1 hour ago, SubtotalGuide said:

That only happened after enough people complained about the Garmins. They would have happily continued as planned otherwise.

 

"Enough people complained."  You mean the "hard core simmers" complained about it?  And then Microsoft/Asobo addressed the complaints of these hard core simmers and hired Working Title?  

It certainly wasn't the casual players that complained about it.  The casual players found the default G1000 on release to be too complex already and likely got bored of MSFS within a few months.

Edited January 28, 20224 yr by abrams_tank

26 minutes ago, BiologicalNanobot said:

I am really confused about the systems modelling part - what exactly are the issues with systems modelling?

and I am really confused as this requirement of the "systems modelling" often comes from users with no prior flight instruction, let alone a pilot license. how about spending some time in basic flight training. ok I hear you, it is not as entertaining as playing with the complex FMCs and G1000s, and I enjoy those toys myself. but there are plenty youtubes of accidents of multi-thousand hours pilots, who crash in IMC conditions as soon as the autopilot malfunctions/disconnects because their lack of basic IFR piloting skills. no lack of "systems modelling", lack of most basic flying skills.

youtube.com/watch?v=JN6IhJfab1g

Edited January 28, 20224 yr by turbomax

2 hours ago, pstrub said:

Any explanation as to why they would bring Working Title on board then?

The group of people that believe Microsoft/Asobo are prioritizing the casual X-Box simmers over the hard core simmer market have never given a plausible explanation for why Microsoft/Asobo hired Working Title.

All the explanations I have read are very silly and often laughable.  Like I said, if Microsoft/Asobo were prioritizing the casual X-Box simmer market, wasting money on Working Title is just a poor business choice and any CEO that did that would be a bad CEO.

11 minutes ago, pstrub said:

I'd definitely say they have issues with getting some bugs under control

There is a popular meme among the development community, which maybe nobody here has come across, but (sans images) it goes like this (you will hopefully know the tune):

99 tiny bugs on the wall, 99 tiny bugs -- you take one down and patch it around, 127 bugs on the wall.

I always think of this, because it's so true. Exactly what my brother faces regularly. Fix one, somehow end up with more 😉

9 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

.

 

Edited January 28, 20224 yr by turbomax
by mistake

3 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

never given a plausible explanation for why Microsoft/Asobo hired Working Title.

Joerg/Microsoft has said from the very beginning they don't consider MSFS a simulator. If someone needs a type rating for a specific aircraft with complex "systems modelling", why not pay FlightSafety a visit. the 100 $ you paid for MSFS should suffice for 1 night at the local Marriott/Courtyard/motel.

3 hours ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

MS/Asobo have a LONG LONG LONG way to go before they appeal to me......

They have a long way to go before the core sim is complete.

Simple things like fully modeled c172sp with the 6 pack or fully modeled G1000, working live weather, a working and realistic ATC system for VFR & IFR flights, and live AI traffic.

They have not even mastered how to deliver updates in a way that doesn't brake parts of the sim.

If ASOBO would have made a an effort to work with A2A & PMDG, a year in a half later MAYBE we would have the planes we want.

If all that a simmer wants is beautiful sceneries, airports, and airplanes, then this sim is perfect for them. It's beautiful!

I asked and expected more, but a year and a half later, I'm still waiting for what was promised on release.

1 minute ago, abrams_tank said:

The group of people that believe Microsoft/Asobo are prioritizing the casual X-Box simmers over the hard core simmer market have never given a plausible explanation for why Microsoft/Asobo hired Working Title.

All the explanations I have read are very silly and often laughable.  Like I said, if Microsoft/Asobo were prioritizing the casual X-Box simmer market, wasting money on Working Title is just a poor business choice and any CEO that did that would be a bad CEO.

Some things take longer than many of us would like, but I agree they're moving in the right direction for hardcore simmers. From time to time I too get frustrated by the two steps forward, one step back with certain bugs, but there's a lot to enjoy most of the time. 

People jump to conclusions all the time, and this is what I see happening here with every word Jörg or Rob or Seb or Iceman (FBW) says/writes, the only one who seems to be immune to this is Matt from WorkingTitle 😉 

4 minutes ago, turbomax said:

Joerg/Microsoft has said from the very beginning they don't consider MSFS a simulator. If someone needs a type rating for a specific aircraft with complex "systems modelling", why not pay FlightSafety a visit. the 100 $ you paid for MSFS should suffice for 1 night at the local Marriott/Courtyard/motel.

When / where did they say this? As far as I can remember, they've been saying right from the beginning that MSFS is targetting the whole simming community, not only the casual market.

What they said though was that they were going to leave high systems depth / avionics modelling to the 3PDs, and focus on providing a capable and stable platform, instead of producing study level aircraft themselves. It's been like this all along in the Microsoft Flight Simulator series, so I was fine with this. However, they came to realise that good avionics can be useful for add-on aircrafts too, so they changed their mind and decided to invest in improving them.

2 hours ago, DJJose said:

If ASOBO would have made a an effort to work with A2A & PMDG, a year in a half later MAYBE we would have the planes we want.

so you didn't watch the latest developer twitch where Joerg/Microsoft confirmed they have been communicating on a daily basis with PMDG and friends? it is a simple question of priorities, not of capability. I assume initially they wanted to develop an FAA approved procedure trainer for maybe a handful of 100 or so customers, willing to pay 100.000 $ each and then found out they are not capable so they decided, hey lets market it to the x-box users instead, they don't know shi-mulator from shinola 😊

Edited January 28, 20224 yr by turbomax

17 minutes ago, DJJose said:

Simple things like fully modeled c172sp with the 6 pack or fully modeled G1000

This "fully modeled" was never part of any MS Flight Simulator. Default aircraft always left much to be desired, any serious simmer (TM) avoided them like the plague and invested in good add-on aircraft. So why should it be different this time? And by the way, I think most of the default aircraft are better than what we had in FSX or FS9.

Edited January 28, 20224 yr by pstrub

10 minutes ago, pstrub said:

the only one who seems to be immune to this is Matt from WorkingTitle

true! he has too much on his plate to waste time here. I am glad he spends his time more productive than talking to us earthlings. and I mean it. I am sure he is smiling at all our speculations while currently cooking a tasty new cockpit, FMC, autopilot for the 787, Airbus etc for MSFS version 2. like they did for the CJ4.

5 minutes ago, pstrub said:

This "fully modeled" was never part of any MS Flight Simulator. Default aircraft always left much to be desired,

what is left to be desired in the current x-plane default C172? I thought it is good enough for the "serious simmer" (TM)

Just now, turbomax said:

true! he has too much on his plate to waste time here. I am glad he spends his time more productive than talking to us earthlings. and I mean it. I am sure he is smiling at all our speculations while currently cooking a tasty new cockpit, FMC, autopilot for the 787, Airbus etc for MSFS version 2. like they did for the CJ4.

True, still it's great to see he's commenting here and on the official forums occasionally. Somehow even the most critical simmers respect him. He has a great way of explaining why certain things aren't as simple to solve as they look to the average simmer.

1 minute ago, turbomax said:

what is left to be desired in the current x-plane default C172? I thought it is good enough for the "serious simmer" (TM)

I don't know, that's why I explicitly mentioned the Microsoft series 😉