Without reading the entire thread the answer is simple: Yes and no. 
MSFS on release was much worse then it is now. There are a lot of improvements. 

But there are areas where there was basically no progress at all. Mainly this concerns the ATC and traffic. I don't know why this takes that long. I know it is pretty complex, but one would think that this core mechanics would be a bit higher on the priority list. 

I would have at least expected the most glaring issues like rapidfire altitude change requests and ATC simply forgetting I exist to be ironed out until now. 

For me that is way more important then helicopters and gliders. And the communication is near 0. I think they might have a team working on it, but that's all I know. 

Also it's just sad that ATC has no multiplayer function whatsoever. 

14 hours ago, sanh said:

Remember when a new version came out every 2 years of the legacy series with significant advances?

And also significantly higher system requirements

It's true the sim has been updated a lot since release. Dozens of World Updates plus Sim Updates, but that not necessarily means the sim is improving overall. Sometimes, there are two steps forward and two to three steps backwards, ups and downs. To me, the sim was "reset" to day one with SU5 last July, which brought Xbox to the game and needed a huge re-programming of the most part of the sim, as the size of the SU5 suggested.

Much has been said about the lack of a good update management policy and the quality of those. Hopefully it'll get better over time and changes are introduced in the way the title is managed mainly by MS (the boss).

I was really expecting that by this time of the year, after almost two after release, we would have a better sim with a working AI Traffic, ATC, weather system and default aircraft with more functionalities (like opening doors, for instance), but it looks we're not even close to that yet.

Just my opinion (and respect the others...).

 

14 minutes ago, AnkH said:

DX12? You cant put this half-baked stuttery implementation on the list seriously

It is wip, but it belongs on the list because it is a huge effort. 

15 minutes ago, AnkH said:

as I said, nothing about the core sim.

Wrong. Any of my points is 100% about the core sim. You guys lack the understanding how a complex platform is evolving. Finite processing resources are like a budget. You have to optimize the existing things to gain headroom for new things. If everything runs at the brink of collapsing (and every software like MSFS is brought by intention to that point by the users tweaking the settings), you constantly have to refactor the code to make the processing more efficient. This work under the hood needs to be honored, when looking at the full picture.

25 minutes ago, AnkH said:

Flying (!) in MSFS is not affected at all in most aspects from those things you listed.

It is like with any other application that can be considered as a platform, or better, a vast framework for addons: 80% of the introduced features are not interesting for a single user. Or, their occur under the hood.

But rest assured, your flying is enabled by the work done in the last 20 or so months.

I have been simming over twenty years. I remember the Ernie Ernst add-on - which was amazing for its time. I currently use X-Plane, P3Dv5, Aerofly, DCS, MSFS products, VTOL, and Aerowinx. All have their limitations.  The key is to enjoy life and just fly. 

Edited May 16, 20224 yr by MHC130

Guys this maybe a stupid question, I have not used msfs in a few months now as I have moved overseas and my stuff is in a container coming over.

When I update.. do I just update to the latest an I am all caught up.

or do I have install each where I left off?

thanks 

mike 

6 hours ago, AnkH said:

Verdict: the TS is basically right. And none of the marketing blabla answers so far DID actually answer his question: what does MSFS do better today in regard of the core sim elements compared to the release version?

All right, but apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?

2 hours ago, mikeymike said:

Guys this maybe a stupid question, I have not used msfs in a few months now as I have moved overseas and my stuff is in a container coming over.

When I update.. do I just update to the latest an I am all caught up.

or do I have install each where I left off?

thanks 

mike 

It's all at once.

4 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

IMO, live weather is getting much better

Absolutely, positively, but not to imply it doesn't need quite a bit more.  My biggest concern is integration of RT Online Traffic which comes from FlightAware, and near as I can tell METAR data that RT actual traffic is using in real time does not always or even frequently match METAR data in-sim.  This seems to be perhaps why ATC will send you to a runway used by RT traffic which of course is mandatory for coordinating traffic into and out of airports.   But then wind direction does not match what runway would normally be used.  For example, ATC will direct me to land on ILS RWY27, and yet wind is coming from the east.  This seems like it could be solved by updating METAR more frequently.  But certainly overall weather continue to look better.

18 hours ago, sanh said:

I could get a copy of the original 2020 release and compare it with today's version  and visually or functionality wise it would be almost identical.

Could you run that 2020 release on an XBox? Nope. Would it have any of the added world updates? Nope. Would it run even better than the current version? Nope. Would it have all the tweaks that have been added? Nope. So that's quite a lot of differences, and to put that in perspective compared to previous efforts from MS and related titles, try this little quiz...

Microsoft Flight Simulator X (i.e. the preceding last version of the Flight Sim Series from Microsoft) was released in October 2006. So, without cheating and looking the answers up...

 

1. How long was it before the first service pack (aka patch number 1) for FSX became available?

A, Two weeks after release.

B, Two months after release.

C, Six months after release.

D, Over a half a year after release.

 

2. How long before service pack 2 was available?

A, Two weeks after service pack 1.

B, Two months after service pack 1.

C, Three months after service pack 1.

D, Five months after service pack 1.

 

3. Do A2A's Accusim add-ons function with a standard copy of FSX, or do you need to buy additional products to have them work?

A, They work fine with a default standard copy of FSX.

B, They work fine with a Deluxe Copy of FSX only.

C, They work with all versions of FSX if you patch them with the service packs.

D, They only work with versions of FSX that have the payware Acceleration add-on, or the payware Steam Version.

 

4. How many years after the release of FSX, was the upgraded Steam version of FSX released?

A. Three years.

B. Five years.

C. Six years

D. Eight years.

 

5. How long after the release of the original FSX, was the first version of Lockheed Martin's Prepar3D released?

A. One year.

B. Two years.

C. Three years

D. Four years.

 

Answers: Q1:D, Q2: D, Q3, D, Q4: D, Q5: D.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 16, 20224 yr by Chock

I've got a headache. 🤕

Not sure why fanb***s of other sims closely monitor the MSFS forums and then jump in all triggered when certain valid statements are made... I can easily say MSFS is the best all-around sim right now, for me.. it's far better than other sims in world/weather/lighting rendering, class leading in default avionics, and yes it's quite great in the aerodynamics/flight-model department too as evidenced finally by all the well implemented aircraft taking advantage of the core engine. I suspect these fanb***s have clung to the notion that MSFS was/is subpar in the aerodynamics/avionics department as it seems to comfort them about their current pet sim, and now they're more vocal as that myth is shattered. I also saw similar behaviour on reddit in the general flightsim sub where all the attention being given to the PMDG 737 brought out some with laughable attempts to downplay it all by creating videos with all assists on and crash detection off, etc.. I mean it's obvious they're trying too hard :||

iniBuilds themselves have said MSFS's flight model is at par with XP's: https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/618710-inibuilds-a310-interesting-tidbit/  ... that's just a recent expert opinion, many other such opinions have come from other 3PDs and IRL pilots.

I'll also predict that MSFS keeps improving in the flight-model/aerodynamics area (I'm personally looking forward to the considerable improvements coming to ground physics as Seb explained in a recent dev Q&A), along with improvements in other areas of course, and it'll only keep getting better as a great overall sim.  If any aspects of MSFS are not attracting you or turning you off, then by all means use those other sim(s), or use them all, as you please 🙂 ... and everyone is free to feel that their pet sim is the bestest, just don't get irked when others feel different 🙂

Edited May 16, 20224 yr by lwt1971

One thing that this thread has going for it is this, it is NOT about either the 737 of the Fenix. 😉

19 hours ago, sanh said:

 

However, as far as the core sim goes it hasn't changed much. Where are the new core sim features? New advanced weather? ATC? Windscreen wipers working? Remember when a new version came out every 2 years of the legacy series with significant advances?

 

If one is too lazy to find out what has changed, why making an effort to ask? Be lazy my friend, just go with flow and let the life pass by.... ! LOL

7 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

Not sure why fanb***s of other sims closely monitor the MSFS forums and then jump in all triggered when certain valid statements are made...

I'll answer the question first.  Many flight simmers use both MSFS and other flight simulators and visit more than one forum. Many, like me, dont feel the need to be in one 'camp'.  I currently use MSFS and XPlane, so I understand, and work with, what each simulator brings to the table. When XPlane 12 is released I will use that and probably stop using Xplane 11.

I spend most of my time in MSFS because it took a giant step forward in flight simulation.  However, appreciating MSFS doesn't come with a requirement to hate other simulators, and neither does it come with a requirement to denigrate users of those sims.  

Flight modelling has come along way in MSFS since release.  As the SDKs continue to develop, and access to them improves, third party developers will be able to improve their flight models.  Just for the moment, XP11 aircraft feel just a little more 'in the air' to me, but the gap to MSFS is narrowing fast.  As I say, I spend most of my time in MSFS, so do not feel negative about the flight model at all - in fact I'm positively excited at the possibilities.

Now the question is answered - you do realise the rest of your post was posted by a fanb*y, don't you?