My view on MSFS now, 2 months after release

[Chock 17,769]

1 hour ago, rksoftware said:

2 months after its release, the "simulator" has not shown any real improvements

So what was all that additional 1.5Gb's of Japan scenery then if that wasn't an improvement?

We all know that MSFS needs some fixes and needs a solid SDK, but we also know these are coming. The forum language filter won't let me write what your original thread post is, but I can tell you that it rhymes with Frolics.

Edited October 15, 2020 by Chock

[stubbornswiss 38]

I think a lot of problems people are having are either with the 'version' they have (MS Store, Steam, Disc), their hardware, their install or their internet speed.

I am running the MS Store version on the hardware I have in my signature. It is installed in the default location (C Drive). I am always very meticulous with my installs/updates and don't have a community folder full of stuff. I have Navigraph installed and fly primarily the FlyByWire A320NX, which I recently took around the world with few problems. Yes, the FMC issue with changing runways/approaches and the 'User' waypoint which can't be deleted is still there, and yes a couple of my flights were not logged correctly. But overall, it was a very good experience.

The other day, I took the Cessna 150 on a short VFR flight from my local airstrip to another VFR field, and was also pleasantly surprised.

So although the sim is not fully were it needs to be yet, I do believe it is both flyable and enjoyable as of now, and continue to hope for positive updates.

Hey... this is just MY take on this subject!

[NBurgess 49]

Whilst I have a great deal of sympathy with the OP's point of view, the last thing we need is yet another thread saying the same thing as countless others.

I find myself in the curious position of feeling that all my simming is rather unsatisfactory at the moment.  I would say that I previously spent my P3D time split around 70% tubeliner flying PMDG etc, and around 30% GA in my A2A fleet. 

Since MSFS arrived  I'm a bit unhappy with both.  I now look out of the window in P3D and meh, after MSFS, I'm really unhappy with the visuals.  I fire up MSFS and really miss any high quality addons.  I spend time in both, but neither quite cuts it for me at present due to the presence of the other !

I'm suppose I'm just going to have to be patient.....

[leprechaunlive 1,852]

54 minutes ago, overspeed3 said:

I guess if you just call anyone with any negative comments a "troll" and the'll just go away nicely and hide in shame,,,

Hopefully

[DavidP 1,410]

2 hours ago, rksoftware said:

At this time for me, MSFS is only a "Cessna 172 VFR simulator"

You should have known anything other than glowing praise is forbidden 😁

[flycln 435]

9 minutes ago, NBurgess said:

Whilst I have a great deal of sympathy with the OP's point of view, the last thing we need is yet another thread saying the same thing as countless others.

I find myself in the curious position of feeling that all my simming is rather unsatisfactory at the moment.  I would say that I previously spent my P3D time split around 70% tubeliner flying PMDG etc, and around 30% GA in my A2A fleet. 

Since MSFS arrived  I'm a bit unhappy with both.  I now look out of the window in P3D and meh, after MSFS, I'm really unhappy with the visuals.  I fire up MSFS and really miss any high quality addons.  I spend time in both, but neither quite cuts it for me at present due to the presence of the other !

I'm suppose I'm just going to have to be patient.....

This is exactly where I stand. 
 

I can either have great scenery (although MSFS scenery is also quite flawed) or great planes (in P3D). 
 

And given the fact that the scenery devs have clearly thrown their whole man power at MSFS it seems like the P3D scenery market is going to dry up. At the same time a good selection of great high quality complex airplanes in MSFS is at least 1-3 years away. 
 

So now I’m faced with a couple of years of seeing hardly any great new scenery for P3D but I also just can’t get myself to fly the terrible planes in MSFS. 
 

I am totally not up for flying some modded A320 that is still an undercomplex flawed disaster when I have an FSLabs in P3D. 
 

Pretty meh situation to be in. 

[ShawnG 1,823]

1 hour ago, overspeed3 said:

I guess if you just call anyone with any negative comments a "troll" and the'll just go away nicely and hide in shame,,,

I guess if you just call the sim a VFR arcade toy, and make reference to the XBOX then Msfs2020 will go away and hide in shame...

 

[scotchegg 4,186]

I think it might be well beyond time to stop feeding the trolls. Just let these threads pass unanswered.

[LarryD 132]

2 hours ago, rksoftware said:

At this time for me, MSFS is only a "Cessna 172 VFR simulator" and a nice scenery tool to view the earth from above by setting dev camera on and using the XBOX controller to span around.

 

I know that there are some on this forum that feel these types of posts should not be responded to.  The reason I disagree with that is these post get displayed on the search engines, and then some newcomer hears about MSFS, does a search to read about it, stumbles on this, no one responds, and goes away thinking it's the truth.  So here is my take on this comment.

You at least stated "for me" which might be the most important two words of your entire post.  Because for many of us, MSFS is far more than a C172 VFR simulator.  And by you saying that, it means 1) you truly are here just to try and stir the pot, or, 2) you just do not have a complete understanding of what IFR is.  I'll assume #2.  For the record, IFR flight is NOT turning on an autopilot and letting the plane fly itself while you take a nap or read a book.

Most of the aircraft included in MSFS have the required equipment that the FAA requires for an aircraft to be certified for IFR flight, and that equipment works just fine in MSFS 2020. Just because at this time, "some" of the avionics do not work as well as their real life counterpart, does not mean the pilot cannot still conduct an IFR flight.

If you want to use it a C172 VFR simulator, go right ahead.  In fact, that is now how I primarily use it myself.  But should you find yourself  in IMC conditions (google it), you can absolutely finish your flight IFR with any type of approach, be it ILS, RNAV, or (heaven forbid 😁) a VOR approach.

Edited October 15, 2020 by LarryD

[LarryD 132]

DUPE

Edited October 15, 2020 by LarryD

[mickatmian 52]

27 minutes ago, stubbornswiss said:

I think a lot of problems people are having are either with the 'version' they have (MS Store, Steam, Disc), their hardware, their install or their internet speed

I have MS store version since day one running fine on similar hardware to you, up until this latest  update that is. Now 2 days later and after half a dozen goes at the update, a complete uninstall, a reinstall of a windows backup from a month ago, and several attempts at reinstall, I am finally 6hrs into a reinstall.

Oh and I have been building computers and flight simming since the 1970's so I thought I knew what I was doing.

As of now, much I like the sim, I am not the best person to give Asobo/Microsft a referance.

To others on this thread. Be a bit more tolerant of people who don't see the sim the same way you do. It is getting so people on this forum are jumped on by some of you the moment  a negative comment is posted.

Mick

[kingm56 1,031]

13 minutes ago, DavidP said:

You should have known anything other than glowing praise is forbidden 😁

That’s BS; everyone who uses MSFS is well aware of the current limitations... There are plenty. However, it’s this persistent false narrative that MSFS is for ‘gamers’ or simply a ‘visual tool’ that deserves to be challenged.  Said statements  are not tethered to reality. In terms of pure simulations, this sim is far more capable than competing products. Concerning the latter, you need hundreds of dollars of necessary add-ons (e.g HiFi, Navdata, A2A global physics, etc) to conduct a realistic flight.  If you fly VFR, you’re required to spend hundreds more for the ORBX suite. The reality is MSFS is the future; to that point, it’s only a matter of time before third party developers shift solely to this platform, just as they’ve done for the past four decades.  Obviously, this reality creates some trepidation for members who have heavy emotional and finical investments in other sims. Thus, the tirade of false narratives, unfounded accusations and attacks on developer persist.  

[leprechaunlive 1,852]

2 hours ago, rksoftware said:

At this time for me, MSFS is only a "Cessna 172 VFR simulator" and a nice scenery tool to view the earth from above by setting dev camera on and using the XBOX controller to span around.

Hopefully, it will be a good flight simulator at some point in time, but it will take a long time, I am afraid.

Now, 2 months after its release, the "simulator" has not shown any real improvements or bug fixes.

MS/ASOBO's priority is probably to get it working and released for XBOX now, and not to do improvements and bug fixes.

And its a bloody good VFR simulator then. I think you'r not putting the effort, thats the problem. Plan a proper VFR flight, pull out the sectional, pick your waypoints, your turning point, estimate your fuel, etc, etc. Im going round the world on the Mooney/Bonanza Turbo, following all the VFR rules and procedures specific to each country, hell, i can even use VOR, NDB, GPS to cross reference my position, using all charts, and all vfr entry or departures procedures (some of them in some countries look like proper IFR SID or STAR). Have had to use alternates multiple times because of the weather bordering IMC conditions, sometimes, i just switch charts and go IFR if my alternate is no good. To put it simple, calling it a VFR simulator doesnt make any sense.

 

 

[Armchair Pilot 261]

status update: arrived in Heathrow, had to do a go around on a missed approach due to company on final. All in all we arrived on schedule facing nice UK weather. And yes, this is all with the default 320, I am not a fan of waiting for ADIRS allignment but I may take the leap now i am more comfortable using instrumentation on my VFR Sim.

 

[rtodepart 761]

I said this before and I’ll keep repeating myself : I think some get turned on by starting threads like this and get some  people heated or some others made it their purpose to JUST IGNORE how far we had got and knock down FS2020 in anyway they can . At one point I Even thought some may even be sent from outside avsim to steer up the FS2020 forum for some change $ ....

why i think this way ? Well Because anyone thats been following the entire progress and has been following all the asobo livestreams and announcements knows the till this day there has not been anything showing them saying or implying “hey we don’t care about the PC crowd We Are Deep into the XBOX scene.  
 

with respect to the moderators sometimes I would love to know why some other threads with really important peaceful discussions get locked and this one here that started with a paragraph that calls for flames get allowed to continue beyond the first reply? . 
 

again i didn’t mean no harm by this comment  I just wonder why that happens sometimes.