9 minutes ago, leprechaunlive said:

Actually i dont think Chris is one, he's in love with the new sim, but as usual love brings a lot of conflicting thoughts 😄

Fair but I find the entire concept of the original point suspect.  I don't recall Asobo or MS implying we will never need mods ever again.  Maybe the community believed it from the videos but given how much time they focused on working with 3PD I don't think they did.  A sim that does all things well and deep would likely be expensive and take forever to develop, the scenery which is clearly what the core of this sim was is beyond whatever we had before.  I mean there is bugs for sure and problems with the GPS systems etc.  And I have certainly experienced a few of them but these are complex programs.  There is a reason there is a CTD forum on AVSIM and its been here longer then the MSFS one has been.

To say they are not trying is a bit ridiculous.  We had 3 patches in 45 days; more transparency then I am used to seeing from any sim developer with maybe the exception of Laminar.  I think its pretty unfair to suggest that they are not trying.

3 minutes ago, pjs37 said:

Fair but I find the entire concept of the original point suspect.  I don't recall Asobo or MS implying we will never need mods ever again.  Maybe the community believed it from the videos but given how much time they focused on working with 3PD I don't think they did.  A sim that does all things well and deep would likely be expensive and take forever to develop, the scenery which is clearly what the core of this sim was is beyond whatever we had before.  I mean there is bugs for sure and problems with the GPS systems etc.  And I have certainly experienced a few of them but these are complex programs.  There is a reason there is a CTD forum on AVSIM and its been here longer then the MSFS one has been.

To say they are not trying is a bit ridiculous.  We had 3 patches in 45 days; more transparency then I am used to seeing from any sim developer with maybe the exception of Laminar.  I think its pretty unfair to suggest that they are not trying.

Nothing to add, that was perfect!

2 hours ago, Virtual-Chris said:

Does Microsoft or Asobo do anything really well?

Not really- each aspect of the simulation has obvious issues... but they are working on it...  

Despite all the hiccups I can tell you that for the first time in my simulator life (starting with the Apple IIc) I find myself staring out the window.  I taxi back to the ramp and remember the feeling of doing exactly the same thing many moons ago, and it feels like Deja Vue.  I have at my disposal the very best available in P3D, and yet I find myself flying the 152 mod or the Mooney every time I get a few extra minutes that do not involve testing.  Each time I go back to testing, I marvel at the fact that the sim I love, and have spent literally thousands of hours in, suddenly seems flat and cartoon like, in comparison to this newcomer.

I am a realist, not an apologist and yet, like a lovestruck teenager, I cannot tear myself away from this new girl who just moved into town and turned my head.  I sure hope Asobo and MS don't leave me weeping in a parking lot after the Prom.

Fingers x'ed!

C

 

Edited October 7, 20205 yr by cavaricooper

1 hour ago, Virtual-Chris said:

I guess I’m glad that MS/Asobo have built a frame work to enable this, but from what I’ve read, even that’s not great  

Using words like "I guess" and "from what I've read" I can only assume that you are making a comment from a zero experience with the product, point of view.  You have, IMO, picked up on the negative comments of probably 1 percent, if that, assuming that a lot of the negatives comes from a small, but highly repetitive percentage of the consumer base (based on sales figures of over 1 million buyers) As a fully paid up consumer, I am "guessing" that 99 percent or more consumers are happy with the product but not voicing their opinion. 

I personally feel happy because I am largely unaffected by the "bugs" but would like a speedier route to quality payware aircraft and utilities. MS/Asobo have indeed built a great framework (better base than all before it) but it certainly has some deficiencies.  

This has been discussed countless times on this forum alone and the same point of view has been expressed so many times it has become boring.  Don't get me wrong, I believe that some of the negative opinions are based on very frustrating facts and for those I have a great deal of sympathy.  There are, however, many trolls out there, motivated by Lord knows what, actively trying to torpedo this platform. I do not know if they do this because they are afraid that their favourite platform may be under pressure or about to be killed off (both points of view, I think are erroneous, as I think increased competition is very good for flight simming in general)  

I do not think that the perpetuation of these negatives by a minority of users, serves any useful purpose

2 hours ago, Virtual-Chris said:

It seems if you want a realistic (or even working) experience you need a heavily modified plane, add-on airports, add-on scenery, add-on weather generator, add-on ATC, 3rd party flight planning, and 3rd party log book. 

This is a completely original point of view.  I can really understand it because FS4/5, FS2004, FSX, FSX-SE P3D Aerofly, DCS and all the other platforms never needed these add-ons and were perfect out of the box.  I am at a loss to understand why we have had to "suffer" through the upgrades, nor, why so many people "suffered' through and paid good money for these upgrades. Human nature is sometimes hard to fathom.

I apologise for the tone in this response, but I am so tired of the same points of view put forward by so few people so many times.  

Lets face the facts. 

1. it is a new release

2. it is not perfect.

3. 3pds will "fix" a lot of the problems in the future,

4. the add-ons will eventually cost us a fortune which is exactly the same situation as all the previous platforms, and 

5. despite many years of development, NONE of the other platforms are not perfect and probably will NEVER be. Why is MSFS any different?

Lets please, be constructive with comments and not simply repeat the oft repeated comments of the relatively few consumers of this product. This last comment has also been repeated and by people who are far better at putting words and ideas forward, than I am.

Tony

1 hour ago, Virtual-Chris said:

Does MSFS do anything really well?

Yup. Loads of things:

Good feeling of flying; great scenery by default; runs great on even a modest computer; has a good camera system; has lots of help for new pilots; has lots of option settings; can run offline or online; is pretty inexpensive for what you get; has a good default flight planner with SIDs, STARs, and Transitions; has a good scenery designer built-in; comes with built-in weather; does clouds well; has great lighting; has great foliage; has great wildlife; water looks good; has a good market interface; has pretty good profiles for a lot of controllers; is fairly straightforward to install mods; has live links to support; has a built-in buddy system; runs in multiplayer well.

That's a few things. Of course not everything is perfect and it does need some work, but there is lots which is very good about it.

1 hour ago, Virtual-Chris said:

Why don't they pick something... anything... and do it really well. Make it so you wouldn't dare mod it?

This is an absolutely brilliant idea.  I suggest they perfect the Cessna 172 so that is totally realistic. Another developer could do the same with the Cessna 152 and so on. If every aspect of simming is treated this way we could have a completely disjointed and unworkable platform with about 30,000 developers to glean the totally justified negative comments from everyone and not just a minority. In a perfect world, MS/Asobo could just depart the scene.  

Despite the intended sarcasm, The quoted statement is unfathomable.

Tony

I have played the Sim extensively. I'm not a pilot but I was flying 150K miles a year before Covid and so flying was a part of my life. I also work as part of a product team where I realize compromises need to be made.  There's no such thing as a perfect product.  But I am very disappointed that Microsoft/Asobo did not really try to focus on nailing any one area with a high standard. 

Some of you love the scenery... it is very good but also fundamentally flawed in many aspects.  When nearly every city, airport and landmark can benefit from some community mod (pulled from Google data) you know that MS/Asobo didn't actually deliver that aspect of it to a high standard.  The same has to be said about the planes which have had serious issues with AP and still do.  And the ATC.  I could be convinced they nailed the weather and lighting, but even that has issues.

So I'm not trolling. I'm passionate about it.  I'm glad you guys all love it. I like it too.  I'm disappointed and feel that MS/Asobo needs to step up and decide what they are building here and what is going to be the aspect they really need to knock out of the park, and execute that to a very high standard, and then let the community pick up the pieces that are left.  (And I actually wish they had made a decision about what to focus on much earlier and really nailed that for launch - or delayed launch until they achieved that).

Edited October 7, 20205 yr by Virtual-Chris

26 minutes ago, himmelhorse said:

Lets face the facts. 

1. it is a new release

2. it is not perfect.

3. 3pds will "fix" a lot of the problems in the future,

4. the add-ons will eventually cost us a fortune which is exactly the same situation as all the previous platforms, and 

5. despite many years of development, NONE of the other platforms are not perfect and probably will NEVER be. Why is MSFS any different?

Lets please, be constructive with comments and not simply repeat the oft repeated comments of the relatively few consumers of this product. This last comment has also been repeated and by people who are far better at putting words and ideas forward, than I am.

Tony

That is true, but really sad.  How did we get to this point where this is an acceptable way to ship a product?

54 minutes ago, Virtual-Chris said:

LOL... Look I'm not the only one here complaining that things could be better. Look at the front page of this forum on any given day to see a dozen current issues that are impacting peoples enjoyment of this simulator.

This is just getting worse IMO.  Look at the front page of this forum on any given day and see 99 percent of people who are not responding to this sort of comment. Your comments, again IMO, are more and more indefensible. 

I am at a loss to work out where you are coming from.  My initial impression was that you were not a consumer of this product, Then you state that you have not simmed since the 80s. Then I think you stated that maybe your expectations were a little high and now this statement.  I do not know whether or not you are aware that the bugs and problems people are complaining about are not affecting everybody at all.  In fact, and I digress, I am not at all sure that these problems are not Windows OS problems.  There is certainly some incredible inconsistencies that could be put down to OS, MS bugs, user faults and/or hardware/driver issues.  These issues are going to take a lot of working out, in both fault finding and fault resolution. What further confuses me is the fact that you are not actually complaining about problems you are undergoing, and simply appear to be repeating previously repeated comments.  I really do not know where you are at.

I do not think I will contribute much further as many will believe that I am picking on you, and that is far from my intention.   

Tony

2 minutes ago, himmelhorse said:

This is just getting worse IMO.  Look at the front page of this forum on any given day and see 99 percent of people who are not responding to this sort of comment. Your comments, again IMO, are more and more indefensible. 

I am at a loss to work out where you are coming from.  My initial impression was that you were not a consumer of this product, Then you state that you have not simmed since the 80s. Then I think you stated that maybe your expectations were a little high and now this statement.  I do not know whether or not you are aware that the bugs and problems people are complaining about are not affecting everybody at all.  In fact, and I digress, I am not at all sure that these problems are not Windows OS problems.  There is certainly some incredible inconsistencies that could be put down to OS, MS bugs, user faults and/or hardware/driver issues.  These issues are going to take a lot of working out, in both fault finding and fault resolution. What further confuses me is the fact that you are not actually complaining about problems you are undergoing, and simply appear to be repeating previously repeated comments.  I really do not know where you are at.

I do not think I will contribute much further as many will believe that I am picking on you, and that is far from my intention.   

Tony

I'm talking about my own experience. I've started many threads on this forum and participate in many others... trying to find mods or fixes for various issues

I find the ATC infuriatingly useless... asking me to expedite my climb to FL140 on final.  I had to install a mod to just get reverse thrust working on the 208B. All of the mountains I fly by have poor textures, all marinas are underwater, the beaches covered in a flat 2d bush texture, most of Vancouver is made of melted buildings, CYVR has zero lighting on the ramps.  My AP seems to have a mind of its own sometimes.  The other day I tried to find out how to do a pop-up IFR clearance... doesn't exist.  I'm looking for an immersive flying experience and there's a lot of issues detracting from it.

Give Japan a go... much better.  That's hopefully where we are headed world wide.  I hear you and you do have valid issues...perhaps I just have a bit more patience.

C

 

I laugh when I see all the traffic these troll posts get 🙂

I suggest that a separate forum is setup for trolls, whiners and complainers so ASOBO can quickly get a handle on whatever and the rest of us can move forward in a constructive manner without the flak.

Cheers

 

 

bs

Edited October 8, 20205 yr by bean_sprout

@Virtual-Chris I'm feeling some of the same frustrations. I have 10 or so airports around the world that I use as home base for that region/country. Almost all of them have no buildings except maybe a beacon and/or control tower. None of them have accurate taxi way markings. One airport, which happens to be the main military aviation training school for that country, is completely missing except for photoreal textures (which show the airport on top of the mesh BTW).

The very first flight I took in the 172, it climbed at 500'/min up to 11000, never changing IAS or needing to reduce climb rate. In addition, it needed almost no leaning of fuel mixture. 

The second flight I took in the 172, I flew to a medium size municipal airport in southern California that was my first time to that airport. It had almost no buildings, the taxiway designations did not match the couple of taxiway signs that were visible. The wind on the ground (I am running the latest patch) did not match the real world METAR. The visibility did match, but, hey, this is the southern California desert...severe clear most of the time.

I went to buy the Carenado Mooney and found out thru reviews, that it would not cold and dark start (believe that has been fixed). 

I've had a couple of experiences that I would call radically modern and a wonderful departure from previous sims, but again, what part of experiences listed are NOT supposed be part of a flight simulator?

Yes, we are being patient but meanwhile, I'm still flying 70% of my time in Prepar3d because I want to simulate real world pilotage.

PS I dont fly tubeliners. 

 

Edited October 8, 20205 yr by yurei

W F F C, absolutely fantastic work a round, never a better application. 

1 hour ago, Virtual-Chris said:

find the ATC infuriatingly useless... asking me to expedite my climb to FL140 on final.  I had to install a mod to just get reverse thrust working on the 208B. All of the mountains I fly by have poor textures, all marinas are underwater, the beaches covered in a flat 2d bush texture, most of Vancouver is made of melted buildings, CYVR has zero lighting on the ramps.  My AP seems to have a mind of its own sometimes.  The other day I tried to find out how to do a pop-up IFR clearance... doesn't exist.  I'm looking for an immersive flying experience and there's a lot of issues detracting from it.

I am totally with you on this. This morning I set up a flight plan flying from Cairns to Townsville in the DA62. I set the flight height at 3500 in order to comply with direction of travel, civil GA requirements and to do some sight seeing. I am given ATC approval to take off and climb to 3500 (set on autopilot) and off I go. I get to 3500 feet and I am then told to climb to 4000ft so this not only does not comply with direction of flight (south = odd feet, GA travel (+500ft) it also negates all attempts to set a height in the navlog.  Simple solution is to cancel IFR and Go with my route and height requirements.  Annoying but not a deal breaker.  What to me is worse in P3D is the number of unprofessional airline pilots who are constantly 300 ft above or below their assigned altitude and other similar nonsensities with default ATC in all platforms.  Again, inconsistancies, but not really deal breakers.  No real point is pausing the sim, going outside to pick up a brick to hurl through the monitor screen.

At least, I now know that you have been flying in this sim for a little while, so I would just advise a little more patience ... the 3PDs will sort it out eventually.  PTATC is now available to those who can afford it, and I believe it is vastly superior to default flight planning and ATC. Life is good mate

Tony