Considering where the aviation industry is headed for the foreseeable future, pretty soon the only thing RW pilots will be flying is in the sim. They'll need to adapt to the new reality.

36 minutes ago, DJJose said:

We "experienced Flight Instructors & flight simmers" must be living in our own bubble, because I found the blog article SPOT ON!

Yeah I’d say that’s probably accurate. You describe an inherent bias and your opinions are coloured by it. If you could consider fsx in a better state than 2020 at launch you’d have to be jaded if not deliberately disingenuous. The default aircraft are much better in 2020 than in fsx. And you definitely don’t need a state of the art computer to run the game lol. 
 

A step backwards? I think his judgement is clouded by nostalgia. The default FSX was way more arcadey then the current FS version. There was no FMC to use at all for example.

2 hours ago, ErichB said:

'A step back for real pilots and serious simmers'?  Give me a break.

How is it not a step back if the G1000 and G3x do not even show airspaces to give only one example of their shortcomings? I think his comment is realistic and fair. But all in all I don't think his view is as negative as you have interpreted it. He mentions positive points as well and sees enormous potential for the future

7 minutes ago, Rimshot said:

How is it not a step back if the G1000 and G3x do not even show airspaces to give only one example of their shortcomings? I think his comment is realistic and fair. But all in all I don't think his view is as negative as you have interpreted it. He mentions positive points as well and sees enormous potential for the future

Thank GOD!

31 minutes ago, KillingJoke said:

A step backwards? I think his judgement is clouded by nostalgia. The default FSX was way more arcadey then the current FS version. There was no FMC to use at all for example.

Less not forget the "flying on rails" part either. You never felt the actual sense of flight at all until a2a came along and mitigated the problem. 

"I hope that Microsoft and the developer who created this new simulation will work closely with the add-on developers"

 

Hasn't done much research has he ?

I agree, some hot air, MSFS has not been designed as a training device., as P3D has been.

30 minutes ago, Rimshot said:

How is it not a step back if the G1000 and G3x do not even show airspaces to give only one example of their shortcomings? I think his comment is realistic and fair.

FS2020 is a big step backward as a training aid for real-world pilots. And I suspect the limitations of the current avionics will also disappoint the virtual pilots around the world who have long enjoyed the challenge of navigating, flying instrument approaches and like. 

No-one ever used default FSX  aircraft or navdata as a 'real-world' training aid until the emergence of third party data.  No real world or virtual pilot ever had 'long lived enjoyment and challenges navigating and flying instrument approaches' in default FSX .   Apples and Oranges.    This comment isn't valid, although I agree some of his other commentaries have some merit.

 

His assessment was prefaced with it being a sequel that's all flashy effects , actually effects are on the To Do LIst and are expected in a future update .

Maybe with some instructions , they hired a technical writer,  I imagine its not only the SDK that needs to fill those blank pages with information on how to use the sim , hanger mode ? , slewing , how to set up pause that pauses , popping to any airport without going to the main menu , all can be done but not its not listed anywhere , perhaps its the work of forums this time round .

 

Best CJ  

One must not forget FSX was widy open whereas FS20 is massively closed... A large bunch of defaults errors (navdata, stars, magdec, textures, weather, thermals etc...) could be fixed by talented developers (mostly for free). This will probably not be the case with FS2020 for various reasons: the game is  supposed to be played online with frequent updates crashing core files modifications, gamers must have same basis for proper challenges scoring, IT security...

So perfection quest of the new simulator relies entirely in Asobo hands. Let’s hope they will take the time to improve properly.

14 minutes ago, Chuck_Jodry-VJPL said:

popping to any airport without going to the main menu

Not being able to do that is driving me crazy!

20 minutes ago, filoux said:

One must not forget FSX was widy open whereas FS20 is massively closed... 

 

That is not true.  In fact, it's entirely the opposite.

Within the space of a week, we have already had a multitude of scenery releases, modifications to the A320N and a number of freeware tweaks and mods and a number of repaints. - all from third party sources. 

After 1 week in FSX we were all still in staggering disbelief as we struggled to maintain 15 fps and stared at miles of Saharan landscapes in Africa, Europe, North America,  Asia...  Third party content was a pipe dream 

 

Edited August 26, 20205 yr by ErichB

12 minutes ago, filoux said:

One must not forget FSX was widy open whereas FS20 is massively closed.

Can you explain more?

1 hour ago, DJJose said:

We "experienced Flight Instructors & flight simmers" must be living in our own bubble, because I found the blog article SPOT ON!

I agree, I'm a 66 year old student pilot, 90+ hours in a 172/R hoping to wrap up my PPL as soon as this COVID-19 fiasco settles down. I'm also a retired software developer and I develop X-Plane add-ons in my spare time. Hope do do that for FS2020 too.

I was avid FSX user years ago but switched to X-Plane when X-Plane 10 came out mostly for the stability as FSX would tend to crash a lot. I used X-Plane extensively during my training. I do have a good rig with expensive flight controls and a close approximation of a 172 cockpit including radios, switches, and even an encoder / button panel for the Garmin 530 / 430. I'm also using an add-on for the default X-Plane 172 to make the flight model more realistic even for things like stalls and forward slips.

I used the sim for all the procedures, getting very familiar with the operation of the 430, and I used PilotEdge to get proficient at the ATC and radio work. I also practiced all my solos in the sim before the actual flight. That really helped with getting comfortable with the various runway approaches in different wind conditions.

I have flown in FS2020 for about 20 hours so far.

The VFR scenery is amazing. I'm completely blown away by how accurate the depiction of the landmarks are. For those of us using the SIM to practice approaches to our local airports this is going to be very helpful. X-Plane is good but this aspect of FS2020 is a amazing. My local airports are missing the right buildings but they were also missing in X-Plane. The thing X-Plane has is their World Editor so with a little bit of work I was able to fix-up all my local airports in X-Plane to make them very accurate. I also was able to submit them back to Laminar and my work on the airports just shows up in the next X-Plane release. That is very nice. I have not looked into what FS2020 offers in this area as I have not dug into the SDK yet.

The default flight dynamics on the FS2020 C172 530/430 model is pretty good. I did not run it through all the things like slow flight, stalls, and slips but normal take-offs and landings are not bad at all for a default plane. I think a good payware 172 would make it great.

I found the avionics to be very disappointing. As best I could tell there are no actions behind the 530/430 actuators so I could not attach my GPS hardware to the sim. I was forced to use the mouse, not fun. I also found that the functions on the GPS do not match a real-world 530 / 430. Again, this could be corrected with a payware plane that accurately models the avionics.

I think FS2020 is going to be a great sim as long a Microsoft sticks with improving it and supports small as well as large 3rd party developers.

Mark