I think the main cause of frustration is that they regularly release obviously buggy updates and that there‘s no indication of improvement in this regard. It’s especially annoying when it‘s bugs that are easy to fix. It just makes a sloppy impression.

Edited November 23, 20214 yr by Shack95

14 minutes ago, Shack95 said:

It’s especially annoying when it‘s bugs that are easy to fix.

However, the bugs may not be easy to fix at all, no matter how simple something appears on the surface. Sometimes, what the programmer themselves thinks should be easy turns out not to be and frustrates the heck out of them.

So, we aren't in a position to make statements like "This is an easy fix".

I'm sure Asobo are working on it, either way. However, I do hope something like this is a hotfix, not left for the next full sim update. But I don't think Microsoft have suggested all bug fixes would be left for the next sim update...

31 minutes ago, MarcG said:

I'll put it in simplistic terms;

Imagine your local garage offered you free service for your car, when you get it back it's been upgraded in various areas, polished a bit, but there's a fundamental control mechanism that is key to driving and it's not working as it did before the service.

What do you do?

I'll answer that for you; You complain until the issue is fixed.

Why then is it that gaming software Devs are "immune" to complaints when things like this happen? Why should the "entitled" shut up? We/you wouldn't in any other form of service, so why here?

Asobo have broken a very basic control mechanism which was working just fine in all previous Sim Updates, please learn to understand the severity of this singular issue (amongst many others) and then, maybe just maybe you'll begin to understand the frustration and outright unbelief that this was allowed to happen in the first place and that we're demanding a Hotfix - the same way I/you would demand the garage sorted your car out, get it?!

No idea what you're talking about.

After SU7 I fired up the sim, plugged in my ye olde Thrustmaster HOTAS, worked just fine.

So, what you're saying is that without this mythical "fundamental control mechanism" the sim cannot be operated?

Merriam-Webster defines fundamental as: "serving as a basis supporting existence or determining essential structure or function....of or relating to essential structure, function, or facts."

I think we’d all be accepting of updates if they did what we expected when we bought MSFS. Maybe I’m naive, but ....

1. When I preordered MSFS, I didn’t know it was an ‘early development’ release that would have monthly updates.

2. When I did read Asosbo would commit to 10 years of upgrades, I was not expecting elements would break along the way.

I still compare this experience to buying a car. It seems I purchased a vehicle without doors, no heater, no back seat and a radio that only works when the sun shines. The dealer told me I can still drive it though. Upon taking it back to shop for the next upgrade, the back seats were installed and I now have new hubcaps but the tires loose air pressure. 

We were sold the idea that sim updates would improve things. Yet we’ve already seen a hotfix needed for a hotfix. It’s getting harder to believe this will end well. 

 

22 minutes ago, March Hare said:

However, the bugs may not be easy to fix at all, no matter how simple something appears on the surface. Sometimes, what the programmer themselves thinks should be easy turns out not to be and frustrates the heck out of them.

removing the log book end screen was a super easy fix ( as they even proclaimed) however it took them ages to do it. 

15 minutes ago, Ricardo41 said:

So, what you're saying is that without this mythical "fundamental control mechanism" the sim cannot be operated?

Merriam-Webster defines fundamental as: "serving as a basis supporting existence or determining essential structure or function....of or relating to essential structure, function, or facts."

What? He was just making an analogy, I understood perfectly fine the point he was making. Your reply is pointless.

18 minutes ago, March Hare said:

However, the bugs may not be easy to fix at all, no matter how simple something appears on the surface.

That‘s certainly true in some cases and I‘m no expert. But there have been cases in which the community found a workaround within a few hours or even less, which suggests to me that these issues weren‘t that complex (but as I said, I‘m no expert). Anyway, it still doesn‘t make the best impression.

25 minutes ago, Shack95 said:

That‘s certainly true in some cases and I‘m no expert. But there have been cases in which the community found a workaround within a few hours or even less, which suggests to me that these issues weren‘t that complex (but as I said, I‘m no expert). Anyway, it still doesn‘t make the best impression.

Completely agree about impressions given. I would just say, on this point, that workarounds are not the same as tracing and eliminating the root cause of an issue on the core code side, to fix it properly. You can easily replace your lawn with fake grass if it keeps dying, but it's not really resolving what lies beneath. Excuse the bad analogy 😉

I do think a lot of the issues are down to Microsoft's direction of the project and the release schedules set, so far. I feel the frustrations of those with issues, such as TrackIR (and do agree with the car analogies made above).

But I want to believe in Jorg, on the publisher side, and give Microsoft the benefit of the doubt, when he says there is no more major new content being developed now, at the moment, e.g. Reno, and the focus will be on fixes for the foreseeable future. I want to believe MS are now listening and are coming to the realisation that wanting to give everyone what they want right now, to please every user and every type (casual and serious simmer), as quickly as possible, and to look good "on the surface" by keep releasing big updates stacked on top of each other, actually doesn't let Asobo concentrate on the issues that are cropping up.

Pressure on a development team will show. I think it was showing in the faces of Seb and Martial. And pressure can lead to more mistakes.

Little anecdote on that: I can't remember which game my more intelligent sibling was working on at the time, but I recall they were under heavy pressure to meet the "set in stone" release date, and at the last minute the release build was compiled and sent to the publisher, which should have been working (apart from some known bugs that weren't game breaking and already under investigation for a post-launch patch). It was only from user feedback, after release the next morning, that they realised someone had accidentally uploaded an older version of their part of the code, which broke other things, which unfortunately made it into the launch. That was a mix of release day pressure and butter fingers. Thankfully, it was fixed fairly quickly. Still involved a lot of people tracing the cause through all the code.

Edited November 23, 20214 yr by March Hare

2 hours ago, Ricardo41 said:

Let's simply compare the development trajectory of MSFS 2020 with that of the "other flight simulators".

Thank you. And case closed.

So Mercedes buyers cannot complain about peeling window buttons because the Trabant was worse? Interesting.

Look the issue is that Asobo release updates either knowing full well they have broken core functionality (reverse is broken for instance) or they didnt even bother testing for those functions.

Either of those possibilities (and it has to be one or the other) shows that adding new stuff especially if its stuff you need to pay for is higher priority than maintaining functionality or heaven forbid fixing stuff they already broke.

It may well be contractual pressure from above and the Devs themselves may well not be happy with it, regardless Its not a state of affairs that deserves defending

 

42 minutes ago, March Hare said:

 

I do think a lot of the issues are down to Microsoft's direction of the project and the release schedules set, so far.  

But I want to believe in Jorg, on the publisher side, and give Microsoft the benefit of the doubt, when he says there is no more major new content being developed now, at the moment, e.g. Reno, and the focus will be on fixes for the foreseeable future. I want to believe MS are now listening and are coming to the realisation that wanting to give everyone what they want right now, to please every user and every type (casual and serious simmer), as quickly as possible, and to look good "on the surface" by keep releasing big updates stacked on top of each other, actually doesn't let Asobo concentrate on the issues that are cropping up.

Pressure on a development team will show. I think it was showing in the faces of Seb and Martial. And pressure can lead to more mistakes.

 

The problem is obviously coming from Microsoft which is not only the publisher but also the sole  investor. Redmond decides where the money should be spent (QC or PR ?), what should be released and when, not Bordeaux.

 We could have faulted hurried preparation  and a perfectible QC process after the first couple of updates. Not after 13 updates !  Large companies know very well how to correct this sort of things. Microsoft is no slouch. 

So the conclusion of my good friend Occam is that it is voluntary. They try to maintain a good level of sales as long as possible through an injection of close updates. Each update even buggy brings a flurry of articles and YT video reviews which are, for most of them, very obliging if not outrightly bought by Microsoft (remember the YouTubers not ashamed to show the nice hardware given by MS ,).  QC is expensive not because of the personel wages but because it would delay the schedule.

MS is not listening, MS follows a business plan

About the Asobo's team, Wloch has gained a few kilos. Stress makes you hungry and deadlines eat junk food. Been there.

One day, somebody will write a book about how things went behind the scene. It could be earlier than we think.

Edited November 23, 20214 yr by Dominique_K

1 hour ago, Ricardo41 said:

No idea what you're talking about.

After SU7 I fired up the sim, plugged in my ye olde Thrustmaster HOTAS, worked just fine.

So, what you're saying is that without this mythical "fundamental control mechanism" the sim cannot be operated?

Merriam-Webster defines fundamental as: "serving as a basis supporting existence or determining essential structure or function....of or relating to essential structure, function, or facts."

You are a perfect example of what I was talking about earlier, you don't even have a clue as to the bug I'm referencing 😂 

Read this before eating your humble pie:

https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/toolbar-broken-in-vr/472150/343

Edited November 23, 20214 yr by MarcG

12 minutes ago, MarcG said:

You are a perfect example of what I was talking about earlier, you don't even have a clue as to the bug I'm referencing 😂 

Read this before eating your humble pie:

https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/toolbar-broken-in-vr/472150/343

My sim works just fine. So, yes, I have no clue to what "fundamental control mechanism" you are referring to.

28 minutes ago, March Hare said:

I do think a lot of the issues are down to Microsoft's direction of the project and the release schedules set, so far. […] And pressure can lead to more mistakes.

I agree, this seems to be the root of the problem.

34 minutes ago, March Hare said:

But I want to believe in Jorg, on the publisher side, and give Microsoft the benefit of the doubt, when he says there is no more major new content being developed now, at the moment, e.g. Reno, and the focus will be on fixes for the foreseeable future. I want to believe MS are now listening and are coming to the realisation that wanting to give everyone what they want right now, to please every user and every type (casual and serious simmer), as quickly as possible, and to look good "on the surface" by keep releasing big updates stacked on top of each other, actually doesn't let Asobo concentrate on the issues that are cropping up.

That‘s my hope as well.
I still think that an open beta, or development version like that of FBW, would be a good approach. That way they could fiddle around with the code and have it thoroughly tested without messing up the stable version. Once  a feature is ready they could inject it into the stable version. They could still release their scheduled world updates to keep us happy, but they would be more flexible when it comes to core issues. 

1 minute ago, Ricardo41 said:

My sim works just fine. So, yes, I have no clue to what "fundamental control mechanism" you are referring to.

See the link........🙄