Well, and this is just my opinion, MSFS still has a lot of technical issues to be solved and many features to improve, but I'm confident it'll grow over time and will be a good game for a lot of users and also a good simming platform for us, the hard core simmers. The real fact is that being a lover of P3D for several years, after the MSFS release back in August and since its installation on one of my machines back in September, I only have flown P3D a couple of times.

Cheers, Ed

Stepping outside the old and jaded veteran sim community for a second.

Out of the more "normal" (as in not sim veterans) younger/teenage people I know of with an interest in flight sims:

• just ONE who is 15 and training real life in a C172 for his PPL has opted to buy Xplane instead of MSFS because it gives access to a more realistic payware C172, I think he is making a good choice
• several are working towards building/upgrading a PC for MSFS or waiting on the Xbox version, they seem mainly excited by the scenery and wide range of light aircraft available, they will likely be happy with MSFS
• precisely zero have any initial interest in flying airliners or learning complex procedures

Edited January 5, 20215 yr by Glenn Fitzpatrick

3 hours ago, tweekz said:

Probably those "I'd not be proud if my sim was named in that category"-guys? 😄

Don't worry, they can still critizise that it's a game award. 😉

Well strictly speaking, it's an award for computing innovation presented to a company more well-known for making games, by a mag aimed at gamers. So it's not really a definition about what MSFS is, more of a recognition of industry skills.

In this way, it's a bit like if a a truck magazine awarded a prize for what it considered was the best make of tire. That wouldn't make your car a truck simply because it had that winning brand of tire on it. Not that I really care who thinks MSFS is either a sim or a game, or both. If someone likes it and has a use for it, that's all that matters. To me, it's both a sim and a game.

Still, I guess that won't stop some people from quoting this award as a definitive mike drop moment for the age-old argument about 'which is it?'. 🤣

Life is a game don't you know.

Cheers

bs

I wonder how many of you guys have read the article instead of rehashing your views 😁 ?

To sum it up, not unfairly I think, Davenport and Kelly focus their praises on being able to visit the whole world during the lockdown from their couch. 

Nothing about gameplay if you see MFS as a game or the depth of simulation if you consider it as a sim. Just a super Google Earth for them. Actually, I found this article rather demeaning for MFS which is, I am happy to say, a bit more than that.

But as Microsoft would say :  Its good to be a king,... and a  huge provider of advertisement money.
 

Edited January 5, 20215 yr by Dominique_K

4 hours ago, bean_sprout said:

Life is a game don't you know.

..with no re-spawns and only one "life" with no extras.. 

12 minutes ago, HighBypass said:

..with no re-spawns and only one "life" with no extras.. 

The great John Conway recently died from Covid 😏

In addition to being a great game, a great simulator, it's also a great travel simulator. Three for the price of one: now that's what I call value!

11 hours ago, Chock said:

To me, it's both a sim and a game.

Same here. I appreciate the parallels to reality and use it to practise skills, while I still do things that entertain me and I wouldn't do (or can't) IRL.

People who side solely with one sim are limiting themselves. Everyone has a bit of stubborness, but it would be very sad to be like that with something that shoould be fun...

Twisted thought of the day...

If life is a game then it would follow that RL aviation is part of that game.

So FS2020 can't be a game of a game but it can be a simulation of a game.

Cheers

bs

15 hours ago, kaosfere said:

To use just a little bit less snark...  I think the comments about how poorly MSFS is being received (which there are plenty of around here, I wasn't just setting up a strawman there) are somewhat valid...  if you're in the extremely narrow niche of a niche of folks who are depending on one thing or another that the game doesn't do well right now.

The problem is that that is a niche of a niche, and those folks don't get to define what "success" means.  They have every right to say what success would mean to them, but projecting their own dissatisfaction upon the entire marketplace is rather solipsistic.  Once you get out of the bubble of super-involved people with extremely high demands and an extremely low tolerance for technical issues, MSFS is going gangbusters.  The amount of positive press and mainstream critical acclaim is astounding compared to where flight simulation has been for a decade plus.

And this is a good thing, for even that "super hard core" crowd, regardless of whether or not it injures their own sense of importance relative to everyone else who plays the game.  Because that's what will provide the financial success for Microsoft and Asobo to stick to this as their 10 year project, and not have it end up like Flight did.

Can't agree more. The bigger user base will definitely also benefit the hardcord simmers. There is a Chinese saying: When the water rises in the big river, it will rise even more in the small river.

all these comments about it being a game and how experienced simmers don't like it or find it real , gimme a break! There's no more real simmer than me nor with more experience (I was Lead Design on Flight Unlimited III, and have 10,000 hours now flying corporate jets for a job) . and I love this new FS2020. Now, granted I fly in real ATC daily, deal with systems on board, fly FMSs all day... so yeah, In FS2020 I just enjoy the beauty, graphics, aircraft but do not do a lot of "fiddling" or systems stuff nor FMS... so I do fly it very simplicity. However for what it is worth, it's got the best feeling of sitting in a cockpit, perspective, graphics etc... and pretty good sounds although that's subjective to me..... still I have given up on my beloved XP11, with all the add-ons I bought, because this 2020 is just much darn fun or spectacular to give up on..... for me it's the BEST sim. 

21 minutes ago, JETPETER2 said:

In FS2020 I just enjoy the beauty, graphics, aircraft but do not do a lot of "fiddling" or systems stuff nor FMS... so I do fly it very simplicity.

Your words remind me of a now-retired Finnair pilot, who did most of his flying with DC9's. After the fleet converted to A32S he kept on saying "The DC9 was the last airliner one could actually fly, now we just play around with a computer." I intepreted from his stories that modern airliners are designed 80% for safety, 15% for efficiency, 4% for passenger comfort and 1% for the magic of flying (1% as planes still have windows). 😄 In simulators, especially in MSFS, I love the fact we can dial up that 1% and try to focus first and foremost on the simplest and purest aspects of flying.

Edit: Typos

Edited January 5, 20215 yr by TuomasV

Well deserved for sure.  Of course still work to be done but the innovation that went into this game is incredible.  It’s important to remember that’s the award, innovation, it’s not the award for “best most complete game that PMDG has deemed acceptable for development”.

Edited January 5, 20215 yr by regis9

38 minutes ago, TuomasV said:

Your words remind me of a now-retired Finnair pilot, who did most of his flying with DC9's. After the fleet converted to A32S he kept on saying "The DC9 was the last airliner one could actually fly, now we just play around with a computer." I intepreted from his stories that modern airliners are designed 80% for safety, 15% for efficiency, 4% for passenger comfort and 1% for the magic of flying (1% as planes still have windows). 😄 In simulators, especially in MSFS, I love the fact we can dial up that 1% and try to focus first and foremost on the simplest and purest aspects of flying.

Edit: Typos

They are actually designed to print money.

The 80% safety thing is just a side effect of the fact that airliners crashing is bad for business (take the 737 MAX as a classic example). 

If crashing real world  airliners made them an exciting thing that attracted thrill seekers there would be a lot less emphasis on safety 🙂 it is all about money in the end.