52 minutes ago, ADamiani said:

Just for the record: here is the first post with disrespectful words ("ridiculous comments") and the usual reference to "comedy". And a not too subtle reference to the fact that things some people say is "not based on anything even remotely true".

In case the thread goes south.

A.

You pulled up some old post from two months ago. How sad. 

Edited September 18, 20214 yr by Ricardo41

🙄😀

Keep your posts polite please. Replying to a topic only a couple of months old is not an issue.

It should be born in mind that there are two bodies involved in development of MSFS. Sometimes the bean counters decide release dates, not the programmers. Programmers probably never want to release something until all bugs are ironed out. The real world doesn’t operate like that.

2 hours ago, Nyxx said:

The problem is 2 steps forward one step back. We still dont have some basic things pre SU5 fixed, airport history still does not work, they broke the tree LOD, said it was an easy fix, fixed it with...was it SU6? and then they HF and broke it again....and so it goes on.

I dont think they should stop developing it. Let the delelopers keep moving forward. 

But....I agree the constant set backs with every step forward is a very negitive thing. I really dont care if the Asobo team was hurt by the feed back from SU5, its like a guy coming to fix your washing machine and cutting through internet cable and knocking out your Sky TV and saying "well you washing machine now works really well !" "dont shout at me!!!!"

I despair at how long its taking to get back to pre SU5 things that worked and now dont.

IMO the testing is the huge problem, even then, I dont believe the beta testers dont see the problems ita  Asobo just push it out anyway....or are told to.🤬 and think! we/they can fix it later......🥵

Honestly, i think we are all the beta testers. Call this early access and that is accurate. Why should MS pay testers when we do it for free, and actually pay for the product, provide the hardware, etc.? This was early access moving into beta state. 

2 hours ago, RobJC said:

Honestly, i think we are all the beta testers. Call this early access and that is accurate. Why should MS pay testers when we do it for free, and actually pay for the product, provide the hardware, etc.? This was early access moving into beta state. 

Call it what you like, but in the end the real question you must ask is:

”Are you not entertained!?” - Maximus Decimus Meridius

I think a lot of us would have agreed to pay the same price to have enjoyed the sim even in its current state for the past year rather than to still be waiting for our first chance to see it until it was “perfect enough”

It’s all a matter of semantics and perspective.

Edited September 18, 20214 yr by VFXSimmer

5 hours ago, Ricardo41 said:

You pulled up some old post from two months ago. How sad. 

A mod answered, I have nothing to add. 

A.

5 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Sometimes the bean counters decide release dates, not the programmers. Programmers probably never want to release something until all bugs are ironed out.

It's always the publisher who sets the release dates, and you're correct, programmers never want to release the software with unresolved bugs. As I think somebody else said the attitude of the publisher is that they can fix it at a later date, which is also accurate; almost every console game now has at least a launch day patch, with more fixes already in the pipeline. All thanks to the internet revolution.

That's also a godsend. We'd be kidding ourselves to say that, prior to the ability to patch games via online updates, all games were released without bugs. There were probably less bugs, mainly because games were simpler, but, when there were, nobody could do a thing to fix them after launch.

So, there are bugs here, yes. They are gradually being analysed and fixed as soon as possible. That's a modern-day luxury.

Am I the only one enjoying MSFS more and more every day, ever since Day 1, despite the many problems?  On the MSFS forum the Moderators have stated clearly that World Updates (eye candy) and Sim Updates (software fixes) are done by totally different teams, and that World Updates can have lead times of many months.  I am still in touch with XP and never a day goes past on the XP Forum without some people having problems. So I still like the World Updates, but at the same time I would like them to create fewer problems, and I wish the Sim Updates would reduce the Bug List much more quickly. I still believe that the developers deserve respect and encouragement for trying to do their best on what seems to be a very complex beast.  Cheers.

You know Frank, most here are professional software developers (as well as football coaches, epidemiologist, and experts in several other fields. All at once). 
 

So if you have no clue please stop defending Asobo and MS. Thanks. 
 

 

 

 

😉

12 hours ago, March Hare said:

They are gradually being analysed and fixed as soon as possible

Or not 🤣 . The MSFS irritating bugs have been here for months when not since release.

 

55 minutes ago, swiesma said:

So if you have no clue please stop defending Asobo and MS. Thanks. 

Having read Frank's post I don't see it as a defence of MS / Asobo. More a description of how the product is being maintained and developed.

It should be borne in mind that some problems experienced by some users are probably because of a lack of knowledge or doing things incorrectly. Not all obviously as proven by mass posts following the release of some major updates followed by hot fixes.

Speaking personally, I always felt there was something very wrong when a product was in alpha for over a year but the beta phase only lasted a couple of months. Beta testing is usually quite a long period but in defence of the programmers I very much doubt they agreed to the release. It was probably a decision taken by Microsoft - the name on the 'box'. The fact the release came as a surprise to many here speaks volumes.

 

18 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Having read Frank's post I don't see it as a defence of MS / Asobo. More a description of how the product is being maintained and developed.

 

Next time I’ll put the #ironic there. I promise….

 

think it was clear with the smiley. But ok. 
 

A good idea for MS/Asobo would be to announce the updates a week before, in game, in the loading screen. 

Edited September 19, 20214 yr by swiesma

MSFS is inevitably going to run better on the Series X as Asobo know exactly the Series X capabilities. The software for a PC is always going to be compromised as it has to work on a huge variety of hardware. This is as true for MSFS as it is for any other dual/multi platform software of which there is a huge amount out there. I have both. PC is great for free stuff, XBOX is better for smoothness and detail running sweet as a nut on my 4K HDR 60inch OLED screen. I am finding I am not missing the free stuff much as there is so much with the standard Deluxe Premium version that I still after a year feel I am only just scratching the surface. 

CJ

4 minutes ago, swiesma said:

Next time I’ll put the #ironic there. I promise….

think it was clear with the smiley. But ok. 

Not to me, sorry. Your post seemed very clear. No harm done. 👍

40 minutes ago, CJ1045 said:

MSFS is inevitably going to run better on the Series X as Asobo know exactly the Series X capabilities.

Exactly another point I was going to make, myself. Nobody should be surprised if there are less issues on a console version. It isn't a conspiracy; it's the fact, as you say, that everyone playing on Xbox has identical hardware, OS, OS updates, drivers, and modding isn't possible... It's far easier to test and trace bugs for developers (the traceability aspect is important: the development team need to be able to replicate a bug themselves to track its root in the code, and, for whatever reason that some people can't easily accept, that isn't always possible).

Edited September 19, 20214 yr by March Hare