I think folks need to exhibit some understanding. And that is sorely lacking in a big segment of the community. There's only one reality here. At no point was Asobo out to cripple the software or downgrade the title, and the vocal backlash seen is not at all what is responsible for the purported 180.

What you see in SU5 is the effort of 6+ months of dedicated engineering work and day in and day out absolute laser focus on a quality engine refactor and truly tangible performance boost. Nobody felt that making it work on the XBox was a chore they had to complete so they'd just hack and slash until it worked (and gut the PC); on the contrary, they felt it was an awesome opportunity to really truly tune the parts of the engine that often you just don't have time to tune as much as you would like. And they were truly, honestly, pretty giddy (and I mean that, there was seriously a palpable excitement) to give all of you a huge performance boost. The developers really did think that simmers would be absolutely so super stoked to go fly with a way smoother, faster product. And, now, you have instead a pretty demoralized team scratching their heads, because everyone kept hearing over and over that performance was one of the biggest complaints, and that yeah, visuals are great and all, but they don't make a great sim, and what good are they if it isn't smooth and fast?

Engineering is always a set of compromises. Did I see a few extra things load when I turned my head as I developed against SU5? Sure, yeah, a little bit, but man, flying with 15 fps more was so awesome. Did I think the backlash over that specific item would be so enormous, with pitchforks ready and conspiracy theories to go with? Never, never in my wildest dreams. My clients have always been companies and not the general public, and this has certainly been an eye opener.

The stuff you see in hotfix two are just a result of things being unintentionally missed, not due to a scramble to change direction to undo the XBoxification of the sim or any other such insanity.

-Matt

9 minutes ago, MattNischan said:

I think folks need to exhibit some understanding. And that is sorely lacking in a big segment of the community. There's only one reality here. At no point was Asobo out to cripple the software or downgrade the title, and the vocal backlash seen is not at all what is responsible for the purported 180.

What you see in SU5 is the effort of 6+ months of dedicated engineering work and day in and day out absolute laser focus on a quality engine refactor and truly tangible performance boost. Nobody felt that making it work on the XBox was a chore they had to complete so they'd just hack and slash until it worked (and gut the PC); on the contrary, they felt it was an awesome opportunity to really truly tune the parts of the engine that often you just don't have time to tune as much as you would like. And they were truly, honestly, pretty giddy (and I mean that, there was seriously a palpable excitement) to give all of you a huge performance boost. The developers really did think that simmers would be absolutely so super stoked to go fly with a way smoother, faster product. And, now, you have instead a pretty demoralized team scratching their heads, because everyone kept hearing over and over that performance was one of the biggest complaints, and that yeah, visuals are great and all, but they don't make a great sim, and what good are they if it isn't smooth and fast?

Engineering is always a set of compromises. Did I see a few extra things load when I turned my head as I developed against SU5? Sure, yeah, a little bit, but man, flying with 15 fps more was so awesome. Did I think the backlash over that specific item would be so enormous, with pitchforks ready and conspiracy theories to go with? Never, never in my wildest dreams. My clients have always been companies and not the general public, and this has certainly been an eye opener.

The stuff you see in hotfix two are just a result of things being unintentionally missed, not due to a scramble to change direction to undo the XBoxification of the sim or any other such insanity.

-Matt

Thank you, Matt, for confirming exactly what I've been trying to say in a couple of my posts. I can only imagine how the team there feel after all this work and seeing these baseless accusations. They are just trying to give people what they have seemingly been begging for, with some hiccups thrown in because s&#! happens. And even their acknowledgement of issues and promise of fixes is met with more conspiracy and bashing...

I'm really disgusted by what I see here. Having a family member who is a developer, I see (and hear) the stress -- and the dedication and excitement. Developers are passionate professionals who want their product to please people and bring joy. And they are human.

Edited August 5, 20214 yr by March Hare

10 minutes ago, MattNischan said:

I think folks need to exhibit some understanding. And that is sorely lacking in a big segment of the community. There's only one reality here. At no point was Asobo out to cripple the software or downgrade the title, and the vocal backlash seen is not at all what is responsible for the purported 180.

What you see in SU5 is the effort of 6+ months of dedicated engineering work and day in and day out absolute laser focus on a quality engine refactor and truly tangible performance boost. Nobody felt that making it work on the XBox was a chore they had to complete so they'd just hack and slash until it worked (and gut the PC); on the contrary, they felt it was an awesome opportunity to really truly tune the parts of the engine that often you just don't have time to tune as much as you would like. And they were truly, honestly, pretty giddy (and I mean that, there was seriously a palpable excitement) to give all of you a huge performance boost. The developers really did think that simmers would be absolutely so super stoked to go fly with a way smoother, faster product. And, now, you have instead a pretty demoralized team scratching their heads, because everyone kept hearing over and over that performance was one of the biggest complaints, and that yeah, visuals are great and all, but they don't make a great sim, and what good are they if it isn't smooth and fast?

Engineering is always a set of compromises. Did I see a few extra things load when I turned my head as I developed against SU5? Sure, yeah, a little bit, but man, flying with 15 fps more was so awesome. Did I think the backlash over that specific item would be so enormous, with pitchforks ready and conspiracy theories to go with? Never, never in my wildest dreams. My clients have always been companies and not the general public, and this has certainly been an eye opener.

The stuff you see in hotfix two are just a result of things being unintentionally missed, not due to a scramble to change direction to undo the XBoxification of the sim or any other such insanity.

-Matt

Well said. But there will always be the folks that think the develovers are liars and corporate shills . (Already said in no uncertain terms) .  To which I say to them do they lie in thier line of work and have no integrity?  Being an engineer I do understand the complexities and appreciate the work involved because it is a large task. Thanks for the input

Edited August 5, 20214 yr by joec63

7 minutes ago, MattNischan said:

And, now, you have instead a pretty demoralized team scratching their heads, because everyone kept hearing over and over that performance was one of the biggest complaints

It was claimed several times in past Q&A sessions that there would be no visual regressions. I think it was mostly a matter of people feeling betrayed.

Of course this doesn't excuse some of the extremely unreasonable reactions, but some of us really did try to warn the team well in advance about the general reception to these changes. Still, I appreciate the transparency, and I hope developer-community relations can be restored.

6 hours ago, Slides said:

Folks, please start taking screenshots and documenting the exact location, weather and time of day. There will be people who will say the graphics are worse then FS9 at the pace we're going in hyperbole.

Just one question - how in the heck are you flying the TBM?  Since the update, I can no longer get throttle control (the throttle will not move into feathered high idle position) - every remedy that has been recommended to me has failed.

I've always been impressed by the top 10 or so guys on how Asobo set the direction of the SIM. I'm a critic at heart though, much like a movie critic, and that's not to look for mal-intent towards anyone, but it's just who or what I am. That said, I do have lines I absolutely do not cross, but there were some others that I felt actually crossed into Jerry Springer territory many times, on both sides. I know if someone is taking flack in any argument it always seems like the fault is only on one side, but it's complicated.

Anyways, as I noted there were bandwidth issues after the patch that caused many of us to over-extend our initial findings, but as far as REAL issues go, I will wait to read the Aug 12th report (or whenever it is), to find out how they are going to get the DEV mode back to a proper productive environment without having tasks that used to take 10 minutes now take 30 minutes or longer (like having to restart sometimes).

 

 

Edited August 5, 20214 yr by Alpine Scenery

1 minute ago, RandallR said:

Just one question - how in the heck are you flying the TBM?  Since the update, I can no longer get throttle control (the throttle will not move into feathered high idle position) - every remedy that has been recommended to me has failed.

Not something you want to hear I'm sure. I was forced to reinstall the sim after the beta was over because the last update deleted my install. I'm sure that has something to do with it. Now running a stock simulation and have not had any CTD's or issues flying the TBM or any other plane I've tried. Just a data point from my end. 

Has anyone heard of the first century legend about a Sybaris native who slept on a bed of roses and suffered due to one petal folding over? Similar to the Princess and the Pea.

Edited August 5, 20214 yr by desbean

26 minutes ago, MattNischan said:

I think folks need to exhibit some understanding. And that is sorely lacking in a big segment of the community. There's only one reality here. At no point was Asobo out to cripple the software or downgrade the title, and the vocal backlash seen is not at all what is responsible for the purported 180.

What you see in SU5 is the effort of 6+ months of dedicated engineering work and day in and day out absolute laser focus on a quality engine refactor and truly tangible performance boost. Nobody felt that making it work on the XBox was a chore they had to complete so they'd just hack and slash until it worked (and gut the PC); on the contrary, they felt it was an awesome opportunity to really truly tune the parts of the engine that often you just don't have time to tune as much as you would like. And they were truly, honestly, pretty giddy (and I mean that, there was seriously a palpable excitement) to give all of you a huge performance boost. The developers really did think that simmers would be absolutely so super stoked to go fly with a way smoother, faster product. And, now, you have instead a pretty demoralized team scratching their heads, because everyone kept hearing over and over that performance was one of the biggest complaints, and that yeah, visuals are great and all, but they don't make a great sim, and what good are they if it isn't smooth and fast?

Engineering is always a set of compromises. Did I see a few extra things load when I turned my head as I developed against SU5? Sure, yeah, a little bit, but man, flying with 15 fps more was so awesome. Did I think the backlash over that specific item would be so enormous, with pitchforks ready and conspiracy theories to go with? Never, never in my wildest dreams. My clients have always been companies and not the general public, and this has certainly been an eye opener.

The stuff you see in hotfix two are just a result of things being unintentionally missed, not due to a scramble to change direction to undo the XBoxification of the sim or any other such insanity.

-Matt

Hey Matt.  I know you and your team talk to Asobo every day.  If possible, I think the best way to gauge how the community would react is by beta testers.  And the more beta testers in beta testing, the better you can gauge how they would react.  Right now, my understanding is that Asobo has 300 beta testers and then there are 3rd party developers who have access to the beta (whether the 3rd party devs are part of the 300, I don't really know).

What would be nice is if after the beta testing were conducted by the 300 beta testers and Asobo is confident of their beta build, that there be a full beta test by the entire MSFS community, allowing every MSFS user to "opt in" or not.  An "opt in" beta testing option for every user of MSFS is the best and I guarantee you, Asobo will immediately get a better idea of what the community thinks about a specific update.

I'm sure the 300 beta testers made some noise during their testing of Sim Update 5.  Whatever noise they made, magnify that by a factor of 100 when the actual update is released to the entire public.  If there were a full "opt in" beta test for every user of MSFS, Asobo would really get an idea of what the community  would think of a particular update before it's released to the public.  I don't know how the infrastructure would work for a fully "opt in" beta test for the entire MSFS community - perhaps the cost of it is too much, so it can't be done.  But if a full "opt in" beta test cannot be done, at least try to add more beta testers.  The more beta testers helping to test in the beta test, the more Asobo can get a more accurate picture of how the community will respond.

I hope this help you guys.  Best of luck to you and please don't get demoralized - you guys are doing a great job, despite the hiccups every now and then.  Cheers.

Edited August 5, 20214 yr by abrams_tank

8 minutes ago, ChaoticBeauty said:

It was claimed several times in past Q&A sessions that there would be no visual regressions. I think it was mostly a matter of people feeling betrayed.

Of course this doesn't excuse some of the extremely unreasonable reactions, but some of us really did try to warn the team well in advance about the general reception to these changes. Still, I appreciate the transparency, and I hope developer-community relations can be restored.

My guess is, you guys made noise during the beta but the noise came out like a bird chirping. Asobo could hear it, but they didn't really think it would result in a big storm.  Once the release goes public though, whatever noise the beta testers made is amplified like 100 times.

I am glad that Asobo has a beta test team of some 300 beta testers or whatever the number is.  But what Asobo really needs is "opt in" beta testing by the entire MSFS player base.  If this can be done, they would find out quickly what the community thinks about a specific update before it's released.

3 minutes ago, ChaoticBeauty said:

It was claimed several times in past Q&A sessions that there would be no visual regressions. I think it was mostly a matter of people feeling betrayed.

Sure, and I understand that. At the same time, while I did see some extra load-in, I was also able to crank up the settings in other ways and get more detail than I could get before, personally, and that felt like it would be on average a win for everyone. And definitely some people in flighting did sound the alarm, but in general it's hard to tell how beta tester feedback will translate, because beta testers are a self-selected segment, and so you tend to get a big bias, even if the pool is really large.

Nonetheless, of course, nobody is ignoring the lessons that can be taken away from this, from the dev end.

-Matt

6 minutes ago, joec63 said:

I was forced to reinstall the sim after the beta was over because the last update deleted my install. I'm sure that has something to do with it. Now running a stock simulation and have not had any CTD's or issues flying the TBM or any other plane I've tried. Just a data point from my end. 

Thanks - well, I won't be doing that (at least for now). I'm going to wait for the hotfix to see what happens, then proceed from there.  If the TBM is still unusable after that, I guess I'll go the reinstall route, as I sure miss that aircraft.

30 minutes ago, MattNischan said:

I think folks need to exhibit some understanding. And that is sorely lacking in a big segment of the community. There's only one reality here. At no point was Asobo out to cripple the software or downgrade the title, and the vocal backlash seen is not at all what is responsible for the purported 180.

What you see in SU5 is the effort of 6+ months of dedicated engineering work and day in and day out absolute laser focus on a quality engine refactor and truly tangible performance boost. Nobody felt that making it work on the XBox was a chore they had to complete so they'd just hack and slash until it worked (and gut the PC); on the contrary, they felt it was an awesome opportunity to really truly tune the parts of the engine that often you just don't have time to tune as much as you would like. And they were truly, honestly, pretty giddy (and I mean that, there was seriously a palpable excitement) to give all of you a huge performance boost. The developers really did think that simmers would be absolutely so super stoked to go fly with a way smoother, faster product. And, now, you have instead a pretty demoralized team scratching their heads, because everyone kept hearing over and over that performance was one of the biggest complaints, and that yeah, visuals are great and all, but they don't make a great sim, and what good are they if it isn't smooth and fast?

Engineering is always a set of compromises. Did I see a few extra things load when I turned my head as I developed against SU5? Sure, yeah, a little bit, but man, flying with 15 fps more was so awesome. Did I think the backlash over that specific item would be so enormous, with pitchforks ready and conspiracy theories to go with? Never, never in my wildest dreams. My clients have always been companies and not the general public, and this has certainly been an eye opener.

The stuff you see in hotfix two are just a result of things being unintentionally missed, not due to a scramble to change direction to undo the XBoxification of the sim or any other such insanity.

-Matt

Well said Matt

Asobo should be congratulated for dragging a very poor legacy game engine into the 21st Century and not be hammered like this. Now we have a more efficient platform to expand upon over the coming years - remember this is a 10 year project.

Many flight simmers really should check out what the rest of the game industry is doing rather than sticking their heads in the FSX/P3D/XP sands of the past

Keep up the good work team - some of us appreciate what you are doing 

Edited August 5, 20214 yr by hanhamreds

14 minutes ago, MattNischan said:

personally, and that felt like it would be on average a win for everyone. And definitely some people in flighting did sound the alarm, but in general it's hard to tell how beta tester feedback will translate, because beta testers are a self-selected segment, and so you tend to get a big bias, even if the pool is really large.

It was a huge win for me. The culling and pop-ins (when you change the view) are very minor to me, but I had a nice boost in FPS.  I desperately want to keep the culling and pop-ins because overall for me, my FPS has gone up 25% or more, and the sim is much more smoother for me.  But look at my specs in my signature.  I have a pretty mediocre computer.  

I had a feeling that people with very powerful and expensive computers would get pretty angry.  And I guess my feeling was right.  To be fair, some people go out and spend thousands of dollars to get a very powerful computer to take advantage of every inch than MSFS will give them (I mean, some people went out and bought 64 GB of RAM for MSFS - did people really need 64 GB of RAM before Sim Update 5?).  And if they can't fully utilize the money they spent, you're gonna hear from them and oh boy, did Asobo hear from them after Sim Update 5, LOL.

I definitely hope Asobo keeps the culling and the pop-ins for people like me with a very mediocre computer.  At the same time, a slider that allows people with powerful and expensive computers to get the best out of MSFS is also needed to satisfy their needs.

Edited August 5, 20214 yr by abrams_tank

54 minutes ago, MattNischan said:

The developers really did think that simmers would be absolutely so super stoked to go fly with a way smoother, faster product. And, now, you have instead a pretty demoralized team scratching their heads, because everyone kept hearing over and over that performance was one of the biggest complaints, and that yeah, visuals are great and all, but they don't make a great sim, and what good are they if it isn't smooth and fast?

Thank you from my side too. I really appreciate your perspective, your comments that are a calm, fact-based and devoid of baseless speculation, something you seldom find in the heated discussions. Ok, for a couple of months now you've been a lot closer to the source, but even before joining the MSFS team, this was the case. I really hope the community's emotional reactions don't make you stop posting here.

When you look closely, there are many forum users that are absolutely stoked about the improved performance - including me. Finally a flight simulator that runs smoothly, and with great visuals. Yes, there are regressions, bugs, but I'm sure they'll get fixed in due time. It's always the angry minority that's most vocal in a forum, and I get the frustration when you can't fly because you're suffering frequent CTDs. The conspiracies though about dumbing down the PC version on purpose is something I'll never understand. 

What those people forget is that in the end everything can be made configurable. This isn't a one-way road, and the team made it abundantly clear that they don't want to reduce the quality, but instead aim for bringing above-Ultra quality to the sim. If this means a slider to reduce the culling of off-screen objects, why not. I personally don't mind a bit of scenery popping in the distance, or the slight reduction in fps when panning very fast, but I understand this may ruin the experience for someone using VR or a TrackIR headtracker. 

And among all that, we have to keep in mind that civil flight sims are on the slow side of gaming. While some people always aim for 60+ fps, many flight simmers are quite happy with 30 fps as long as the frametimes are stable. With a 3080 or 3090 this has already been possible pre-SU5, so those simmers with high specs don't see a benefit in improving the performance, on the contrary, if they're sensitive for these details, it is in fact a downgrade to them. As I said, it can be fixed by adding some more parameters to fiddle with. Now that we're closing in on stable 60fps on enthusiast systems, and maybe eyeing 90fps for VR, it's more important than ever to give users the possibility to fine-tune their experience. It's up to them to decide whether they prefer 30fps with extreme graphical fidelity or high fps with some tradeoffs.

Anyway, the most important thing is to keep it civil, especially towards the developers. Mistakes have been made, mistakes will be made, but that shouldn't be a reason for accusing the team of dishonisty or a hidden agenda. And as far as I remember, Asobo has always been openly admitting mistakes, and making their efforts to fix them.

 

Edited August 5, 20214 yr by pstrub
typo