The Tide of Progress is Unstoppable

[Marco Manieri 194]

3 hours ago, tpete61 said:

 

This overblown praise for the game is incredible.

I own, use it and like it. It's still a game. No I'm not a troll as someone else has tried to imply.

The G1000 is laughable! Weather is far from accurate. Flight planning is laughable. Select a couple of points on a map and let it make your plan. ATC hmm I would get lost trying to follow it. I could continue and list many other areas that this game is lacking in.

For GA/VFR it works for sightseeing that's about it.

 

And how these weak points were addressed in old generation products 1 month from their release?

Did they have proper G1000 by default? Or did they came later, either in the core offering or addons?

Live weather? Who got it right on release?

Flight planning in any other default sim?

ATC?

What else would you list that did not require patching/upgrading/add-ons or got it in one month?

Default planes realism? 

I do very well understand people that currently get much more enjoyment from their well known, precisely tweaked sims and wonderful add-ons.

But this new product cannot be labeled "game" on these bases. Or if you would like to do so, then that same label should apply to the entire bunch.

We ha have to keep pushing Asobo to fix bugs, complete lacking features they marketed, allow for 3PD to do their magic: but that's exactly what all sims always needed and will need.

Edited September 23, 2020 by Marco Manieri

[marsman2020 1,310]

5 hours ago, Dillon said:

The cost savings of getting the sim up to speed is huge as well.

Every time someone brings up a problem with the nav data, flight models, G1000, weather, ATC, hell even the missing sensitivity settings that they #@$#$ up in the last patch, lack of a manual/documentation - the answer on this same forum (and the official MSFS forum) is "wait for third party stuff you can buy for $$$ to fix it.

So I'm not seeing any cost savings, unless Asobo actually commits to fixing things which I have not seen them do, only vauge non-statements. 

Since I purchased this sim based mostly on the cost savings and unwillingness to maintain a house of cards of 3rd part mods from different sources, I'm currently extremely frustrated and disappointed.  What was shown in the pre-launch videos and discussed is not what has been delivered, period, full stop, end of message.

5 hours ago, Dillon said:

 The flight dynamics is the sim is the best yet seen in a desktop simulator.

It's actually hosed in a number of ways that are unclear if it's the way they have modeled the aircraft, or the physics engine itself.  There are weird pitch oscillations that a real aircraft shouldn't have based on the static and dynamics stability coefficients, it's way too difficult to get trimmed out to straight and level flight.  Inertia is all wrong.  I've spent over 12h of time measuring fuel consumption and range of many of the default aircraft on a "standard day" at 8,000/12,000 feet.....the performance of most of them is way off. 

5 hours ago, Dillon said:

They can at any time pull the plug on the scenery severs, change the core sim, fall out with Asobo, and/or lock down the sim unless we all pay a monthly fee.

That's just adding salt to the wound.  At least if I buy a bunch of add-ons for FSX or X-Plane I can be assured that my copy of the game will always work in the future.  With FS2020, Microsoft has total control and can kill the entire thing on a whim if they want to.

[StoneDoor 86]

17 minutes ago, marsman2020 said:

Every time someone brings up a problem with the nav data, flight models, G1000, weather, ATC, hell even the missing sensitivity settings that they #@$#$ up in the last patch, lack of a manual/documentation - the answer on this same forum (and the official MSFS forum) is "wait for third party stuff you can buy for $$$ to fix it.

No, the answer more often is "The sim is brand new, just give them some time to improve it and get the bugs out".

Anyway, the weather is fixed. Works great for me.

 

Only for planes we'll have to wait for third parties.

[VFXSimmer 1,310]

1 minute ago, StoneDoor said:

No, the answer more often is "The sim is brand new, just give them some time to improve it and get the bugs out".

Anyway, the weather is fixed. Works great for me.

 

Only for planes we'll have to wait for third parties.

https://msfsaddons.com/2020/09/23/aerosoft-reveals-video-of-upcoming-crj-700s-cockpit/

They're coming...

[Lon Duncombe 83]

Actually I've dumped MSFS and gone all the way back to Sublogic's version 1.0  Had to dig my trusty Tandy 1000 out of the closet and load MSDOS 2.44,  but it was well worth it!  Great FPS, the disk drive grinding away emulates engine failure very well, and you gotta love those clean, crisp wire frame graphics!  Chicago could probably use an ORBX makeover, maybe remodel the Sears Tower, but that's about it. 

I might try MSFS again when when it matures in another 10 years or so, if I'm still living.  (I'm 72)

[wthomas33065 994]

1 hour ago, marsman2020 said:

That's just adding salt to the wound.  At least if I buy a bunch of add-ons for FSX or X-Plane I can be assured that my copy of the game will always work in the future.  With FS2020, Microsoft has total control and can kill the entire thing on a whim if they want to.

That's not entirely true.  We have base scenery and mesh that gets installed.  IF MS pulls the plug, it would be like going back to offline mode, which is still pretty impressive regarding that it is nearly 100% autogen.  Roads, Freeways, building placement and vegetation placement are all still there, even in offline mode.  Your addons should also work in offline mode, if properly programmed.  I do know going to offline mode causes some issues with Orbx KTIW, but scenery devs should make their sceneries be able to adjust to offline and online modes appropriately.  That's on the third party developer.

One of the first things I did was see what "offline" looks like and whether or not I would be happy with it.  And while it's not even close to having real satellite imagery with photogrammetry, it is still head and shoulders better than what FSX provides out of the box.    The down side is really lack of hand crafted buildings,   FSX has more handcrafted buildings than FS2020, which primarily relies on Photogrammetry.  But the autogen in FS2020 blows anything that FSX can do.  

I flew in my neighborhood and still was able to place the building that contains my townhouse, even offline.  Something that FSX and it's randomized housing and vegetation placement can't do.

[tpete61 227]

1 hour ago, Marco Manieri said:

And how these weak points were addressed in old generation products 1 month from their release?

Did they have proper G1000 by default? Or did they came later, either in the core offering or addons?

Live weather? Who got it right on release?

Flight planning in any other default sim?

ATC?

What else would you list that did not require patching/upgrading/add-ons or got it in one month?

Default planes realism? 

I do very well understand people that currently get much more enjoyment from their well known, precisely tweaked sims and wonderful add-ons.

But this new product cannot be labeled "game" on these bases. Or if you would like to do so, then that same label should apply to the entire bunch.

We ha have to keep pushing Asobo to fix bugs, complete lacking features they marketed, allow for 3PD to do their magic: but that's exactly what all sims always needed and will need.

Why are you defending any of this stuff. MS/Asobo embellished us with plenty of videos and talk of how realistic this stuff was going to work, especially with the partners they have on board. Not every issue should or has to be resolved by 3rd parties. If I have to purchase a bunch of add-ons to bring this to the level of other offerings it basically doesn't make it any better, other then the pretty scenery in certain areas.

[StoneDoor 86]

1 minute ago, tpete61 said:

Why are you defending any of this stuff. MS/Asobo embellished us with plenty of videos and talk of how realistic this stuff was going to work, especially with the partners they have on board. Not every issue should or has to be resolved by 3rd parties. If I have to purchase a bunch of add-ons to bring this to the level of other offerings it basically doesn't make it any better, other then the pretty scenery in certain areas.

Just buy it and use it yourself. Then at least you know what you are talking about.

[Chock 17,769]

1 hour ago, marsman2020 said:

With FS2020, Microsoft has total control and can kill the entire thing on a whim if they want to.

At which point either Lockheed Martin or Dovetail, or someone else will step up and do their version of it because they know there's a market already been set up which they could make money off. So I wouldn't worry too much about that scenario, it could even be a good thing, when Aces closed it was good for FSX, with it ending up getting a recompile with the service packs and tweaks built in plus nemerous improvements and additions, and it resulted in P3D coming into existence, as well as prompting Laminar to make more of an effort to sell things with some of the competition being out of the way for a while.

[snglecoil 1,828]

1 minute ago, tpete61 said:

Not every issue should or has to be resolved by 3rd parties.

This ^^^^ right here is the crux of it. 

Not anti-3rd party at all, but that seems to be the default answer to every question for some folks around here. 

[VFXSimmer 1,310]

4 minutes ago, wthomas33065 said:

That's not entirely true.  We have base scenery and mesh that gets installed.  IF MS pulls the plug, it would be like going back to offline mode, which is still pretty impressive regarding that it is nearly 100% autogen.  Roads, Freeways, building placement and vegetation placement are all still there, even in offline mode.  Your addons should also work in offline mode, if properly programmed.  I do know going to offline mode causes some issues with Orbx KTIW, but scenery devs should make their sceneries be able to adjust to offline and online modes appropriately.  That's on the third party developer.

One of the first things I did was see what "offline" looks like and whether or not I would be happy with it.  And while it's not even close to having real satellite imagery with photogrammetry, it is still head and shoulders better than what FSX provides out of the box.    The down side is really lack of hand crafted buildings,   FSX has more handcrafted buildings than FS2020, which primarily relies on Photogrammetry.  But the autogen in FS2020 blows anything that FSX can do.  

I flew in my neighborhood and still was able to place the building that contains my townhouse, even offline.  Something that FSX and it's randomized housing and vegetation placement can't do.

I have to agree with this.  Even if the plug were pulled we be in no worse shape than the other base sims.  I've been doing a lot with the SDK and there are things we can do now (even with its buggy state) that you simply can't with something like Xplane's World Editor (cant speak about Prepared - never made scenery for that).  The procedural trees and grass come for free with the engine and you can terraform the mesh within the editor for starters.  Even more substantial is that you make your scenery edits in the live sim - makes a world of difference when precisely placing new details.

They havent published the details on the terrain mesh yet, but the hooks I've already seen make it hard to believe we wouldnt be able to implement something like Ortho4xp to replace mesh & terrain textures.  Yes, no guarantee, but if you base any of your hesitation with this sim on the chance that MS pulls the plug, I think the outlook for continuing extended life with the sim is already in a better place than FSX when its plug was pulled.

[tpete61 227]

13 minutes ago, snglecoil said:

This ^^^^ right here is the crux of it. 

Not anti-3rd party at all, but that seems to be the default answer to every question for some folks around here. 

It's absolutely is a standard answer here and on other forums!

It then makes this product not much more advanced then the other offerings.

For example "weather" was highly touted from the beginning of development. While some may claim it works fine many others can't say so. I still have winds that are somewhat accurate on a first flight. Once re-fueled and taxing for my next leg the weather is back to 225/03. At least in North America.

As for "StoneDoor" saying buy it yourself...I was in early ALPHA and do own the premium deluxe version.

I'm not at all regretting my purchase, but I'm solidly convinced this game is far, far from acceptable. The "tied of progress hopefully is unstoppable" because this game has much room for improvement before I invest in any 3rd party stuff.

 

Edited September 23, 2020 by tpete61

[VFXSimmer 1,310]

14 minutes ago, snglecoil said:

This ^^^^ right here is the crux of it. 

Not anti-3rd party at all, but that seems to be the default answer to every question for some folks around here. 

Its only the default answer because its the default answer every flight sim.  Why would MSFS need to be any different?  If you truly read/watch the press releases from Asobo, the sim that was delivered is completely in line with what was delivered.  I'm not talking about the bugs (thats a different conversation), but feature set when I say this.  The hype that many complain about is really self inflicted - it was the community, for example, that leapt the conclusion that you would never need 3rd parties.. MS/Asobo never claimed this.  They also never claimed that the planes would be study level.

Everyone agrees there are bugs and you can make a case about whether it was 'released early'.  If you feel its not worth your money, ask for a refund or dont re-up your gamepass sub.  Many of us are thrilled to use the sim in its current (extremely beautiful - opinion, mine) state and continue to politely prod for the fixes/updates of the rest.  For me, I'd much rather be using it now then being stuck constantly watching youtube videos from the beta testers and WISHING I could get my hands on it...

[marsman2020 1,310]

51 minutes ago, wthomas33065 said:

That's not entirely true.  We have base scenery and mesh that gets installed.  IF MS pulls the plug, it would be like going back to offline mode, which is still pretty impressive regarding that it is nearly 100% autogen.  Roads, Freeways, building placement and vegetation placement are all still there, even in offline mode.  Your addons should also work in offline mode, if properly programmed.  I do know going to offline mode causes some issues with Orbx KTIW, but scenery devs should make their sceneries be able to adjust to offline and online modes appropriately.  That's on the third party developer.

One of the first things I did was see what "offline" looks like and whether or not I would be happy with it.  And while it's not even close to having real satellite imagery with photogrammetry, it is still head and shoulders better than what FSX provides out of the box.    The down side is really lack of hand crafted buildings,   FSX has more handcrafted buildings than FS2020, which primarily relies on Photogrammetry.  But the autogen in FS2020 blows anything that FSX can do.  

I flew in my neighborhood and still was able to place the building that contains my townhouse, even offline.  Something that FSX and it's randomized housing and vegetation placement can't do.

How would you login with your Microsoft account into the username/password that is required to get to the main menu if Microsoft decided to shut down the login servers?

How would you download the 100GB of the base game if those servers are gone?

[snglecoil 1,828]

3 minutes ago, VFXSimmer said:

Its only the default answer because its the default answer every flight sim.  Why would MSFS need to be any different?  If you truly read/watch the press releases from Asobo, the sim that was delivered is completely in line with what was delivered.

Sorry but that excuse is just that...an excuse. MSFS has already raised the bar on what “default” can be. Why stop raising the bar? What qualifies something as “Study Level” (🤮 that term) what percentage of non-inop switches or basic system capabilities crosses the “study-level” threshold? When half the world reports accurate live weather, and the other half doesn’t, is it time to call in the 3rd party cavalry because that’s Just the way it’s been done for the past 10+ years?

I don’t want to speak for you, @tpete61, but get the feeling we share the same sentiment here. We both participated in the alpha, own the super deluxe version MSFS, and want to see it thrive. It is not in its current state, however, what was represented in all of the pre-release marketing. People can call it griping if they want. The title hasn’t delivered on those incredibly lofty expectations yet. I’m very excited by was was shown and will continue to encourage Asobo to meet the challenge of delivering that vision. If it comes across as being negative, sorry. It is not intended that way.