4 minutes ago, devgrp said:

It already has. It makes flying a lot more enjoyable. Don't care too much for airliners now and I had all the pmdg birds for p3d, but what makes it so much more fun is that I can fly and navigate like I have done in real life. Nothing else comes close atm

No...objectively speaking, MSFS most certainly does not live up to its advertising.  The flight dynamics performance isn't even close to what was advertised--an advanced finite-element system that produces high-fidelity replication of aircraft performance.  MSFS aircraft are gross caricatures of real-world planes--their performance is *massively* inaccurate using basic measurable and verifiable metrics such as time-to-climb, acceleration, etc.  Then there's the weather system...supposedly simulating flows across terrain and turbulence effects.  Not even close.  The nose of light GA acft hunt like a hound dog working a cornfield due to artificial perturbations in stability that have *nothing* to do with actual flow (e.g. the same turbulence on a cold, windless day as a gusty trip across terrain).  And who considers a weather system that won't allow the user to set visibility anything close to complete?

I get it...you like it.  It meets your needs.  No problem with that.  But I am measuring their product against their advertising...what we were deluged with beginning with the 2019 E3 announcement, not against my own personal desires.  And using a yardstick of their own making, it's got a long way to go before it's the sim that was advertised.

Just now, w6kd said:

No...objectively speaking, MSFS most certainly does not live up to its advertising.  The flight dynamics performance isn't even close to what was advertised--an advanced finite-element system that produces high-fidelity replication of aircraft performance.  MSFS aircraft are gross caricatures of real-world planes--their performance is *massively* inaccurate using basic measurable and verifiable metrics such as time-to-climb, acceleration, etc.  Then there's the weather system...supposedly simulating flows across terrain and turbulence effects.  Not even close.  The nose of light GA acft hunt like a hound dog working a cornfield due to artificial perturbations in stability that have *nothing* to do with actual flow (e.g. the same turbulence on a cold, windless day as a gusty trip across terrain).  And who considers a weather system that won't allow the user to set visibility anything close to complete?

I get it...you like it.  It meets your needs.  No problem with that.  But I am measuring their product against their advertising...what we were deluged with beginning with the 2019 E3 announcement, not against my own personal desires.  And using a yardstick of their own making, it's got a long way to go before it's the sim that was advertised.

This is the problem. People have expectation that will never meet reality. P3D was really bad when it first came out. It took people hacking it and start making addons to make it function the way it does today. MSFS is just 7 months old. I have seen more progress in MSFS since that 7 months than P3D over the last 5 years. 

If you don't like a live system, than I am afraid MSFS is not for you.  No need to rant endlessly it's not what you want. It is what it is. Accept it or move on. I choose to be part of the solution instead of being part of the problem. I've reported bugs on every beta and I can say that Asobo has made 180 on how they handle the beta this time around. They have listen, they ever issue hotfixes and patches to try the make the sim better. 

10 minutes ago, w6kd said:

I get it...you like it.  It meets your needs.  No problem with that.  But I am measuring their product against their advertising...what we were deluged with beginning with the 2019 E3 announcement, not against my own personal desires.  And using a yardstick of their own making, it's got a long way to go before it's the sim that was advertised.

A deluge of false advertising? What specifically? What lies were told? I don't feel I've been conned?

11 minutes ago, fogboundturtle said:

This is the problem. People have expectation that will never meet reality. P3D was really bad when it first came out. It took people hacking it and start making addons to make it function the way it does today. MSFS is just 7 months old. I have seen more progress in MSFS since that 7 months than P3D over the last 5 years. 

If you don't like a live system, than I am afraid MSFS is not for you.  No need to rant endlessly it's not what you want. It is what it is. Accept it or move on. I choose to be part of the solution instead of being part of the problem. I've reported bugs on every beta and I can say that Asobo has made 180 on how they handle the beta this time around. They have listen, they ever issue hotfixes and patches to try the make the sim better. 

Its a forum.. Entitled to partake and rant all he wants. Funny thing is hes not on here all day doing it so hes not a troll or griefer and looking at his status im sure hes fully aware of what the forum rules are. Now you and the majority may not like his opinion but he was challenged for examples and he gave em. So im looking for the rebuttals on the merits instead of others telling him whether its for him or not.

Im glad they're getting away from P3D and getting with the times.

21 minutes ago, fogboundturtle said:

I've reported bugs on every beta and I can say that Asobo has made 180 on how they handle the beta this time around. They have listen, they ever issue hotfixes and patches to try the make the sim better. 

This new update coming Tuesday actually sounds promising from the small hints beta testers keep dropping.

17 minutes ago, w6kd said:

No...objectively speaking, MSFS most certainly does not live up to its advertising.  The flight dynamics performance isn't even close to what was advertised--an advanced finite-element system that produces high-fidelity replication of aircraft performance.  MSFS aircraft are gross caricatures of real-world planes--their performance is *massively* inaccurate using basic measurable and verifiable metrics such as time-to-climb, acceleration, etc.  Then there's the weather system...supposedly simulating flows across terrain and turbulence effects.  Not even close.  The nose of light GA acft hunt like a hound dog working a cornfield due to artificial perturbations in stability that have *nothing* to do with actual flow (e.g. the same turbulence on a cold, windless day as a gusty trip across terrain).  And who considers a weather system that won't allow the user to set visibility anything close to complete?

I get it...you like it.  It meets your needs.  No problem with that.  But I am measuring their product against their advertising...what we were deluged with beginning with the 2019 E3 announcement, not against my own personal desires.  And using a yardstick of their own making, it's got a long way to go before it's the sim that was advertised.

well its certainly leaps and bounds ahead of p3d which up until a year ago was the gold standard. We've lived with fsx and p3d for so long with the flying on rails FD, now we have a real one and now suddently its trash lol. Its 2021, the days of a dead flying environment is over. The planes in xp and p3d feels dead in comparison to msfs.

I fire up xp the other day and switching to the outside view in the c172, the plane just looks static. If I didnt have the sound up I would have thought the game was paused. Same for p3d. With msfs the world is alive. The plane gets bumped around every now and then by pockets of wind. This is much more representive of a real flight. I was in the usaf for 8 years and I've been on lots of planes and I've never been on one even on a calm day that the plane wasnt being bumped around.

Please post a recent video of the ga plane hunting around and I'll post one debunking all the things you mentioned

52 minutes ago, neucoas said:

I agree 100% with this. The fact that they opened a youtube channel for marketing gives me a little bit of hope. 

MSFS is a "Game" for 95% of the userbase, and they will freakout if the plane cost more than the Sim.

I am not sure if I would pay more than $60.

I also hope it makes it to the Marketplace.

pmdg is not for 95% of that userbase. Whichever way you cut they will make their money

1 minute ago, devgrp said:

pmdg is not for 95% of that userbase. Whichever way you cut they will make their money

This. When PMDG charges $140 they know 99.95% of gamers will laugh and pass them up. PMDG is selling to that 0.05% of gamers who don't.

Ferrari knows 99% of Americans will never consider their products. That doesn't change the price of a ferrari.

10 minutes ago, devgrp said:

pmdg is not for 95% of that userbase. Whichever way you cut they will make their money

The idea they have this YT channel and tutorials (which will be as well for all their planes), for me, it suggest they want as well to expands their userbase more than that 5%. Similar to Aerosoft's CRJ, to educate more "new comers" which makes sense to be honest

Well for being new to the sim since launch i am really looking forward to these new aircraft coming from PMDG, they simply look stunning, and i relish the challange in learning each version. (Cost dependant)

I guess the game is now becoming " The Sim"

34 minutes ago, fogboundturtle said:

This is the problem. People have expectation that will never meet reality. P3D was really bad when it first came out. It took people hacking it and start making addons to make it function the way it does today. MSFS is just 7 months old. I have seen more progress in MSFS since that 7 months than P3D over the last 5 years. 

If you don't like a live system, than I am afraid MSFS is not for you.  No need to rant endlessly it's not what you want. It is what it is. Accept it or move on. I choose to be part of the solution instead of being part of the problem. I've reported bugs on every beta and I can say that Asobo has made 180 on how they handle the beta this time around. They have listen, they ever issue hotfixes and patches to try the make the sim better. 

No, this is the problem:  In a virtual world, people often tend to declare victory based on sugar plum fairy visions of what they imagine they have, and not on what's actually in front of them.

I want MSFS to be what MS/Asobo said it would be.  My expectations are no more than what they advertised.

Releasing a product that came up way short of what was promised from the very first viewing of their promotional video at E3, and then making improvements towards getting the product up to those specs is not "progress".  It's remediation.  And that remediation is being done in fits and starts that repeatedly make the platform and everything running on it unstable.  PMDG sure looks to be attempting to defy the conventional wisdom by building their proverbial house on a bed of shifting sand--only time will tell if they can overcome those sorts of headwinds without stirring their user base into an angry hornet's nest.  I wish them success, but it sure smells like trouble ahead.

9 minutes ago, w6kd said:

Releasing a product that came up way short of what was promised from the very first viewing of their promotional video at E3, and then making improvements towards getting the product up to those specs is not "progress".  It's remediation.  And that remediation is being done in fits and starts that repeatedly make the platform and everything running on it unstable. 

Sorry but since when there is a perfect software from version 1.0 and with the complexity of MSFS?

Just now, w6kd said:

No, this is the problem.  In a virtual world, people often tend to declare victory based on sugar plum fairy visions of what they imagine they have, and not on what's actually in front of them.

I want MSFS to be what MS/Asobo said it would be.  My expectations are no more than what they advertised.

Releasing a product that came up way short of what was promised from the very first viewing of their promotional video at E3, and then making improvements towards getting the product up to those specs is not "progress".  It's remediation.  And that remediation is being done in fits and starts that repeatedly make the platform and everything running on it unstable.  PMDG sure looks to be attempting to defy the conventional wisdom by building their proverbial house on a bed of shifting sand--only time will tell if they can overcome those sorts of headwinds without stirring their user base into an angry hornet's nest.  I wish them success, but it sure smells like trouble ahead.

Sinking-sand ? Seriously. That's your view of MSFS ? P3D and XP11 are sinking sand.  I think you have very short memory of how bad P3D or FSX used to be when they launched. Now two wrong don't make a right.  You have such distorted view of reality. Is the sim perfect  ? absolutely not. Asobo has made some pretty good remediation by hiring Working Title to work on Avionics. Something they have acknowledge, they didn't know enough about. I care about how a company evolve and adapt.  We have a sim with a developer that is actively trying to improved the sim every update. In the meantime, wait 6 months for P3D to issue a fix. I waited close to year to have the taxiways bug that was creating crazy artifacts at CYVR in P3D. 

4 minutes ago, Car147 said:

Well for being new to the sim since launch i am really looking forward to these new aircraft coming from PMDG, they simply look stunning, and i relish the challange in learning each version. (Cost dependant)

I guess the game is now becoming " The Sim"

dont really care for tthe dc6 but their 737 is amazing. The gold standard. You'll really enjoy it if you like a challenge. Once Majestic brings over their Q400, you'll be in for another treat. IMO that is the best payware plane on any platform