37 minutes ago, LHookins said:

It's been optimized for new flight simmers (and gamers) who will be able to fly GA aircraft 

Speaking MS Neumanish 😉 ? In English that would be dumbed down for the bunch of halfwits  that MS thinks their gaming customers are.

They are not. Why in the world new simmers or gamers couldn’t like having good flight and complete system modeling except in the reductive mind of the MS marketing folks ?

 

7 hours ago, Dominique_K said:

They are not. Why in the world new simmers or gamers couldn’t like having good flight and complete system modeling except in the reductive mind of the MS marketing folks ?

For the same reason the gamers buy racing games but don't typically want an F1 car fully modelled.  Driving one takes years of practice and work. 

Richard Hammond, who is no slouch behand the wheel barely got one around the track after hours of trying.    

There are literally dozens of driving games that have simplified models so people can pretend to drive a car they'll never experience in real life.  

I have always been bemused by the decades long argument of whether Flight Simulator was a game or a sim.  The answer is it's a game that some of you insist on treating like a sim.  

There are products out there designed specifically for pilots to maintain proficiency and log sim hours.  And they cost a heck of a lot more that $60.-$120.

I remember when Microsoft used the tagline "As real as it gets" for one of it's versions and they were pilloried by the sim community for false advertising.  It was a marketing slogan, not a statement of fact, and yet so many people took that phrase literally and still do.

It's a game.  Get over it.  And while you're at it, you can get over the self righteous attitudes that some of you have about being a simmer over being just a "gamer".  After 3 decades it gets tired.  

I think we can all be happy that Microsoft didn't try to resurrect "Flight", but Flight Simulator has always walked the line between simulation and entertainment.  But make no mistake, it's developed for entertainment purposes.  Live with it.  

 

Edited September 13, 20205 yr by wthomas33065

That's your opinion. It is quite obvious what is the difference between a game that strives to reproduce a fictional experience of flying, a game and a flight simulator that tries to recreate as far as possible a real experience of flying, which sometimes succeeds better and sometimes worse. MSFS is an example of the latter.

On 8/19/2020 at 9:35 AM, buspelle said:

Spot on! This sim is released WAY to early!

Then don't use it.

 

next...

4 hours ago, wthomas33065 said:

[great stuff about game vs sim and people needing to get over themselves]

Have you ever been tempted to create a sock-puppet account just so you could like a fabulous post more than once?    I was just now, that's for sure.

15 hours ago, wthomas33065 said:

Sorry, I don't buy it.  Cbonz77 smells like his mothers basement.

I wish I had noted this earlier. That was a very unkind thing to say. Like myself, this gentleman is a member of the long-past-retirement age group, and given where he lives probably doesn't even have a basement! 😂

Like Larry posted, I've read his bio on qrz.com* so have factual information at hand, which I am not going to reveal here at AVSIM.

Nota bene: for those who don't know about that website, it is a place where amateur radio operators (hams) are listed, along with whatever biographical information and pictures they'd like to share.

23 hours ago, Cbonz77 said:

Totally disappointed.

I'm truly sorry to read this, Dennis! For reasons known only to the MS "suits" Asobo was instructed to release the sim much earlier than they had planned, so unfortunately we are going to have to wait while they continue to refine and fix the discovered issues.

That is a beautiful station you have set up. I'm sure I'd enjoy the "Joker's Net" but unfortunately my current G5RV Junior will not tune up on 80m...

I lost my mom in 1997 and dad back in 1999. Did you hang on to any of the beautiful hand-crafted radios your dad built?

Welcome to AVSIM, and I hope that you will return and find a bunch of new friends!

73 de N4GIX

8 minutes ago, n4gix said:

Like Larry posted, I've read his bio on qrz.com* so have factual information at hand

I figure anyone who likes motorcycles and sailboats can't be all bad. 😄 

His post was a little unfortunate but I can understand his first impression reaction to MSFS if he tried to fly one of the jets.

I found the Cessna 152 to be pleasant to fly.  Given that all my flying is some variation on navigation exercises using pilotage and dead reckoning I'm less concerned about totally accurate flight models, especially at the edges of the envelope.  And to be sure, these navigation exercises are much better in MSFS than in previous sims.

I'm not going to worry about Iceland until I have a steam gauge radial engine to do an Atlantic Crossing, and by then maybe Iceland will be fixed and someone might even add the Narsarsuaq airport which is currently AWOL. 🙂  Yeah, MSFS is in an unfinished state, but it's certainly usable. 

Hook

I must say my experience has been quite the opposite from the OP. The download was long (almost 24 hours) but the sim fired up and I have not had one crash. I am sure it isn't perfect but for an initial release WOW. This sim has a fabulous future imo. 

1 hour ago, n4gix said:

I wish I had noted this earlier. That was a very unkind thing to say. Like myself, this gentleman is a member of the long-past-retirement age group, and given where he lives probably doesn't even have a basement! 😂

Like Larry posted, I've read his bio on qrz.com* so have factual information at hand, which I am not going to reveal here at AVSIM.

Nota bene: for those who don't know about that website, it is a place where amateur radio operators (hams) are listed, along with whatever biographical information and pictures they'd like to share.

You are right, It was an unkind thing to say.  However, this individual chose to create an account, along with signature highlighting his credentials just to create a single post on how terrible one aspect of the product is, that was wildly inaccurate to say the least.  

I apologize for my statement.  But perhaps Cbonz77 might want to reconsider his words when describing the work of hundreds of people who have been working months if not years of development as a POS.  Constructive criticism is helpful.  Degrading other's efforts while offering no solutions yourself isn't.

I'll own up to my lack of decorum.  Let's see if others do likewise.

No CTD's here after 48 hours of flying and slowly, luxuriously working my way across the US but I was having them in a different simulator (IL2) which is known for being quite stable, but only in the more demanding scenarios, so after a lot of troubleshooting I upgraded / replaced RAM and now my system is rock solid in that sim as well as this one and all others.

Sad to say but when you are having CTD's and others are not it's a strong indicator of something not right on your system, and a more demanding sim will bring those problems to the surface.

.

Edited September 13, 20205 yr by Stoopy

6 hours ago, Stoopy said:

No CTD's here after 48 hours of flying and slowly,

I can confirm a CTD if you try to depart Reykjavik.  (It happened to me on a King Air, but the C172 G1000 worked...go figure)  However with Tens of thousands of airports to enjoy it's not too much to ask to log the bug and then fly elsewhere in the meantime.  What you don't do is impune the work of the many people who worked on the project, question their character and professionalism stating their work is fecal matter while implying that you are some sort of expert.

As someone who has worked over 20 years in software testing, development and support let me say that the amount of work simply to verify over 37,000 airports let alone to even attempt to load each one to see if it causes a CTD is a monumental task.  If you were somehow able to load up and verify 60 airports an hour (one a minute) it would take over 616 man-hours just to cycle through the entire list ONCE.  And if the bug occurs only with certain planes, then times that by the number of aircraft.  And of course you have to test both intel and AMD CPU's and Nvidia and AMD GPU's.  .

That is not a reasonable expectation.  So software testers test boundary cases and use sample sizes, not each one.  And as such, some get missed.  The issue might be found in alpha or beta, but depending on the severity and priority of other bugs, the bug might be triaged and set to be fixed after release.  That is the nature of software development.  Especially for a program that is slated to have continual development throughout it's lifecycle as this one is.

My point is, not being a pilot, I'm not about to tell one how to do their job.  I suggest ex-pilots don't try to tell software developers and testers how to do theirs.

Edited September 14, 20205 yr by wthomas33065

On 9/13/2020 at 8:12 PM, kaosfere said:

Have you ever been tempted to create a sock-puppet account just so you could like a fabulous post more than once?    I was just now, that's for sure.

Game vs sim: a game, obvs ...

 

BUT not 100%:

Years ago I went with a friend to play on BA’s proper 737 training simulators at Heathrow (they don’t even fly the 737 these days so must have been a while back).
 

My friend was a real world pilot in small planes. I had no real world experience, just hours of “gameplay” in flight sim with the PMDG 737 add-on.

 

IMO the verisimilitude was impressive. It was easy and intuitive to move from PC desktop controls to operating the real thing. In fact in some ways it was easier: the trim function was much easier thanks to the physical feedback from the plane.

 

And guess who nailed the best landings / cross-wind landings? And who handled the wind shear?

 

The supervisor couldn’t believe it.

 

just sayin’ 🙂