I thought his response to that question was spot on, of course it's a Sim for Simmers but you cannot alienate everyone else because of a few. Helping new wannabe pilots enter the world, helping kids who in turn may well become hardcore simmers further down the line. Add in fun elements (like the Reno Races) whilst still maintaining a full simulation and the flip side is new features and advancements come into the Sim because of these (air turbulence as per the Q&A for example), they all go hand in hand eventually.

2 minutes ago, MarcG said:

I thought his response to that question was spot on, of course it's a Sim for Simmers but you cannot alienate everyone else because of a few. Helping new wannabe pilots enter the world, helping kids who in turn may well become hardcore simmers further down the line. Add in fun elements (like the Reno Races) whilst still maintaining a full simulation and the flip side is new features and advancements come into the Sim because of these (air turbulence as per the Q&A for example), they all go hand in hand eventually.

Very true, I'd imagine not many people were what you would call a hard core simmer until you've actually used a flight simulator and found out you loved it and wanted to get deeper into the genre. 

43 minutes ago, Krakin said:

I called that question trash in the chat and I'm happy I wasn't the only one that decided to say it.

Well considering the opposition on these regards, Is it not a legit question?

46 minutes ago, jbdbow1970 said:

Well considering the opposition on these regards, Is it not a legit question?

The question makes an incorrect assumption about the sim.

1 hour ago, Krakin said:

The question makes an incorrect assumption about the sim.

I agree this question makes no sense at all.

I believe this dichotomy between game and simulator is often used to pose the question of the intended use, which is therefore raising the question whether there are any intrinsic limitations preventing the intended use. It is clear some features are probably not well implemented whether for basic or advanced use, and some other features are perfectly suitable regardless. However one can be wondering what direction the game will take if 20x more Xbox users concerns are different than 20x less PC users (1), or if 20x more new simmers concerns are different than 20x less long time simmers.

Given there are always limited resources available, the game can only be focusing for the largest population using the game, or the largest population financing the game, in which case it is not a question of gamers and simmers (although it could), but I have a strong feeling from the initial Xbox feedback it will be a question of who is using the game and for what reasons.

---
(1) to illustrate what I mean with Xbox/PC users concerns and priorities: how many Xbox users are concerned with multi-monitor for example and therefore how much resources Asobo will allocate to implement multi-monitor support, vs something which would be more in demand for Xbox users specific to the console as a console.

Edited October 1, 20214 yr by RXP

22 minutes ago, RXP said:

I agree this question makes no sense at all.

I believe this dichotomy between game and simulator is often used to pose the question of the intended use, which is therefore raising the question whether there are any intrinsic limitations preventing the intended use. It is clear some features are probably not well implemented whether for basic or advanced use, and some other features are perfectly suitable regardless. However one can be wondering what direction the game will take if 20x more Xbox users concerns are different than 20x less PC users (1), or if 20x more new simmers concerns are different than 20x less long time simmers.

Given there are always limited resources available, the game can only be focusing for the largest population using the game, or the largest population financing the game, in which case it is not a question of gamers and simmers (although it could), but I have a strong feeling from the initial Xbox feedback it will be a question of who is using the game and for what reasons.

---
(1) to illustrate what I mean with Xbox/PC users concerns and priorities: how many Xbox users are concerned with multi-monitor for example and therefore how much resources Asobo will allocate to implement multi-monitor support, vs something which would be more in demand for Xbox users specific to the console as a console.

This question only become a thing when LM sign an agreement with Microsoft about using their ESP engine. It was written in the contract that it could be use for entertainment as Microsoft already had an agreement with Dovetails games for FSX. That's it. It was for legal reason this debate about game vs sim. Some hardcore elitist looking down on others now had an excuse to claim they are not playing a game , they a simming. It's all about how big their ego is and how peasant everyone else is because they are just playing a game. 

It's a most ridiculous argument that ever come to life in the flight simming community. Today the focus has shifted PC vs Console. PC elitist thinks they are better than console gamers because they have access to more mods and peripheral.  The reality of all of this is that MSFS is a more accessible product that has not more for the flight sim community than any other flight simulator before. It made the game accessible for everyone. including people who just want to barrel roll or virtual tourism.  There is absolutely nothing wrong with the approach MS took. There is content for everyone. For the hardcore to your grandma.  

3 hours ago, Krakin said:

The question makes an incorrect assumption about the sim.

Assumption of what that it is and still it is. a Scenery scheme. Give me replay (flybies), particle effects. Atc. RWW just anything that effects the airframe and we can talk about the next step of MSFS of being a real simulator.

Edited October 1, 20214 yr by jbdbow1970

9 minutes ago, jbdbow1970 said:

Give me replay (flybies), particle effects.

replay is coming, and particle effects already exist.. I think?

@fogboundturtle

I'm not sure to follow whether you're agreeing with my post, or whether you wanted to object on its content and you are not agreeing with my post, especially since you're replying to me "There is absolutely nothing wrong with the approach MS took" whereas I was not suggesting or saying any wrong doing at all?!

Edited October 1, 20214 yr by RXP

1 minute ago, RXP said:

@fogboundturtle

I'm not sure to follow whether you're agreeing with my post, not agreeing with my post, especially since you're replying to me "There is absolutely nothing wrong with the approach MS took" whereas I was not suggesting or saying any wrong doing at all?!

Neither. Just making a statement that Hardcore always blame the casual for <x not in game/sim yet>. It's an endless vicious loop that seems to again be at the center of the MSFS drama.   It's the constant insecurity they are going to be left behind.

5 minutes ago, fogboundturtle said:

Neither. Just making a statement that Hardcore always blame the casual for <x not in game/sim yet>. It's an endless vicious loop that seems to again be at the center of the MSFS drama. 

Thank you for the clarification. I won't try judging whether it is a sentiment of insecurity which is driving any drama, however if there is any such dram going on, the real question would be why is this drama developing only since FS2020 release and what factors are contributing to fuel the drama, if any. In other words, is this an endogenous reason (the game itself, MSFT communications and marketing, 3rd party vendors selected to represent products in the market place), or an exogenous (the community using it, the type of add-ons 3rd party vendors are doing). I don't think the latter has changed much though.

Edited October 1, 20214 yr by RXP

Just now, RXP said:

Thank you for the clarification. I won't try judging whether it is a sentiment of insecurity which is driving any drama, however if there is any such dram going on, the real question would be why is this drama developing only since FS2020 release and what factors are contributing to fuel the drama, if any.

Good question. It's obvious the current installment if missing key features that has been considered as "basic" or "mandatory" in flight simming.  Who releases a flight simulator without a replay mode ? The AP logic is obviously terrible. If you only fly IFR, this is a biggie.  It's nowhere near perfect.  Asobo ported FSX legacy code and it's chipping away at it with the goal that at the end of it all, the legacy code will all be replace. It's a tall order. Something that not even LM ever attempted to do.  There is plenty of drama to go around but if you look at MSFS as new product. It only had been 1 year. FSX,Xplane 11 and P3D product in it's first year was awful. It's easy to forget history. Things improved over time, it will stabilized. 

Personally, I think Asobo and MS are doing a pretty good job at working the issues and improved the experience. I am way more optimistic about where the platform is going compare to it's competitor. 

2 hours ago, jbdbow1970 said:

[...] we can talk about the next step of MSFS of being a real simulator.

What's the difference between a simulator and a real simulator? So this means, in your opinion MSFS is a simulator but not a real simulator? 🤔

Edited October 1, 20214 yr by pstrub

Game, simulation it doesn't matter to most if a computer is involved.  XBOXERs might take the simulator tag as a negative I suppose.

Cheers

bs

19 hours ago, BIGSKY said:

What is LATC?

https://www.liveatc.net