MSFS Crosses Two Million+ Players

[abrams_tank 7,426]

36 minutes ago, Janov said:

It´s a bit like watching a hospital show on TV if you are a real doctor or an "airplane movie" if you are a real pilot...you can´t stand to watch, because certain things are simplified for the sake of the average Joe viewer - so they don´t get overwhelmed by technicalities.

 

Well, I would guess most of the participants here at AVSIM would prefer more realistic systems in MSFS. And if you actually tune in and watch the Twitch live streams when Asobo answers questions, Asobo wants more realistic systems too.  The thing is, it takes time.  The FBW A320 is getting better every day.  At the rate the FBW A320 is improving, it's possible that the FBW A320 could reach "study level" if they are given another year or 1.5 years (I'm being conservative with my estimate, those FBW folks are making so much progress every month).  And if you have read about the latest working title CJ4 release, that version of the CJ4 is also getting more and more advanced and more realistic.

I think there will probably be "study level" airliners in MSFS eventually that rival XPlane's "study level" planes.  But everything takes time.  And this is the direction that Asobo wants to go - they actually want "study level" planes eventually in MSFS, but also allow entirely new players to get off the ground quickly with planes.  Hence, new players can start on the runway with any plane with all systems and the engine running, while other hard core players can do a cold start from the ramp and turn the systems & engine on one by one like real life - this is a great design choice by Asobo because they don't sacrifice any complexity for real life pilots, while they also allow very new players to get their planes into the air very quickly. 

[abrams_tank 7,426]

26 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

 

Agree ... Cyberpunk 2077 ... 8 Million Pre-orders, 4.7 Million on PC which I thought was interesting ... I would have thought consoles would outsell PC.  It's only been out for 7 days so Cyberpunk has some time to expand.  I'm not a fan of those types of games, but they do present a technology showcase (DX12, Ray Tracing, DLSS) without the use of WASM 😉  (no mention of WASM and yet it's on consoles too) 

MS/Asobo need to give MSFS a purpose beyond just flying around if they want to see those high sales numbers ... my hunch is MSFS might spawn other games with Microsoft's streaming technology if they can get better quality Photogrammetry and Terrain.  Combat seems to sell as a "purpose" ... for better or worse.

So what happens when the remaining 28% of the planet is visited? 🙂 

Cheers, Rob.

I think MSFS can be altered to a combat sim, maybe in a few years.  It definitely has all the basics needed.  If I were Microsoft, I would definitely consider making a combat sim off of the MSFS engine.

For one, it really sucks that I have purchase all the different sceneries and areas for DCS World.   MSFS as it is now, can provide all that scenery for free.  I would so love a combat sim that is based off the MSFS engine where we don't have to fork out another $30 to $40 for a new scenery area.

[Janov 2,383]

51 minutes ago, Chock said:

You must have a short memory, or rose tinted specs, or maybe not have frequented places like Avsim if you think the reception to FSX was a bowl of cherries three months after its release.

Note that I wrote "depth" not "graphics" or "performance".

I remember the frustration about the bad performance well - I bought the game at Best Buy in New York, they put it on the shelves a few days early by accident, I couldn´t believe my luck and felt like I was stealing the box...my heart beating fast while I was standing in line at the register.

[BigDee 119]

38 minutes ago, Chock said:

You must have a short memory, or rose tinted specs, or maybe not have frequented places like Avsim if you think the reception to FSX was a bowl of cherries three months after its release. People were up in arms about needing a supercomputer to run it with the graphics turned up, and that was at a point where there were no fancy airliners or GA aeroplanes for it either. Recall that the thing was even being recompiled and patched to its FSX-SE form eight years after the initial release. Seriously, it took a lot of time to get to where it is today, and it took about eight years for it to get a realistic Airbus.

I bought FSX in 2008 and it was a great product. No errors and no problems at all. I seriously don`t know to what you are referring to when you talk about 8 years. At that time there was long ago no Aces Studio any more existing. In 2008 to 2009 when I used to play FSX I didn`t experience any problems. It was a solid product. So point 2  - 8 years - is senseless.

 

MSFS is a product built for profit, built for next-generation consoles. It will likely have more millions of players, mostly attracted by graphics, but in the end it is a "visual experience" flight edition game. 

 

Also, 

just as a side note, FSX might have had huge hardware requirements, but even at that time, there were games out there, that were 5 times better looking, that are somehow also looking quite the same as MSFS.

https://www.google.com/search?q=pgr+4

Also looking at the roadmap of MSFS, they are clearly only evolving the graphical parts.

[ComSimPilot 623]

For me that is not good news for now. I see how scenery developers have prioritized MSFS, letting behind their P3D projects, for the sake of sales. I don't blame them, they work for profit, but for us who have been supporting them for their P3D sceneries, this MSFS publicity is bad news. It seems that newbies who fly community mods get priority for scenery developers compared to simmers who like flight simulation realism. 

Edited December 17, 2020 by ComSimPilot

[abrams_tank 7,426]

8 minutes ago, BigDee said:

I bought FSX in 2008 and it was a great product. No errors and no problems at all. I seriously don`t know to what you are referring to when you talk about 8 years. At that time there was long ago no Aces Studio any more existing. In 2008 to 2009 when I used to play FSX I didn`t experience any problems. It was a solid product. So point 2  - 8 years - is senseless.

 

MSFS is a product built for profit, built for next-generation consoles. It will likely have more millions of players, mostly attracted by graphics, but in the end it is a "visual experience" flight edition game. 

 

Also, 

just as a side note, FSX might have had huge hardware requirements, but even at that time, there were games out there, that were 5 times better looking, that are somehow also looking quite the same as MSFS.

https://www.google.com/search?q=pgr+4

Also looking at the roadmap of MSFS, they are clearly only evolving the graphical parts.

FSX had a lot of problems when it was released in 2006 (I was there in 2006 when it came out).  Two service packs, SP1 and SP2, were released before 2008. So the copy you got in 2008 had a lot of problems fixed by then.  

[Will Fly For Cheese 1,710]

1 hour ago, Azapata87 said:

Runs fine on many computers including mine and no I’m not running a gtx 3090 water cooled super computer. 
 

Might be a problem on your end.

(To be said in heavy Yorkshire accent);

Aye, I dare say.

[Scottoest 1,561]

50 minutes ago, BigDee said:

MSFS is a product built for profit, built for next-generation consoles. It will likely have more millions of players, mostly attracted by graphics, but in the end it is a "visual experience" flight edition game. 

As opposed to FSX, which was built for... love?

I'll never understand people who confidently state that the new MSFS was "built for consoles" when the console port of the sim isn't even scheduled to come out until a full year after the PC version, and Asobo/Microsoft have repeatedly made clear that they consider the PC to be the lead platform for the game.

[Tuskin38 6,528]

1 hour ago, BigDee said:

Also looking at the roadmap of MSFS, they are clearly only evolving the graphical parts.

The roadmap doesn't show everything they're doing.

1 hour ago, BigDee said:

I bought FSX in 2008 and it was a great product. No errors and no problems at all.

2008 was 2 years after it released, after 2 service packs and an expansion pack to fix any major issues.

  

1 hour ago, BigDee said:

MSFS is a product built for profit,

So was FSX. Some advertisements for it even showed people playing it with X-Box 360 controllers.

Edited December 17, 2020 by Tuskin38

[HighTowers 1,434]

Think there is too much emphasis on statistics being analyzed and interpreting what it means.   What I see, is young people being inspired by flight. Seeing a long time simmer doing a flight on YT, or even the other streamers who stream many simulation titles, but when they do a full flight in MSFS, there is comments from those young gamers who are into the other major titles, be inspired by these flights, and comment about getting a desktop , and a setup , learning to fly.   To me that is alot more promising than a bunch of numbers which dont entirely tell the real sentiment.   With the mass marketing this has reached along with social media and real life pilots showcasing a full flight,  plus evidence it is reaching these young people, this will carry on far into the future, and sets up a much more solidified flight simulation hobby for all of us that have  been here in this world for so long.  I would like to think that the numbers will continue to rise, but not retract too much from boredom, but rather the curious nature of learning to fly, be it airliners or GA. Especially when some great payware aircraft will be on the horizon in the next year. 

[omarsmak30 4,068]

3 hours ago, Janov said:

Well, I think this has some merit - and I think the advent of MSFS has certainly shifted priorities at LR.

Well Jan for the first time, LR is serious of getting XP12 the way we want it, look at the feedback that LR has launched before : https://feedback.x-plane.com/#

Although I love X-Plane and I love your IXEG and I also love MSFS. I am glad to see MSFS raising the bar here, that now will push others for better competition and finally XP12 will get a proper weather system that we have been looking for long in XP ;).

Instead of being too negative towards MSFS, why don't we take a step back, appreciate where our hobby is and appreciate the fact is a lot of new simmers are joining the party and eventually will get to know X-Plane end this will enriche our third party ecosystem.

[ca_metal 2,025]

12 minutes ago, omarsmak30 said:

Well Jan for the first time, LR is serious of getting XP12 the way we want it, look at the feedback that LR has launched before : https://feedback.x-plane.com/#

Although I love X-Plane and I love your IXEG and I also love MSFS. I am glad to see MSFS raising the bar here, that now will push others for better competition and finally XP12 will get a proper weather system that we have been looking for long in XP ;).

Instead of being too negative towards MSFS, why don't we take a step back, appreciate where our hobby is and appreciate the fact is a lot of new simmers are joining the party and eventually will get to know X-Plane end this will enriche our third party ecosystem.

You and me, we are looking it from a costumer’s perspective. The 3rd parties that need to profit have a different view of it. They need the cash flow. The 3rd parties really invested on it might be in a so good spot right now. And it’s not up to MS/Asobo to take care of those 3rd parties.

That said, the only thing I don’t think is fair is to raise false claims to support their agendas, and unfortunately I’ve been seeing a lot of that lately.

[omarsmak30 4,068]

13 minutes ago, ca_metal said:

That said, the only thing I don’t think is fair is to raise false claims to support their agendas, and unfortunately I’ve been seeing a lot of that lately.

Well unfortunately this false claim flow will continue as you saw from the other thread about Milviz. However anyway, I am not worried, pretty sure time will tell how MSFS will progress in the future

[Janov 2,383]

27 minutes ago, omarsmak30 said:

Well Jan for the first time, LR is serious of getting XP12 the way we want it, look at the feedback that LR has launched before : https://feedback.x-plane.com/#

Thanks for the nice words, Omarsmak.

Honestly I don´t think much has changed since pre-MSFS times.

LR always knew what users missed and wanted (orthoscenery, weather, seasons, ATC), it came up again and again, every Q&A, every blog commentary... Conicidentially the move to Vulkan (long planned before MSFS got announced) paved the way for better graphics, it is not like they "reacted" to MSFS.

The feedback website is nice, but they have in no way commited to anything beyond a very general "we like this and will implement it in the future".

I would like to warn anyone to think that XP12 will look better or even on par with MSFS - LR has neither the manpower, resources or data to achieve that. It will look a lot better than XP11, but it will not leapfrog MSFS.

Cheers und viele Grüße, Jan

 

[omarsmak30 4,068]

3 hours ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

I'm not a fan of those types of games, but they do present a technology showcase (DX12, Ray Tracing, DLSS) without the use of WASM 😉  (no mention of WASM and yet it's on consoles too) 

Yeah an awesome game indeed 

https://youtu.be/qTuMEuP5VGg