Study Level Default Aircraft

[lwt1971 7,411]

I'm in the camp of Asobo continuining to focus and improve the core platform, and if anything making the development environment more feature-rich for 3rd party aircraft to continue to flourish.

As for default aircraft, like they've done with their Cessna, and prop physics improvements in SU8 and coming CFD improvements in SU9+, if they continue on that path I'd be happy.. i.e. where the default aircraft can take easy advantage of these core sim improvements. I think aiming to get the default aircraft to "medium" fidelity levels is a good goal for Asobo within the next few years.

Apart from that, weren't the Working Title folks going to focus on default aircraft like the 747 and 787 in the future to improve their systems and other factors?

[Abriael 952]

9 minutes ago, WestAir said:

So that's ASOBO's stance on the matter as of 2021

That's not Asobo's stance. That's Microsoft's stance. Jorg works and speaks for Microsoft. 

Incidentally, they already said that the ATR is going to be for advanced users. I don't imagine that's gonna be all the way to what the "study level" crowd expects, but that's obviously not gonna be a default-level aircraft. It's going to be payware, made mostly by an external developer.

Edited March 17, 2022 by Abriael

[Mike... 7]

Quote

MS has made it clear that MSFS is supposed to be a 10 year project that will be constantly improved throughout that period.

Does that mean that some bugs will take ten years to fix? 😜

This is nog a good idea. MS should focus on the basis and that is already challenging enough. Plenty of bugs around, not getting fixed quickly. SU8 broke some more things. Last thing they should do, is do a study level aircraft.

[MrBitstFlyer 3,873]

2 hours ago, jcjimmy said:

I was expecting better quality default aircraft than what we got.

The default aircraft in MSFS are some of the best ever included with a base flight sim imho.

[Abriael 952]

1 minute ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

The default aircraft in MSFS are some of the best ever included with a base flight sim imho.

Indeed they are, and not by a small margin. It's literally the first time I find default aircraft at least enjoyable to fly.

I think some people simply have short memories.

Edited March 17, 2022 by Abriael

[WestAir 2,522]

1 hour ago, Abriael said:

That's not Asobo's stance. That's Microsoft's stance.

I disagree. There's a reason Jorg said "we considered" rather than "we were specifically told not to;" I saw a stark distinction with his statement. I also like to believe the words of the Director of a company represent that company.

2 minutes ago, Abriael said:

It's literally the first time I find default aircraft at least enjoyable to fly.

I think some people simply have short memories.

The OP didn't say the default aircraft weren't enjoyable. He also didn't say they weren't leagues better than default FSX aircraft. He said he'd like to see ASOBO make study level aircraft. There is, of course, a glaring difference between ASOBO's 172 and the A2A 172, or the ASOBO A320NX and the FBW A320NX. What he wants to see is ASOBO make the later, rather than the former.

[Abriael 952]

9 minutes ago, WestAir said:

The OP didn't say the default aircraft weren't enjoyable. He also didn't say they weren't leagues better than default FSX aircraft. He said he'd like to see ASOBO make study level aircraft. There is, of course, a glaring difference between ASOBO's 172 and the A2A 172, or the ASOBO A320NX and the FBW A320NX. What he wants to see is ASOBO make the later, rather than the former.

And that has already been abundantly addressed. What he wants is not going to happen. Ever. 

9 minutes ago, WestAir said:

I disagree. There's a reason Jorg said "we considered" rather than "we were specifically told not to;" I saw a stark distinction with his statement. I also like to believe the words of the Director of a company represent that company.

Feel free to disagree as much as you want with fact, but Jorg is not the director of Asobo. 

Jorg Neumann is the head of Microsoft Flight Simulator at Microsoft. He calls the shots on behalf of Microsoft, because Microsoft is the company he works for. 

https://www.linkedin.com/in/jorg-neumann-b7143/

Edited March 17, 2022 by Abriael

[HiFlyer 9,359]

3 hours ago, jcjimmy said:

I was expecting better quality default aircraft than what we got.

Why?

Its a serious question. Why was anyone expecting more than.... FSX default? (for instance)

Because my understanding for years, is that so-called "study level" planes were the purview of third party developers, many of which might have soon found themselves out of business if MS was handing out aircraft of equal of greater value for free.....

Even now there is simmering debate over the value of any upcoming third party A320's (for instance) when the FBW version exists....

[jarmstro 2,402]

I don't care whether the circuit breakers work or not. Because I'm never going to pull them unless at first as a novelty. And neither does anyone else if they are honest.

[VFXSimmer 1,310]

3 hours ago, Krakin said:

Optics. There's still a bunch hardcore guys who won't touch MSFS because it is perceived as just a game. Imagine what will happen when MS has the sim with the reputation of having the best default planes on the market.

Yes, but those same "hardcore guys" counter with legacy sims whose default planes arent any better than MSFS.  All of them fly exclusively on 3PD aircraft even in the "more sophisticated sims" (their words, not mine) and even use addons for Garmin systems, etc.  I dont think MSFS's default planes have anything to do with their opinion - its more to do with the long term investment with the other sims and the countless hours dialing them in, installing the perfect addon's etc.  Its understandable to have a tough time leaving that all behind, so the invention of excuses why "its not time to switch" (both valid and invalid ones) are to be expected.

[WestAir 2,522]

13 minutes ago, Abriael said:

And that has already been abundantly addressed. What he wants is not going to happen. Ever.

I never said it was... 🙄 

13 minutes ago, Abriael said:

Jorg Neumann is the head of Microsoft Flight Simulator at Microsoft. He calls the shots on behalf of Microsoft, because Microsoft is the company he works for. 

https://www.linkedin.com/in/jorg-neumann-b7143/

So many websites and videos get this wrong. I've seen "Head of MSFS at ASOBO studios!" a thousand times. Thanks for the clarification, and in that case you're right and I'm wrong, it is a MS decision to let 3PD's handle the study level offerings.

I totally agree with his assessment though. There's no way ASOBO could handle a study level offering, not yet. And like you said, their time is way better spent fixing other things. (Aerodynamics, weather, ATC, traffic, etc)

[Waldo Pepper 1,952]

Just as a point of order,  Asobo has already stated that Working Title's Nxi will completely replace the default G1000 in the sim as soon as the Nxi's development is finalized.

3rd parties like PMS and others have recently been given access to WTT mode.  This allows (for example) the PMS GTN 750 to use Working Title Technology (WTT) derived from the Nxi package to manage the autopilot and the flight plan,  instead of relying on the somewhat lacking Asobo code.

[Abriael 952]

3 minutes ago, WestAir said:

So many websites and videos get this wrong. I've seen "Head of MSFS at ASOBO studios!" a thousand times. Thanks for the clarification, and in that case you're right and I'm wrong, it is a MS decision to let 3PD's handle the study level offerings.

Most websites are still trying to get over the shock of being able to fly over their houses. Can't expect them to do proper fact checking on top of that. 😂

That being said, I'm fairly positive that the decision to steer clear of study-level aircraft is likely something mutually agreed between Microsoft and Asobo. 

Microsoft has the interest to keep third-parties happy and fed. Asobo has the interest not to be swamped into a field that requires tons of resources and research on top of improving the base sim, which is already taking a lot of resources and research.

[Waldo Pepper 1,952]

50 minutes ago, Abriael said:

Indeed they are, and not by a small margin. It's literally the first time I find default aircraft at least enjoyable to fly.

I think some people simply have short memories.

There are some heavy hitting mods too.    Asobo provided the state of the art visuals,  for the rest there is FBW's A320,   Heavy Division's 787,   Salty's 747,  JPL's 152,  Rob Young's Bonanza,  Touching Cloud's F-18,  etc.   You can pay more to get more depth,   but for no money out of pocket a lot of casual simmers can dip a toe into the more serious end of the pool.    I'm guessing that MSFS has sparked more interest than ever.

[Krakin 5,763]

17 minutes ago, WestAir said:

The OP didn't say the default aircraft weren't enjoyable. He also didn't say they weren't leagues better than default FSX aircraft.

You're spot on with what I was getting at so thanks for that. I'm one of those people who have pointed out how MSFS default aircraft are the most advanced I've ever seen them out of the box for any sim. My post is not a critique or a rant. I'm just sharing my wishful thinking.