things not being finished at this point, we all realized this was a rushed release.

What I can absolutely not understand is the step back in the lack of progress in the Flightplanning tool. Yes it now has SID's and STARS, but it still lacks proper functionality to manually edit routings. Looking for intersections on the map instead of typing in a fix and a via in a menu? This is not rocket science!

Airports missing because the satelite data was insufficient or censored? How about, no?

Taxiway signage being proceduraly generated instead of properly labeled according to charts and databases? Erm...

I certainly appreciate all the new ideas, but stuff now missing, that previous versions had? Especially when it comes to the meat and bones, the airports, that is just... What were they thinking?!

[robert young 2,897]

56 minutes ago, RudyB24 said:

I don't understand this statement that I keep hearing over and over again:

• they're 'default planes', don't expect much of them
• wait for the payware addons
• wait for the DLC creators

When I just payed €120 for a game that calls itself a Flight Simulator I think I'm entitled to expect the planes that are inside that game to be a proper simulation of the real thing.

Yes. Imagine if the scenery was dire and the clouds looked like fluffy bits of nebulus candy floss. People would be up in arms. So why does everyone not only accept but even expect that aerodynamics will not be reasonable. It really is not that hard to make a sim aircraft that flies reasonably well. It is hard to make it fly almost perfectly but no-one is expecting that. They do however reasonably want something that out of the box does not require you to tone down your stick by -70% in order to avoid ridiculous over control.

And by the way, this myth that it is all about the controller set up is as bad as the myth about no more flying on rails. Most aircraft have pretty linear controls. A typical elevator on a GA aircraft doesn't start with a tiny elevator movement then exponentially increase its angle the more you pull. While smaller sim joysticks might need a little adjusting, you should not have to lower sensitivities by huge amounts, and this constant "once I adjusted my controls everything was fine", is just putting sticky plaster over the problem. If a sim aircraft grossly over-reacts to an input then it is because the core flight model is over-sensitive, not just the stick.

[Shack95 2,658]

24 minutes ago, RudyB24 said:

I will set my expectations for the planes realistically.

To be honest I haven‘t even tried the airliners in the release version yet, but that‘s probably a good strategy.

24 minutes ago, RudyB24 said:

I like to think that when you buy something that has a price tag of over €100 you're entitled to have certain expectations

I know what you mean. I agree, we certainly can expect something for that price. The question is what. And I think the devs have been pretty transparent in this regard. And then there‘s the reviews. But yeah, everyone has to decide for themselves whether it‘s worth it I guess. 

Edited August 19, 2020 by Shack95

[Recognition 91]

My expectation was always that I would be splitting my game time between 3 sims. 

[MarcG 2,965]

I'm quite surprised at the number of people surprised at the negativity across forums, Reddit & social media. It's been that way across multiple genres of gaming for years; those with a lack of knowledge blame the game, those not understanding what a continuously developed title means blame the Devs, those expecting a perfect 1.0 release but find some bugs blame the game, those not finding the Sim suits their individual needs blame the devs, those with performance problems that are probably their own doing blame the Devs......ad infinitum.

 

Fact is those looking to rant do so more on forums, Reddit and social media, much more than those who are happy as such we're (yes I'm a happy one!) spending our time in the flight sim enjoying it, not running off to the forums to moan about the trees!

 

Ergo the abundance of negativity, to me at least, is not surprising, just an unfortunate state of affairs with online Postings in this day and age.

[RudyB24 296]

I felt quite a good vibe at Reddit. People over there often bring complaints with humor and funny memes ... I had a couple of good laughs when I had a look there yesterday evening.

Like someone who said: "If I turn on airplane mode on my PC will the download go faster?".

Or someone who had a look at his home town:

Edited August 19, 2020 by RudyB24

[HighTowers 1,434]

8 hours ago, RudyB24 said:

I don't understand this statement that I keep hearing over and over again:

• they're 'default planes', don't expect much of them
• wait for the payware addons
• wait for the DLC creators

When I just payed €120 for a game that calls itself a Flight Simulator I think I'm entitled to expect the planes that are inside that game to be a proper simulation of the real thing.

Since when have default planes inside any flight sim be a proper simulation? Ever.   Prepar3d is touted to be commercial corporate sim, but the default models are horrible.    And the full license is 200$.   Why would you expect it to be high fidelity as a default?  If anything, default are ok or just passable to just fly, but dont expect alot from it.The base sim just needs to be strong at its core with strong SDK develop[ment support so that aircraft developers who are dedicated to aircraft modeling can do what they do. 

[robert young 2,897]

1 hour ago, HighTowers said:

Since when have default planes inside any flight sim be a proper simulation? Ever.   Prepar3d is touted to be commercial corporate sim, but the default models are horrible.    And the full license is 200$.   Why would you expect it to be high fidelity as a default?  If anything, default are ok or just passable to just fly, but dont expect alot from it.The base sim just needs to be strong at its core with strong SDK develop[ment support so that aircraft developers who are dedicated to aircraft modeling can do what they do. 

I agree, nearly. Most default aircraft in every sim are pretty atrocious. It is kind of expected that 3rd parties will step in. I think that is very complacent and I would apply that to all current flight simulators. It really doesn't take much effort, and certainly is no more expensive, to churn out default aircraft that can fly reasonably well. After all, P3d/Xplane/FSX/FS2020 developers will have flown many examples of 3rd party aircraft (if they had any sense) and see what they can learn, but it seems to me they have learned very little.

I just don't understand why they find it so hard to produce something that flies ok. No-one expects perfection, just a vaguely believable flight model.

Edited August 19, 2020 by robert young

[dho112 17]

I have a very much Love/Hate relationship at present with MSFS 2020.

It tried VERY hard to manage my expectations before the release; Thinking of what they were trying to accomplish.  I also knew leading up that software was $120 so that fell on the side of raising my expectations a bit higher.

There are some regions I fly in where things are suitably impressive (GA Aircraft/wilderness, and many others (mainly population centers) where I feel utter frustration.

I watched the preview videos and thought that those would of course be the creme-de-la-creme of hardware and maybe a little bit of doctoring distorted by excitement on my part, but, at least initially, the experience has been more on the frustration and disappointment side, then on one of excitement.  Admiration is definitely still there for what they have done, but I feel like the "hype" doesn't live up to the product as it exists in my hands on my hardware.

I am currently running a i9-10900K that is overclocked to a point where it touches 5.2Mhz briefly at some points and loads, an Asus Maximus XII Extreme Motherboard with 32Gb of Corsair 3600 ram, An EVGA 2080 Ti FTW3 video card, and 4Tb of SSD storage with 2 Samsung Evo SSDs running in RAID0, System is running a 1Tb  Samsung 970 Pro NVME drive, Corsair 1,000 Watt P/S to power the whole thing and 9 120mm fans and an NZXT Kraken Z73 CPU Cooler to keep the brain cool.

when I run the various 3dMark graphics test on my PC I will consistently get a score that it tells me is "your PC is faster than 98% of other PCs listed" and faster than 99% of other PCs if I do a 2k resolution test.

I've been at the PC building game for a LONG time (over 35 years) and am painfully aware that "integration" of lesser components can often be an ace-in-the hole when it comes to performance as opposed to a machine that contains every top-of-the-line part.  Often components, no matter how high-end they are, will just not play nicely with each other.

However, my rig performs in a stellar way with every, and I mean every, other AAA title; shooters, DCS, Steel Beasts, racing sims, etc etc.  The list is literally never ending.

In FSX with payware airports, PMDG aircraft, Megascenery, Ultimate Traffic Live, FS2Crew, GSX, REX Textures, Active Sky and more, I was getting 40fps on the ground at payware airports with 100% traffic and max or near max settings at 4k.  In the air 60FPS was normal.

The "hate" part of the Love/Hate is that I can't run MSFS 2020 in 4k without the sim bogging down relentlessly at large airports.  Frame rates which dip so low that you can see the individual frames go by, stutters everywhere, and weird inexplicable behaviors like my GPU actually running HOTTER (75 Celsius) in the menus, than when I'm in the sim...  Why?  I laughed the other day just because I said to myself, "I better get out of this main menu and flying over a metropolitan center to cool down my GPU!" LoL!

Running in 2k at medium/high settings is the only way I can get an "enjoyable" experience 30-35fps and I've tried what I assume is everything to get 4K to run passably; killed live traffic, weather, enabled hardware accelerated GPU scheduling,  increased rolling cache to 100Gb (I have a 320Mbit internet connection)

When I fly over cities, I don't see these stunning arrays of highly detailed buildings, I see mounds of what look like melted buildings that SLOWLY morph into something more recognizable over time (sometimes a LOT of time) an amount of time which, even in a piper cub have the buildings transform into acceptable clarity only after I have passed and look at them in the rear view.

I still have a high level of acceptance and hope though.  The program is brand new, I might have crappy integration of my high end PC components (or even a fault) that MSFS2020 is "specifically" sensitive to, the servers used by AZURE might be impossibly overloaded at launch, etc

So at this point I can say Love/Hate is an accurate assessment for me.  Hate, that $120 has gotten me "this" and Love that I see the history of MSFS and know it's not a false hope that things will firm up.

Right now, I am scouring the internet and forums for every tip/trick to hopefully identify why I am getting such horrid performance from a pretty stellar PC, wondering if reviewers are just way too forgiving, or if Microsoft and Asobo were running their demos on a multiple bank of LN2 cooled super computers (especially the shots of multiplayer flight!)

Hang in there everyone!

David

Specs above in the post