Just not the same

[FPStewy 538]

2 hours ago, sd_flyer said:

I personally don’t understand how people want to walk back to fsx after MSFS.

Here's what's working against MSFS

• No PMDG
• No A2A
• No MilViz
• No FSLabs
• No Majestic
• No Leonardo
• No Quality Wings
• No TFDi
• No GTN's
• Some data is still missing
• Simbrief, AIRac data, Flight Planning are let's face it, problematic at the moment.

Those are some very serious considerations in making the decision to go back, yes I admit MSFS is very very nice, but after 7 months there's only one twin piston of "questionable" quality and they refuse to allow access to 3rd parties to make a GTN. Why oh Why did they choose NavBlu over Navigraph is a head-scratcher I won't understand anytime soon.

The sim if VERY nice don't get me wrong but you have to accept some very serious clawbacks and I totally don't blame simmers going back.

 

There's one question you need to ask, if you didn't look out the window which sim would you choose.

[MrFuzzy 2,123]

1 hour ago, buspelle said:

I agree with You! The first "launch" back in august 2020 was a hit! But then, after several updates, things has defenently changed. Someone alse wrote som good and true words a while ago here in this forum. "these so called updates messes things up more than they fix"

I think that says a lot... 

This is the opinion of many, many people. Which other game in history got worse patch after patch? Even the most bugged releases (Fallout 76, Cyberpunk 2077) consistently improve with patches.

This morning I read this post on the official forum and it came into my mind that the reason of the degradation could be related to the number of users connected to the Bing platform. This would make sense, as in the closed alpha/beta a very limited number of players were connected and the system could cope with the data streaming. It would also explain the inconsistency in stuttering behavior between a session and another at the same coordinates.

It would be interesting to see how Bing's bandwidth usage changed since 18 August 2020, how many concurrent players are online on average (not only on Steam) and what's the total bandwidth / saturation figure for the data streaming service. 

[langly 129]

2020 has definitely lost it's initial "wow" factor (it's still a good sim).

The fact that the SDK wasn't ready by launch is an absolute joke and the community should not let them off the hook. They rushed the sim to market and by the looks of it, it will be quite a while until the SDK is in a state that developers of complex aircraft can even begin. Even in the weekly updates, the same SDK progress is repeated (is this even progress?).

It's a great VFR simulator but that's about where the advantages end.

[Maxis 1,886]

1 hour ago, FPStewy said:

Here's what's working against MSFS

• No PMDG
• No A2A
• No MilViz
• No FSLabs
• No Majestic
• No Leonardo
• No Quality Wings
• No TFDi
• No GTN's
• Some data is still missing
• Simbrief, AIRac data, Flight Planning are let's face it, problematic at the moment.

Those are some very serious considerations in making the decision to go back, yes I admit MSFS is very very nice, but after 7 months there's only one twin piston of "questionable" quality and they refuse to allow access to 3rd parties to make a GTN. Why oh Why did they choose NavBlu over Navigraph is a head-scratcher I won't understand anytime soon.

The sim if VERY nice don't get me wrong but you have to accept some very serious clawbacks and I totally don't blame simmers going back.

 

There's one question you need to ask, if you didn't look out the window which sim would you choose.

If your going to try to compare a mature platform with all the third party development and the time it took to get to that maturity and put it against a brand new release with no highly developed aircraft addons/mods (save for 2) and the only thing your interested in is advanced aircraft and its procedures (wholly discounting the rest of the experience) then whats the point of the comparison? I think the more fair question is where was FSX in its development 6 months from release and how was it in comparison to the development rate of MSFS2020.

Other than that its apples and oranges and whomever prefers their fruit can keep it. No need to fuss about it but if your going to do comparisons .. do it right.

 

Edited January 17, 2021 by Maxis

[Ricardo41 5,959]

4 hours ago, PIC007 said:

I keep hoping and waiting but even the few dev's I worked with in FSX say it's going to be a long time before complex planes are ready.

Your statement is factually wrong:

https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/593322-working-title-cj4-090-holds-new-fm-fd-dual-comms/

[Glenn Fitzpatrick 3,799]

In some ways if the end result is the complex aircraft/procedures/airline people spit off and stay with P3D which becomes the go-to place for people wanting to simulate airline ops and all the rest (VFR GA, Bush Planes, Retro and classic stuff etc etc) becomes the focus of MSFS that may actually be a good outcome.  

There is no rule that says one sim has to be all things to all people.

 

[pmplayer 9,609]

4 hours ago, Chock said:

We're traditionally always disappointed with the shiny new sim in its first few months of release. FSX took a very long time to get good, and didn't really mature as a base sim until Dovetail tarted it up in 2014, which was eight years after it first came out. It was ten years before the FSL A320 came out for FSX and it was five years after the release of FSX that the iFly 737 NG came out for it and a month or two after that when PMDG managed to get their NG out for it.

P3D was hardly worth bothering with at all until three versions in if you already had FSX unless you added a bunch of DX10 payware add-ons for cloud shadows etc, and XPlane was basically awful for high quality realistic and complex add-ons until MS announced they'd stop making flight sim in 2009, whereupon developers started looking at it as the possible lifeline for add-on sim stuff before P3D really took off, and that was with version ten of XPlane. Not forgetting Aerofly FS2, which even now still lacks a lot of basic functions.

Conversely, we're a few weeks away from getting a CRJ for MSFS. This will be about six months after its release, but this is practically a ballistic rate of progress compared to all of the aforementioned stuff.

I'm not disappointed with MSFS at all, because I can remember all that preceding stuff, and all the stuff before it with the first version of flight sim etc. Asobo is going great guns with progress by comparison. We're just not bothering to remember how tectonically slow it has been for all preceding sims. And if anyone thinks Aces didn't @rse up the patches for FSX, then they've got a pretty short memory and a pair of Ray Bans with pink lenses firmly balanced on their nose. I won't deny that there have been some dodgy moments with patches for MSFS, but the truth is, Asobo is sussing it out pretty quickly and in most cases they sort problematic stuff out after a couple of weeks with another patch, which is particularly impressive given that they are working on all this during the middle of the zombie apocalypse and obviously were under pressure to release it early.

So yeah, it is not the same, it's actually much better than all previous efforts. Would I like a DC-3 and a 737 etc for MSFS right now? Of course I would, but I can guarantee you they'll be in my MSFS hangar a lot quicker than they were for any other flight sim, and when they are, they'll sound better, look better, fly better and run better than they ever would or could in any other sim

Some developers might be crying about having to wait a while to turn on their cash cow for MSFS whilst they await an SDK, but I'm unlikely to shed too many tears for them when they've been driving around in nice cars that I helped to pay for over the past two decades. They've done alright out of us lot thus far, and it won't be long before they'll be doing it all again. And for once it will be in a sim where you don't need to sell a kidney to be able to afford a super-computer which can just about manage 20 FPS the moment it sniffs an add-on aeroplane on your hard drive.

Very good sayd, i am totally on yours .

I belive about in one or max two years

we have the best Flightsim we ever used

since today, and as today it still gets better and better.

So i just have to say - Thanks Asobo Team !!

cheers 😉

[Nyxx 6,994]

3 hours ago, FPStewy said:

There's one question you need to ask, if you didn't look out the window which sim would you choose.

Lol did you really ask that?

Fly a simulation were you can see the world as it is or fly a sim were not looking out the window is best?

With 1000’ on hours in the FSL let alone PMDG, I will take the world in the detail that was and is a dream in any other sim thank you.

Also with out spending hundreds or DL 100's GB trying and make looking out the window better.

 

Aircraft with come but your views out the window will never come close.

FSX is relic that needs putting to rest.

Edited January 17, 2021 by Nyxx

[sal9000 210]

Hello,

there is a picture what FSX promise and MSFS simply does 😉

There are a lot of issues, but when you make what the SIM can do and not what you have done in FSX/P3D, then you have a lot of fun and enjoy in MSFS 😉

[Nyxx 6,994]

6 hours ago, PIC007 said:

I was so excited a year ago when I heard about FS 2020, I started planning for it back then.

Did a lot of research, waited for the specs, checked numerous sources, and once it was launched decided on a top of the line PC just for the sim.... I was pumped up and ready!

The sim runs word not allowed near perfect, none of the major issues others seem to have. I waited 2 months after the sim was released to be sure of the specs before buying the machine...I-7....RTX 2080...32 gigs RAM......and in the months since, it sits there on it's own desk, complete with CH yoke, throttle, pedals....and about 5 hours total time, a few of which were spent just 'tweaking' it.

Try as I might, I just can't get excited about 2020, there are too many things I loved about FSX that are missing from 2020. I keep hoping we would see them return on these updates, but so far, they are not even on the 'to do' list. I bought the basic sim because the ultimate had none of the options I wanted, so I planned on buying whatever I wanted when the addons are released. So far that ain't happened. I had over 300 gigs of addon's in FSX, planes, scenery, airports, I have no issue spending money, but so far there has been nothing I am interested in...NADA.

I keep hoping and waiting but even the few dev's I worked with in FSX say it's going to be a long time before complex planes are ready......I am getting real close to firing up FSX again and parking 2020 for the foreseeable future.

Anyone else a bit disappointed in the current state of affairs or am I alone on this?

No am not just go back to FSX and enjoy! 😂

[spitzer45 99]

I can't no longer tolerate fsx and p3d ancient terrain textures and 2d spinning clouds, sorry.

[willy647 193]

Bought it, spent many hours trying it out, and went back to P3D v5. I do all my (IFR) flying online (IVAO) and FS2020 is just not (yet) up to it.  The panic when ATC tells you to enter a hold !! to name just one thing (the A320 just won't do it)  When PMDG/FSLabs bring their planes to FS2020, I will have another look at it. This is just me of course, if you  are happy with FS2020, enjoy

 

[Stona 39]

3 hours ago, FPStewy said:

Here's what's working against MSFS

• No PMDG
• No A2A
• No MilViz
• No FSLabs
• No Majestic
• No Leonardo
• No Quality Wings
• No TFDi
• No GTN's
• Some data is still missing
• Simbrief, AIRac data, Flight Planning are let's face it, problematic at the moment.

Those are some very serious considerations in making the decision to go back, yes I admit MSFS is very very nice, but after 7 months there's only one twin piston of "questionable" quality and they refuse to allow access to 3rd parties to make a GTN. Why oh Why did they choose NavBlu over Navigraph is a head-scratcher I won't understand anytime soon.

The sim if VERY nice don't get me wrong but you have to accept some very serious clawbacks and I totally don't blame simmers going back.

 

There's one question you need to ask, if you didn't look out the window which sim would you choose.

No wonder I don't understand why you guys are so against it as I have no idea what your "no"'s are LOL

I'm loving the sim I guess because I don't fly the airliners and purely do VFR;  I never enjoyed the other sims because VFR just didn't work well

 

[Nedo68 533]

Everyone has different expectations.
I've been very satisfied with VR since msfs came out,
I really don't need more, I fly GA 99% of the time.
and for that msfs is just fantastic.

[pmb 5,138]

6 hours ago, PIC007 said:

Anyone else a bit disappointed in the current state of affairs or am I alone on this?

I can't tell if you're alone. However, being a virtual pilot for 30 yrs now, I never did so much actual flying since I was admitted as MSFS beta tester a year ago, which may say something.

Kind regards, Michael