Patch Version 1.8.3.0 Is Now Available!

[RobJC 2,069]

13 hours ago, RamonB said:

I think it is a mixture of both.
How would You classify wrong specs / parameter numbers entered in the aircraft config files?

Of course I didn't expect Garmin's / CDU's, GPS's and other advanced instruments to be fully functional, and all switches working, heck I didn't even expected opening doors or full bug free scenery. But I surely expected default airplanes to have correct specs in config files, FM and Autopilots fully tested before release.

Can't say much else because of the NDA. Suffice to say I believe there are still some bugs not yet addressed in these forums, that might affect LOC/VOR navigation all over the globe, except perhaps along the Agonic Line.
(Test in Alaska or Maine, also notice AI parking positions relative to the ground parking position lines and charts. Even better if You have an external GPS program.)

I agree with You; of course MSFS is not a lost cause, but it needed more time before release, and it will need even more time to develop its full potential.
I was the happiest guy the day I joined the Alpha/Beta; long story short release came and haven't bought it yet.

Good points. Fortunately everything is fixable and they know they have a winner on their hands. Head down and continue coding!

[Adrian123 1,015]

15 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

You go where the user demand is, if XBOX user demand is make it more "game like" (shoot things, blow up things, mission to save the world, uncover the conspiracy of 737 Max adventure, hunt animals in Africa, kill the zombies in the US, etc.), then development resources will be allocated to meet that demand

Well Rob, you gave me a laugh on a not so laughable business day. You did your job! thanks. 🙂

[Elvensmith 165]

12 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

• [Snip]

So whatever the XBOX buyer "likes" in their game/sim is most likely where MSFS will head, that's just common sense and basic economics ... the desire/hope that some "hardcore" simulation may come out of this is just that a "hope" and not really backed by any economic or marketing logic.  

Cheers, Rob.

We have seen this with Dovetail's Train Sim World (TSW). Cut down routes which will not cause the attention to wander. Simplified physics (they still haven't implemented steam traction). It is unashamedly aimed at the console user with the traditional PC simmer being the afterthought. As with FS20, the emphasis is on eye candy, the "experience" - tablet style menus and achievements. Lot's of woffle from the developers about exciting things to come, etc. etc. Oh and no intention to provide editors for other than favoured partners to add content to the game.

With various bugs and unresolved issues in TSW(1), we then got TSW(2) this year - again blatantly orientated towards the console user.

I will put my virtual hat on the table to eat if we revisit this thread in 12 or 18 months time and see where things are if FS20 has not walked a similar path.

 

Edited September 23, 2020 by Elvensmith

[Paraffin 2,197]

7 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

So whatever the XBOX buyer "likes" in their game/sim is most likely where MSFS will head, that's just common sense and basic economics ... the desire/hope that some "hardcore" simulation may come out of this is just that a "hope" and not really backed by any economic or marketing logic.  

Doesn't MS get a cut of the payware add-ons sold through the MSFS storefront? I don't know, I'm just assuming they do.

A constant source of revenue skimmed off the top from sales of 3rd party aircraft and scenery should be motivation to build in the "hardcore simulation" features that will allow 3rd party devs to sell more advanced aircraft etc. to the PC sim market.

It might be small potatoes compared to the revenue from MS (and now Bethesda.) AAA games, but it would still be a continuing income stream. This is the add-on market capture they didn't have with FSX. 

Then again, maybe this is just wishful thinking, if those small potato sales are really tiny. 🙂 

[Noel 4,494]

30 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

I don't agree, why would increased revenue from console gamers (XBOX dedicated) who have a "gaming focus" trigger Asobo to work on more hardcore simulation features they don't want? 

Cheers, Rob.

I don't think it's as binary as this.:   either gamer, or hardcore.  Clearly they've launched  a dual-platform project and the simulator side is already exceedingly well understood as it's present on decades old software and I would think they have access to it.  In my mind the things that make MSFS lacking in terms of a hardcore simulation are miniscule compared to the features required for both domains:  scenery inlcuding airports, and atmospherics.   So no, I disagree w/ your disagreement.  Perhaps as an insider you know something others don't?

Step back and see what's missing in MSFS to move it more towards what we call hardcore, though I dont think there i a standard definition of what constitutes 'hardcore.'   

I think it's largely a case of Asobo delivering an SDK robust enough to entice 3rd party content development for more hardcore attributes.   Are you saying that is not going to happen?  Near as I can tell, virgin P3D does not offer a whole lot more than MSFS does already even as a 'hardcore' simulator.  And I would have to say anyone in their right mind, if they were stuck choosing either virgin P3d or virgin MSFS would choose the later.  It's the SDK and Simconnect and massive 3rd party content that has allowed others to turn P3D into a more complete simulator or so it seems to me, which of course took years and years to bring it to where it is today.

[Noel 4,494]

Well, as stated we really don't have a standard definition of what constitutes a 'hard-core' simulator at least I've never heard of one.  If you mean by that P3D can drive physical simulators or something along those lines, then I guess sure, but those users, compared to all of the desktop flightsimmers, I would think would be relatively few and far between.  I'm one of the in-betweeners Rob, and I'll bet there are ample just like me.  Some will know what a good flight model is, others like myself will guess and be content if it seems like it ought to.  But if it's someone like myself, a genuine in-betweener who enjoys learning more about RL flight management and who appreciates PMDG and Majestic craft and loves the challenge of flying them to meet criteria from something like an FSCaptain, then absolutely I can see MSFS filling that role quite easily going forward w/ a few adjustments and additions here and there, which is all I'm saying.   

[Bert Pieke 7,584]

I am hoping that the 3rd party community, payware and freeware, will get their fingers into this, and start fixing shortcomings and adding capabilities.

Just look at what the "working title" group has already done for the CJ4 🙂

If this continues for the other default aircraft, and the MSFS flightplanning/modification capabilities get fixed up.. we could have a very nice base to work with.

This is before PMDG and a2a have released their first aircraft.

Now, and I grant you this... the current bugs in the the underlying sim code have to be fixed, and I do not know if anyone but Asobo can do this.. 😉

[TheFamilyMan 280]

4 hours ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

Agree, but still not the market MS wants to tap ... ask yourself, why release the product early and why is it still in a very buggy state?

If you really analyze what is and has happened and take the “blinders off”, I think you’ll see where this is going.

Cheers, Rob

Seems that you are implying that this is all a big hoax: "oh look...sorry if you though MSFS was really going to be a sim".  I can't imagine the motive to half bake so many features that the average xbox gamer would not ever think to use, nor even know about their existence, if the whole idea was to fool those that did into thinking "it'll get better someday".

[GSalden 4,656]

59 minutes ago, TheFamilyMan said:

Seems that you are implying that this is all a big hoax: "oh look...sorry if you though MSFS was really going to be a sim".  I can't imagine the motive to half bake so many features that the average xbox gamer would not ever think to use, nor even know about their existence, if the whole idea was to fool those that did into thinking "it'll get better someday".

You seem not have read Rob’s reply very well. You are implying things that he did not wrote ...

[XCLTM3 112]

1 minute ago, TheFamilyMan said:

Seems that you are implying that this is all a big hoax: "oh look...sorry if you though MSFS was really going to be a sim".  I can't imagine the motive to half bake so many features that the average xbox gamer would not ever think to use, nor even know about their existence, if the whole idea was to fool those that did into thinking "it'll get better someday".

Well said.

There's evidence of unjust bias. I only have to peruse this forum and identify certain individuals who clearly have an agenda that is aimed fair and square at MS. Now that is fine indeed, as I believe very deeply in Freedom of Speech and Liberty in general (and have personally fought for that right for a more than a few decades).

I'd just like to ascertain what is driving these behaviours? It seems as though they have been personally burnt by MS in some fashion, and are bent on some form of revenge. Despite other flightsim platforms experiencing some major/minor issues over the years, I doubt you would see these same individuals replicating that outrage/outcry in these other flightsim forums. And there is the point.  Just check these other forums carefully. Have these individuals conducted themselves in the precise same fashion with their criticisms in all forums - or, just this one?

Otherwise, why spend an inordinate volume of time criticsizing a product in the attempted guise of "I'm merely pointing out the issues". Constantly ready to provide their points of view on those who oppose them in any way, or provide an "au contraire". Just take a look at this thread as a perfect example. The evidence is right there. These same points are being driven several times over and over. That certainly doesn't have the hallmarks of persons without any bias / prejudice. 

To further highlight this, when any of these individuals are called out, the response is either, "don't attempt to stifle free speech", or "you can't handle the truth about this product" or "you're wearing blinkers and don't want to acknowledge the issues this product has" etc. 

There is a point between healthy, rigorous debate. And there is a point where it becomes prejudicial / bias.

These individuals have tipped past that point and shown their cards (so to speak) very clearly.

Now I'm no MS word not allowed, to be blatantly clear. And it can easily be misconstrued that I'm defending MS. I could easily point to MS and many of their OS issues over the years which have added to my chagrin, and that's the tip of the iceberg....as I'm sure many here could attest to.

And when it comes to MSFS - I agree on many/most of the issues raised. But, I see a product with great promise. Whilst many are viewing it as a single use platform (ie Flightsimming), I'm seeing a bigger picture with many applications spanning many facets of Govt & Private. But for now, I'll adhere to the flightsimmimg phase.

It is new. It's technology is new. The team delivering it is new. These aren't battle hardened devs that have spent 20 yrs+ working deep in on major titles like GTA, COD, P3D, FSX and the likes  - where we would expect that all facets of creating, delivering and providing post sales support would have been a higher standard. In fact, even these battle hardened devs and their teams get things wrong and the community uproar is felt and heard. I certainly didn't walk into this purchase commitment with the highest expectations. I paid for the Premium Deluxe. It came with some issues. I knew it would not be a polished, shiny product. I knew this was a longer term deal. And, as long as I'm breathing, I'll stick with it as I can see where it will be in a period of time. I sincerely hope MS/Asobo are fully committed as they have publicly stated they are. Time will tell. This is all a storm in a teacup - but it's being treated by some as though it is an absolute natural disaster where many lives have been tragically lost. There is a loss of all proportion/reality and a complete loss of focus on what is really important.

For those who have had major issues like constant CTD's, download interrupts, etc. I sincerely hope this is addressed soon and completely.

Like many others, I'm thankful that I can complete most flights and generally enjoy the sim for what it is now, and look forward to further enhancements via both MS/Asobo and 3rd party devs and enjoy it for what it will become.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Noel 4,494]

13 hours ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

why release the product early and why is it still in a very buggy state?  Cheers, Rob

By the same token, why release it at all on PC?  The things that are missing for most desktop users really aren't that deep when you compare against what P3D offers sans 3rd party content, if not how so?  I must say you do seem to be hinting you know things others don't beyond conjecture.   Since FSX/P3D represent some of the longest running PC software to date it seems to be bizarre to do what they did to release it on PC, then just go bye-bye in terms of continuing to refine and SDK at least to the point 3PD's like PMDG can't fill the higher end airware market within it.

 

[sd_flyer 6,038]

18 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

Paying Beta testers or early access (take your pick), but being sold as complete product.  Test server loads across the globe.

There is no way a company like MS would release a product in this state unless the objective was something “else”.  Again many of these issues were in the Tech Alpha from many months ago and pointed out by many.

Cheers, Rob.

 Says who? Rob? LOL

 I've been working developing for Microsoft  platform for 20 years I can tell you  lengthy stories how Microsoft screwed up things and it's not even game related scruff!

[RamonB 449]

15 minutes ago, sd_flyer said:

I've been working developing for Microsoft  platform for 20 years I can tell you  lengthy stories how Microsoft screwed up things and it's not even game related scruff!

Been there, done that. Using MS development tools since the 80's
This was a classic response from MS Connect:
Bug acknowledged -> wont fix! (topic closed) ->> try a workaround and let us know ->>> Carry on.

Edited September 24, 2020 by RamonB

[sd_flyer 6,038]

Just now, RamonB said:

Been there, done that. Using MS development tools since the 80's
This was a classic response from MS Connect:
Bug acknowledged -> wont fix ->> try a workaround and let us know ->>> Carry on.

LOL So true. I will never forget Windows XP service Pack2 and OLEDB drivers. Thousands customers calls and etc! Yep MS would never do such thing except they did, and still do. In fact, even right now every security update is potential hassle  !

[DylanM 1,069]

18 hours ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

Agree, but still not the market MS wants to tap ... ask yourself, why release the product early and why is it still in a very buggy state?

If you really analyze what is and has happened and take the “blinders off”, I think you’ll see where this is going.

Cheers, Rob

Noting that the first releases of P3D V4 and V5 were quite clearly in the "unfinished" buckets as well...

This doesn't have to an us or them argument; the us and them works just fine too if the ecosystem is conducive to a stable revenue stream. Heck, look at the business model for Star Citizen for something really zany.

Edit: to add, with the MS purchase of Bethesda, the direction towards exclusive cross-platform AAA titles from MS (with PC gaming in the mix) appears to be right where they're headed, and I personally don't have a problem with that.

 

Edited September 24, 2020 by DylanM