MSFS 2020 is the best thing to happen to flight simmers

[Tierborn 203]

4 hours ago, Bert Pieke said:

Well maybe... P3D and XPlane have their own development plans in place, and MSFS is not exactly delivering what they do..

Possibly there is room for all three, each doing what they are good at..

MSFS is first and foremost an Entertainment Title and they have yet to show that they can support serious flightsimming..  A year from now?  Who can say.. 🙂

If MSFS is entertainment then so is P3D and Xplane.  The comment that MSFS is a entertainment flight sim and P3D and Xplane are not is just a ridiculous notion.  All three, sim the flight experience.  I would submit that MSFS will have the highest user base.   And these users will range from the guys that like to fly airplanes into the ground in their neighborhood,, to guys the enjoy multiplayer fly-ins, to guys that are interested in flying "study level" aircraft.

[Richard Sennett 2,499]

5 minutes ago, Dirk98 said:

Strangely, but I doubt about many so many other things in 2020 rather than that. Just curious, why do you think that it is so hard to pull off? 

Hi Dirk not sure if its hard to pull off but as you mention they will have no time for that wish as they have bigger fish to fry - have you used xplane ? if so you no what I mean

First time I saw the lighting at airports I was blown away - was like being there - those led lights shining on the tarmac so nice

[Dirk98 354]

1 minute ago, Tierborn said:

If MSFS is entertainment then so is P3D and Xplane.  The comment that MSFS is a entertainment flight sim and P3D and Xplane are not is just a ridiculous notion.  All three, sim the flight experience.  I would submit that MSFS will have the highest user base.   And these users will range from the guys that like to fly airplanes into the ground in their neighborhood,, to guys the enjoy multiplayer fly-ins, to guys that are interested in flying "study level" aircraft.

Come on, the strongest attraction point in MSFS2020 currently is visuals, not simulation by any means.

[Dirk98 354]

6 minutes ago, Richard Sennett said:

Hi Dirk not sure if its hard to pull off but as you mention they will have no time for that wish as they have bigger fish to fry - have you used xplane ? if so you no what I mean

Of course, I know, Richard. And I must say I like night lights in MSFS2020 over P3Dv5 already. However I agree XP11 is the winner hands down in that part.  

Edited September 26, 2020 by Dirk98

[Richard Sennett 2,499]

1 minute ago, Dirk98 said:

Of course, I know Richard. And I must say I like night lights in MSFS2020 over P3Dv5 already. However I agree XP11 is the winner hands down in that part.  

There you go Buddy so hard to explain unless you see it for yourself 

Vehicles go by airport and you actually believe its a vehicle 

Edited September 26, 2020 by Richard Sennett

[sd_flyer 6,119]

I have question. Is an airplane image below a toy or hardcore training tool? 🙂

 

[Richard Sennett 2,499]

1 minute ago, sd_flyer said:

I have question. Is an airplane image below a toy or hardcore training tool? 🙂

 

Hardcore 🙂

[Bert Pieke 7,607]

3 hours ago, sd_flyer said:

You mention 152. It pretty accurate . What is a problem for hardcore simmer?

I went for dinner, and came back to find the discussion morphing all over the place... but back to the discussion as I remember it..

If MSFS had launched with only the C152 and the A320 as flyable planes and both worked correctly, I would probably have agreed with the notion that this is a good base for future development..

What they did, however, was launch with a dozen planes, mostly with Garmin avionics that are missing the most basic capabilities... Hence my comments.

As for what I ask for as a "serious simmer"  (do not recall using the word hardcore..), is for the instruments in the panel to work correctly.   Garmin GPSs, whether GNS, or G1000, or GTN.. all have certain common functions which a pilot learns as "memory items". For example, you should be able to highlight a waypoint, whether in the flightplan or on the Nearest page, and push DTO Enter Enter.  Or, you should be able to choose a waypoint in the flightplan and push Menu Activate leg. These are just examples..

None of this works at present, which makes the GPS little more than a moving map.

There are two ways forward, that I can see... Either Asobo gets its act together and makes this work (maybe in partnership with Garmin),  or they come up with an SDK that allows 3rd parties such as RXP or Flight1 to build the avionics for them..

I am hopeful that this resolves itself, it is indeed early days 🙂

[Dirk98 354]

4 minutes ago, sd_flyer said:

I have question. Is an airplane image below a toy or hardcore training tool? 🙂

 

Can be both, depending on the real-time performance, and/or your point you're trying to put across.

Edited September 26, 2020 by Dirk98

[LarryD 132]

1 hour ago, Noel said:

1.  Create and customize an IFR flight plan.

2.  Utilize built-in pushback services for entertainment, which looks better than having no ground crew.

3.  Fly the Daher TBM 930 on that flight plan, using the G3000 FMS.  I don't now if it's accurate as such at all, but it works as it appears it should.  I can even enter an instrument flight plan in the MFD and it ports to ATC automatically.

4.  I can follow ATC's routing and most of the time, it's as reasonable as FSX/Pbut again, it's similar to the base product in FSX/P3D.

5.  I can do an ILS approach and landing or visual.   

Bingo...(5 times)

I am going to add to that you can also do RNAV approaches very nicely.  I know we all tend to think that it has to be autopilot on an approach, but it really doesn't.  The LNAV can fly all the RNAV approach fixes to the runway, and as pilot, we simply descend to the published altitude for the fixes.  When we are at the missed approach point at the minimum altitude, we either see the runway environment or we don't.  We land or execute the miss.

And actually on second thought, it is the autopilot that is descending.  We as the pilot just set the altitude and descent rate and click a button.  

 

There is nothing from the flying standpoint that cannot be done.  No, not on autopilot for RNAV, I agree, but the planes are certainly flyable.

[Adrian123 1,016]

2 hours ago, Noel said:

3.  Fly the Daher TBM 930 on that flight plan, using the G3000 FMS.  I don't now if it's accurate as such at all, but it works as it appears it should.  I can even enter an instrument flight plan in the MFD and it ports to ATC automatically.

Based on my familiarity with Xplanes Xaviation Hotstart TBM 900, it is defiantly NOT even close! Flight dynamics or Navigation systems. IMO, the MSFS is a very Dumbed down version for use with an Xbox controller in mind..

Edited September 26, 2020 by Adrian123

[FlyBaby 659]

1 hour ago, abrams_tank said:

The business case for X-Plane and P3D is not good.  The userbase for both are shrinking and unless sales of X-Plane and P3D can justify future development expenses, it’s very possible that both may see very reduced development in the future.  I see a lot of 3rd parties are already shifting to MSFS and I think I even read some of them have plans to stop further releases for X-Plane and P3D.

I like to compare MSFS to the IPhone release in 2007.  When the IPhone was released in 2007, it shook up the mobile phone industry.  For some phone models like the Blackberry, the writing was on the wall.  I think there is a strong possibility that X-Plane and P3D may go the way of Blackberry.  The technological gap is too big and X-Plane and P3D are stuck on an engine from the last decade.

Exactly…

Another advantage that MSFS has is the marketplace where they now get a cut of the addon sales.

Folk always said that sims can’t survive without addons…now MSFS gets to eat along with the 3P Devs. What was up and running on day 1? The Store. What was available day 1? Addons. MSFS weekly updates now include new store items…

LR hardly worked with 3P Devs (like X-Enviro) for compatibility although these addons were trying to get more out of XP and address the gaps. Austin did not position XP to compete on a large scale. He obviously has other projects and XP remained under small development cycles. Not faulting him, he is much bigger than XP; but at the same time, XP did not take advantage of the past 10 years to really advance given that the competition was stale.

MSFS has the looks, a unique offering (the world), the community engagement, the social media presence (yes those YT vids make a difference), and the marketplace to put the addons right in front of the user for a seamless purchase / install. Their approach was top notch from Day 1 (the trailer).

Just look at Flightsim.to with over 300 freeware addons (including 130+ airports / enhancements) less than 1.5 months after the release. The community is pushing just as hard as Asobo to make MSFS the best sim ever.

[ShawnG 1,823]

The OP isn't so much about what does and does not deserve to call themselves a sim, but whether or not the arrival of MSFS is going to cause the other sims to have to raise their game in response.  Predictably, there is a backlash of folks who are conditionally triggered by the notion of calling MSFS2020 a "sim", and people who are triggered by people who are triggered about calling MSFS2020 a sim, so that's what we've been talking about.  as usual.

Unfortunately this industry consists of three main sims which have wildly varying reasons for existing.  MSFS is a mass market sim as it has been since the early 80's.  P3D is a training aid developed and licensed from a previous version of  MSFS by a defense contractor, and XPlane is a personal passion project with only mild market aspirations.  Given that P3D is loosely (for now) prohibited by legal agreement from competing in the public arena with MSFS, and that Austin Meyer sees his product mainly as a foil for MSFS and an aerodynamic development tool,  I doubt that either party is interested in really taking on the giant.  Lockheed's interest in casual use of their product is mainly just to serve as a paying wide test bed for the sim that they make for military applications and commercial installations.  In the case of XPlane, it's possible that Google might want to partner with them for the purposes of developing their geodata in a similar fashion that MS/Bing is, but would Austin want to do that?

Of course we all are aware of this, but what gets everyone bitter and hacked off is not what the simulators do in response, but what the third party developers do.  For many years, MSFS had been the home of the payware development scene, and xplane was a freeware dominated scene.  As FSX was abandoned, and XPlane dragged itself out of obscurity in the last few years, that changed, with devs going to P3D and Xplane to produce payware.  This wasn't a move made of desire, but necessity.  It was what they had left at that point.  Third party developers aren't going to produce add-ons for platforms that don't sell, and given reality and potential market, the amount of addons available for P3D and XP are going to go down once the current SDK issues are resolved.  And given the incentive that both the 3rd party devs and MS have to resolve them, it will get done.  

So will MSFS cause the other sims to raise their game?  Probably not.  Lockheed will continue their development for their internal needs until the day comes when they don't. they may or may not allow the public to join them as they have in the past.  Austin already thinks his sim is superior in every way to everybody else, other than in areas that he thinks are stupid wastes of time, so I'm not really that convinced that either is going to significantly change their trajectory.

[sd_flyer 6,119]

33 minutes ago, Dirk98 said:

Can be both, depending on the real-time performance, and/or your point you're trying to put across.

Well by analogy can be said to any sim! Play with it to use it as training aid.

By the way I used to use iPad  arcade sim to demonstrate my students forward slips and proper attitude during touch down. Worked good as well!

Similarly, I don't see any difference between XP11, P3D, and MSFS as far as stick and rudder skill. Neither of them will help someone to get endorsed for solo next day no matter haw extensive hardcore swimming experience. But in case MSFS  photorealistic entreatment aspect does come with good use. Know how things look from the cockpit is a big deal. Especially for those instructors whose students lost during cross country solo LOL (yes I know some of them).

Even just flying for fun and exploring can give an edge. I used to use google map for that (no kidding) And yes when I fly in MSFS I see Starbucks short final runway 24 of my home airport just like I see it every time I fly in real life. Even ORBX didn't have so detailed landscape.

[Bob Scott 7,779]

And here we go again...