On 8/11/2021 at 8:42 PM, PIC007 said:

http://qwsim.flight1.net/forums/forums.html

This will keep you updated.

 

That link certainly did not help answer the question regarding MSFS20 development.

Are you guys not tried of this topic game vs real simulator? A reality is, most of us are chair pilots so yeah, if we want something real, we gotta then fly in real life. Can we just enjoy what we have for now and be grateful instead if arguing over this topic? 

7 hours ago, RXP said:

Maybe it is because it is late here, and I don't have all my lucidity, but I really don't understand at all what it is you're trying to say about Reality XP. Can you please clarify?

Nothing, really. It was a hypothetical situation where Reality XP could be doing the same thing ProSim did with X-Plane.

On 8/11/2021 at 8:42 PM, PIC007 said:

http://qwsim.flight1.net/forums/forums.html

This will keep you updated.

 

QualityWings – 787 Announced for MSFS (simflight.com)

24 minutes ago, omarsmak30 said:

Are you guys not tried of this topic game vs real simulator? A reality is, most of us are chair pilots so yeah, if we want something real, we gotta then fly in real life. Can we just enjoy what we have for now and be grateful instead if arguing over this topic? 

You just changed the argument.   The debate is game or simulation.  You are turning the discussion into real vs. simulation/game.   So you can have an arcade flight simulation, however, MSFS20 is a simulation.  Those that are calling it a game have no real basis for that judgement, except to just whine about the sim.

All PC flight emulations are games, or maybe they are all sims, does not really matter, they are all in the same ball park, tarred with the same brush. 

To try be nit picky about the semantics and claim that one is a "game" and the other a "sim" due to some perceived difference in algorithms or clients is either elitist nonsense or someone has been conned by marketing.

HOWEVER  - eventually some clever lawyer will find a way to copyright and register the term "simulation" and restrict its use to just one particular product. At that point in time the argument will finally be resolved in a court of law somewhere.

 

Edited August 13, 20214 yr by Glenn Fitzpatrick

On 8/11/2021 at 11:58 PM, LanceW said:

MSFS is so pathetic I wouldn't even waste my time as a 3rd party developer. I just keeps getting worse and worse. Welcome to the new MS Flight folks!

This experience and opinion isn’t shared by all, dare I say even most.

But you can read that in another 100 threads, so I won’t belabor the point. 

Particularly ingenuous is the suggestion/hint that because there exists a vastly different more expensive product with vastly more expensive hardware which is approved for some limited flight training, which also shares a few features and has a similar name to a dirt cheap consumer product that they happen to own, that somehow that makes their $100 software a "true simulator" and, by implication, they themselves are therefore as close to an actual airline captain as it is possible to get without working for an airline.   

You would be forgiven for thinking they entertain daily fantasies of taking over the controls and landing the plane when the fight crew on their airbus suffer simultaneous heart attacks or are incapacitated by terrorists or something.

Total silliness.  Thankfully most people are not like that.

Umm, I've read all of this, now I'll get thru the business of the day, and this evening I may fly somewhere (from the comfy surroundings of the computer room) and then I'll get up tomorrow and probably do something similar again. Nothing has changed.

10 hours ago, sd_flyer said:

EvidencePlz: I’m CFI who chooses and bets on MSFS. I really don’t care if another CFI chooses other platforms as training aid . I can assure no one in professional aviation training world cares about P3D, XP or MSFS. Result is count on student pass rate not on which “realistic” platform they trained on. After all what is used in training up to CFI, flight school and etc.

Look at this from different angle - some company use Boeing, some Airbus. Which on is better? The one that makes money!
 

Just to be realistic. I haven’t seen  another CFI who uses  XP as integral part of his/her training. I presume  such CFIs do exist, but I haven’t met them yet!
 

All of that kiddie talk “my sim more realistic then your” is childish.  Everyone uses what fit their needs. Who cares which platform is someone’s favorite !
 

My philosophy is simple if someone is happy with XP11 there is absolutely no reason to come to MFS forum and contrast sims. Stay in your lane and be happy with your choice ! 🙂

Which actually just proves his point that MSFS ISN’T head and shoulders above the rest at all.  It’s just another play at home simulator, only with far less quality add-ons, making it in some ways we’ll behind the rest. 
 

Thanks for confirming it and therein should end the discussion. 

11 hours ago, BiologicalNanobot said:

I guess some people's commercial interests are more important than telling the truth. How do you know that it is not the case with Reality XP and some others who say the same things ProSim says about X-Plane either?

2 hours ago, BiologicalNanobot said:

Nothing, really. It was a hypothetical situation where Reality XP could be doing the same thing ProSim did with X-Plane.

My first reading was "how do you know other vendors, because they are protecting their commercial interests, are not telling the truth about Reality XP". Which honestly is pretty much what you'd expect any company doing, though it seems most of the community is fine with this even when it crosses the line, given the apparent lack of reaction to the actual slander RXP is enduring for libellous reasons. Since I refuse to think this community, which used to be much more vocal on ethical principles, hasn't became complacent only because they are saving a few pennies now that MSFT is paying for some of their avionics wants (not necessarily needs), I couldn't help thinking you might have wanted to say something else than this and it must have been only me not making sense of what you wanted to say. Thank you for the clarification because this was confusing me.

 

Edited August 13, 20214 yr by RXP
typo

57 minutes ago, RXP said:

Though it seems most of the community is fine with this even when it crosses the line, given the apparent lack of reaction to the actual slander RXP is enduring for libellous reasons

The truth is, we simply cannot know which side is telling the truth, hence the lack of reaction from community. No one wants to take a side when it is very clear that both sides are trying to protect their businesses by undermining the alternatives. We can see this in ProSim's behavior towards X-Plane, we can see this in the link you sent, we can see this in how you "like" every single post goes against MSFS in a very unfair way. In the end, it is very likely that there is a lot more to the truth than what both sides are telling, hence my recommendation for people to form their opinions by gaining required technical knowledge.

I am not the one who will discuss how ethical this is, but it is very clear that no one, be it ProSim, Working Title or Reality XP is telling the complete truth.

Edited August 13, 20214 yr by BiologicalNanobot

9 hours ago, BiologicalNanobot said:

The truth is, we simply cannot know which side is telling the truth, hence the lack of reaction from community. No one wants to take a side when it is very clear that both sides are trying to protect their businesses by undermining the alternatives [...] I am not the one who will discuss how ethical this is, but it is very clear that no one, be it ProSim, Working Title or Reality XP is telling the complete truth.

I thank you for your balanced answer and for your bluntness. It is much appreciated and I believe necessary sometimes to move forward in a constructive way. I'll can't answer you right now because I have other commitments but I'll get back to it later, either in a new post or in editing this one directly.

Edited August 13, 20214 yr by RXP

7 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

Microsoft will push to get MSFS FAA certified, 

I don't think so, this is one of the only rare things on which i believe Jorg, when he said this product is made for entertainment.

21 minutes ago, nirgal76 said:

I don't think so, this is one of the only rare things on which i believe Jorg, when he said this product is made for entertainment.

Perhaps Jorg meant the current version of MSFS as it is.  Nothing will stop Microsoft from taking the current MSFS, and branching out and making a commercial version of it.  Hence, there could eventually be two versions of MSFS, one for the consumer home market, and a different version for the commercial market.

It's about $$$ at the end of the day.  Jorg would be quickly sidelined by Microsoft execs if he stopped a commercial version of MSFS, if the Microsoft execs determined that MSFS actually has a good chance of making decent money in the commercial market.  

Edited August 13, 20214 yr by abrams_tank