41 minutes ago, VFXSimmer said:

I echo the many above who started out on MSFS II - mine was a Commodore 64 in the early 80’s.  Back then your imagination did an amazing job of filling in the details of the world around you.  I still remember flying from NYC to Chicago in the business jet (believe it was a lear?).  The scenery was available in relatively small (by todays standards) regions - In this case just the New York metropolitan area and some of Illinois.  To make that flight required dead reckoning between the zones, but you could still do it!  The fun part was figuring out where you were when you arrived in the Chicago area and making your way to Ohare.

For someone whom could be that enraptured by a flat green ground, blue polygonal sky and white lines for runways and taxiways, what MSFS 2020 gives is leagues beyond what I could have imagined back then.  It’s reinvigorated my interest in aviation to the point that my typical MO when I get on an airline is to pop in the earbuds and listen to liveatc to hear my flight callouts.  Usually works until the handoff from tower to departure before cel based internet cuts off.

I fall into the category of having more years behind me than in front and yet I’m still humoring the idea of getting a PPL.  I did a discovery flight and was truly amazed how familiar it felt - not so much the controls, but just the vibe and familiarity with the instruments and things like best climb out speed etc.  After that flight I went back and redid it in the sim and it was a massive deja vu.  Anyone saying they can’t use this for flight “training” is full of it 😉. You don’t need to be able to legally log the sim time as FAA approved hours to get something useful out of it.  The sheer result of having an environment that looks so closely like the real thing is enough to give you a leg up when you sit down in a real plane.  You just start from a more familiar place and know what the instructor is talking about so much faster. 
 

Asobo and MS … thank you so much for making this long time fan very happy!

 

This was my go to sim back in that era.

The technology and innovation has come so far in this hobby....now, for under $100 (for the sim and plane),  I do can do an approach at Dallas Love field...and clearly see the hospital I worked at going under my nose, and the high-rise building I worked at in the city to the left.

All while having a cockpit as detailed as the excellent HJet in front of me.  I have the ILS chart, checklist and navmap all at a glance, with her stuck perfectly to the LOC/GS by the AP in the approach, while all I do is manage flaps, gear and speed while I sight-see along the way. 🙂 

I am extremely happy with the sim and while I know there are still issues with some things....you could not have convinced me back when I was flying SubLogic's ATP back then, that I'd be able to see what we see in the screenshot above.  Just amazing!

54 minutes ago, blingthinger said:

I am still curious (as in my original post) about why thrust-pitch coupling is off. I see two possibilities: 

Either it's because Asobo isn't actually calculating forces on the elements

or

Asobo is using the balsa-glider geometry everywhere and the forces and therefore moments are eternally wrong.

Maybe a combination of both.

 

I bet the pitch trim issues could be resolved simply by changing how much the trim moves with each button press. In other words, the aircraft wasn't trimmed before it hit turbulence in the first place (to use video example). Originally I thought a trim wheel would solve the problem, and I still do, but thumb switches are just as prevalent as a wheel and that's what most desktop users are using.

Have you tried contacting MSFS about these issues and suggestions????

Asobo is not shy about their shortcomings and they are willing to take advice (even ask for it) or simply hire those who can do it better (like World Title).

So again, have you you raised awareness via support ticket, official forum voting, live stream questions, or trying to contact Asobo in any way to "help" them "improve" their fantastic product???

1 hour ago, blingthinger said:

I am still curious (as in my original post) about why thrust-pitch coupling is off.

I'm guessing that it is off because it's not of primary importance to normal people. I do, however, accept that Meyer's thrust coupling is not to be gainsaid.😂 God love his wind-o-meter.

Edited December 16, 20223 yr by jarmstro

2 hours ago, Ricardo41 said:

Kind of funny to observe.

But very predictable. We did the same with FSX and P3D, then apparently completely forgot and/or disregarded that history.

Edited December 16, 20223 yr by HiFlyer

2 hours ago, jarmstro said:

I'm guessing that it is off because it's not of primary importance to normal people. I do, however, accept that Meyer's thrust coupling is not to be gainsaid.😂 God love his wind-o-meter.

"Normal" including pilots, but...I can totally see why the 9.5 million xboxers wouldn't though.

And, I'm not technically allowed to say this in this thread but, you know why, right? It's because the forces over there are cage-free, non-GMO, certified organic!

 

@OverTheEDJ I'm 100% certain Asobo is aware of all their aerodynamic shortcomings.

I'm more curious about why it is happening in the first place based on the documentation they have already provided.

I like the guy, especially because his content is generally fairly even handed, like this one: 

 

And generally he's focused on the important stuff like pilotage & flying planes, and not worrying about which sim is "superior". 
 

OTOH, I have a few bones to pick with this "MSFS is best" video.

a. his contention that desktop sims are essentially worthless for IRL flight training.

While I agree that the Big Iron sims & training programs are highly necessary given the stakes at hand, his is a gross overgeneralization.

If desktop sims were as bad as he says, the US DoD wouldn't be using Prepar3D (!!) & commercial VR headsets in their pipeline. The program has been out for years now, and the success is high. So the trend of desktop flight sims for IRL is increasing:

b. That MSFS' superior visuals make it "best" for VFR training.

This is kinda strange to me because so little of modern day flying is "VFR" of the type of landmark/dead reckoning "navigation" to which he's referring. And even so, visual conditions frequently change in extraordinarily rapid fashion. Even if you don't leave your front yard, you can go from clear skies to torrential rain or blizzard in just an hour or two (especially in the tropics or mountains). And if you're making time at 200 knots, even that short period of time can be drastically cut.

And it's not just heavy precip that's dangerous, there are plenty of days where lighting/visibility conditions change drastically because of clouds/haze/smog/fog and even just shadows against indistinct backgrounds (like mountains!).

While I greatly prefer MSFS' visuals, I've never had a problem "VFRing" from place to place in X-Plane using nothing more than the landmarks available in that that sim. X-Plane is, like MSFS, far more detailed than just about any nav chart I've ever seen, and all the important stuff for VFR is there. 

I think this is because he's so accustomed to blasting up to the FLs and staying there for most of the time.

In sum, if visibility changes that rapidly, how important for training is photorealistic scenery?

c. He says MSFS has the best weather/clouds, but then proceeds to nitpick the shortcomings (and in truth, I've yet to see any sim weather really get it right).

d. how great the included aircraft are. This is particularly galling since it's only been true for a few weeks (out of 3 years), and only for the newest addons. Aaaaand he's also running the beta, so many of the improvements hes praising haven't actually even been released!

For the last 3 years, the Defaults (and most of them remain unimproved) are visually superior, but much of their systems and, ahem...flight models are rather stunted and incomplete.

e. He says that this FLIGHT simulator is the best, but goes on - at length - about how much work needs to be done, and how X-Plane is better in nearly every regard. 

f. Further to training on desktop sims (which we "shouldn't use and can't compare"), bu if we're gonna, he says anyone who's after their PPL should definitely choose...X-Plane! Talk about a record scraaaaatch!!!

Anyhow, none of this is to say he's categorically wrong, because I happen to agree with much of what he says.

It's just ironic that so much of the video was spent talking about the advantages of another simulator and the problems of this one.

Edited December 19, 20223 yr by UrgentSiesta
added point

On 12/13/2022 at 7:15 AM, abrams_tank said:

Just look at Avsim. The overwhelming majority of Avsim users are using MSFS now.  At least for Avsim, the overwhelming of Avsim users endorse MSFS.  And it's not even close between the MSFS forum and the other competing simulator forums.

The best kicker of this all, IMO, is that there are a lot of real life pilots here at Avsim; and I see so many real life pilots here on Avsim, using MSFS.  While I am not a real life pilot, to me, the fact that it appears the overwhelming majority of real life pilots here at Avsim are using MSFS, that is a huge ringing endorsement of MSFS, IMO.

Using that same logic, since the Ford F-150 pickup is the best selling vehicle in America, and is used by many commercial/professional operators, it must be the best vehicle available and we should all drive them?

Quote

Steam also gives us some insight. It's also not close between MSFS and the competition according to Steam DB.

I think you talk about Steam stats at least 3 or 4 times in this thread alone, as though they're the be-all, end-all source of truth for userbase, adoption, suitability, preference, etc.

While it can be useful to include Steam stats in consideration, there are a number of reasons those numbers are highly skewed. Yes, they're facts, and yes, they give a relative ranking, but they are hardly representative of the larger market.

Just consider the fact that Jorge himself quotes a daily user base of around 100,000 people. In Japan. Where flight sim "other than Ace Combat" was never a thing.

How relevant are the 8,000 daily users on Steam - spread over the entire planet - vs 100,000 in just a single flight sim "backwater"?

If MSFS has rung up it's 10 millionth user, how relevant is the all-time Steam peak of 62,000 (on the first day, never repeated, never again above 20,000, and "only" hitting 8,000 a day...).

The answer? Steam is interesting, but it's not representative, nor even statistically significant.

If you want some good (but still skewed) information, much better you switch over to the annual Navigraph flight sim survey (we should get the 2022 results in Jan/Feb).

You'll see there are some key metrics in there that demonstrate how unreliable Steam is as a source for flight sim market metrics. Such as on p 47, where Steam is one of the LEAST used sources for flight sim purchases... 😉

Or p 58, where Steam FSX users are far lower than...standalone FSX, which is overshadowed by DCS World (which you somehow leave out), which is soundly beaten by Prepar3D (not even present in Steam!), which is curb stomped by X-Plane, and which, finally, is itself utterly dwarfed by MSFS 2020.

Or p 61, where the majority of X-Plane's user growth is coming from...MSFS 2020 users. (I myself really want to see how this changed over 2022).

How about p 63, where the majority of "switchers" are moving from ESP to MSFS rather than from XP to MSFS? (again, 2022 should be very interesting).

p 120 directly counters the Steam "facts" by showing that both MSFS and X-Plane are growing, while Prepar3D (still not on Steam!) is drastically shrinking, and FSX is, well...apparently not even worth mentioning (unlike you crowing about it's relative frequency of use on, sigh...Steam).

One question/angle they didn't pursue was how many folks own & operate multiple simulators (like me!). I'd love to see that breakdown as it might be a far higher percentage than many of us would think...

Now, this survey is obviously skewed towards Navigraph users (several times more than any other source of respondents), and that likely means the "typical" flight simmer is not well represented, and almost certainly means that the newer or more casual flight simmers are excluded, as well.

So, again: the Steam charts are kinda useless for drawing conclusions about anything other than Steam games, so it's pointless to delude yourself believing otherwise.

@OverTheEDJ, you, too!

Edited December 19, 20223 yr by UrgentSiesta
tag

3 hours ago, UrgentSiesta said:

Using that same logic, since the Ford F-150 pickup is the best selling vehicle in America, and is used by many commercial/professional operators, it must be the best vehicle available and we should all drive them?

I think you talk about Steam stats at least 3 or 4 times in this thread alone, as though they're the be-all, end-all source of truth for userbase, adoption, suitability, preference, etc.

While it can be useful to include Steam stats in consideration, there are a number of reasons those numbers are highly skewed. Yes, they're facts, and yes, they give a relative ranking, but they are hardly representative of the larger market.

Just consider the fact that Jorge himself quotes a daily user base of around 100,000 people. In Japan. Where flight sim "other than Ace Combat" was never a thing.

How relevant are the 8,000 daily users on Steam - spread over the entire planet - vs 100,000 in just a single flight sim "backwater"?

If MSFS has rung up it's 10 millionth user, how relevant is the all-time Steam peak of 62,000 (on the first day, never repeated, never again above 20,000, and "only" hitting 8,000 a day...).

The answer? Steam is interesting, but it's not representative, nor even statistically significant.

If you want some good (but still skewed) information, much better you switch over to the annual Navigraph flight sim survey (we should get the 2022 results in Jan/Feb).

You'll see there are some key metrics in there that demonstrate how unreliable Steam is as a source for flight sim market metrics. Such as on p 47, where Steam is one of the LEAST used sources for flight sim purchases... 😉

Or p 58, where Steam FSX users are far lower than...standalone FSX, which is overshadowed by DCS World (which you somehow leave out), which is soundly beaten by Prepar3D (not even present in Steam!), which is curb stomped by X-Plane, and which, finally, is itself utterly dwarfed by MSFS 2020.

Or p 61, where the majority of X-Plane's user growth is coming from...MSFS 2020 users. (I myself really want to see how this changed over 2022).

How about p 63, where the majority of "switchers" are moving from ESP to MSFS rather than from XP to MSFS? (again, 2022 should be very interesting).

p 120 directly counters the Steam "facts" by showing that both MSFS and X-Plane are growing, while Prepar3D (still not on Steam!) is drastically shrinking, and FSX is, well...apparently not even worth mentioning (unlike you crowing about it's relative frequency of use on, sigh...Steam).

One question/angle they didn't pursue was how many folks own & operate multiple simulators (like me!). I'd love to see that breakdown as it might be a far higher percentage than many of us would think...

Now, this survey is obviously skewed towards Navigraph users (several times more than any other source of respondents), and that likely means the "typical" flight simmer is not well represented, and almost certainly means that the newer or more casual flight simmers are excluded, as well.

So, again: the Steam charts are kinda useless for drawing conclusions about anything other than Steam games, so it's pointless to delude yourself believing otherwise.

@OverTheEDJ, you, too!

The Steam DB stats tell us how XP 12 performed directly with respect to XP 11. So we know that relative to XP 11, XP 12 is doing poorly. If you go by the logic that most XP 12 users purchased XP 12 directly via the Laminar Research website and not Steam, then most XP 11 users also purchased also XP 11 directly via the Laminar Research website and not Steam.

Another small hint that XP 12 sales didn't go well is that LR forced XP 12 advertisements on XP 11 users that spawned into the game.  There are XP 11 users that called those XP 12 advertisments in XP 11, "spam": https://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/forums/topic/272924-how-to-disable-this-advertisement-from-lr-in-x-plane-11/&do=findComment&comment=2409522. This is not a major piece of evidence, but it is a small piece of evidence because it's a sign of desperation from LR's behalf.  LR knew that the XP 12 advertisements in XP 11 were spammy, but went ahead with it anyways, because LR was probably desperate for XP 12 sales.

Another small hint is the 33% discount of XP 12 on Steam, only 3 months after XP 12's release. The 33% discount on XP 12 came even before XP 12's official release! I don't even recall MSFS going on sale, either in the Microsoft store or on Steam, 3 months after release. This is another sign of desperation, that LR didn't hit their sales target and had to give a discount on XP 12 so soon. 

I also find it curious that after Austin mocked the streaming of satellite & photogrammetry that MSFS has done for so long, Austin in a recent interview, appears to be putting in resources to look into the streaming of satellite data: https://youtu.be/CMTcSq_I-Og?t=4020.  If XP 12 sales were that strong, I think Austin would have continued to mock the streaming of satellite & photogrammetry in MSFS. But now he appears to be doing a partial U-turn, saying that he is putting resources into looking into this technology, and even saying that this feature is gradually "bubbling up" as a priority (although it's not his top priority right now).  This partial U-turn is another sign that XP 12 sales may not have been that great and Austin finally recognizes MSFS's strengths and is considering following what MSFS is doing.

Next, aside from Avsim, just take a look at Twitch.  On any given day, there may be over 1K people streaming MSFS on Twitch, but not even 10 people streaming XP 12.  While Twitch isn't entirely representative of the market share, it gives another small hint..

Finally, last but not least, XP 12 was panned by so many content creators, who were formerly XP 11 users.  You have Twitch streamers like Chewwy and LondonController panning XP 12, and both used to stream XP 11.  You have CptCanada on Youtube also panning XP 12, another former XP 11 user. Those content creators giving XP 12 such a bad review, only hurt XP 12's sales, of course, because they have a lot of followers.

Put it all together, it seems like XP 12 sales are probably pretty underwhelming.  And IMO, this shouldn't be surprising because XP 12 was not revolutionary. XP 12 needed to be revolutionary, to recapture the consumer market.

Now I didn't say MSFS has 10 million current active users.  I said the opposite in this thread, saying that 10 million users may have tried MSFS in some form or the other, but MSFS does not currently have near as much as 10 million active users.  Having said that, MSFS users are probably at a much more healthy number than XP 12.

BTW, do you know what was revolutionary? MSFS was revolutionary.  MSFS had so many problems on its release, but despite those problems, it captured a huge chunk of the consumer flight sim market on the first year of its release. That is what revolutionary products that sell at a reasonable price can do - capture a huge chunk of the market on their release (assuming there is proper marketing/advertisement as well for that product).  XP 12 was not that revolutionary product, and the likely poor sales of XP 12 is a reflection of that.

Edited December 19, 20223 yr by abrams_tank

47 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

The Steam DB stats tell us how XP 12 performed directly with respect to XP 11. So we know that relative to XP 11, XP 12 is doing poorly. If you go by the logic that most XP 12 users purchased XP 12 directly via the Laminar Research website and not Steam, then most XP 11 users also purchased also XP 11 directly via the Laminar Research website and not Steam.

Another small hint that XP 12 sales didn't go well is that LR forced XP 12 advertisements on XP 11 users that spawned into the game.  There are XP 11 users that called those XP 12 advertisments in XP 11, "spam": https://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/forums/topic/272924-how-to-disable-this-advertisement-from-lr-in-x-plane-11/&do=findComment&comment=2409522. This is not a major piece of evidence, but it is a small piece of evidence because it's a sign of desperation from LR's behalf.  LR knew that the XP 12 advertisements in XP 11 were spammy, but went ahead with it anyways, because LR was probably desperate for XP 12 sales.

Another small hint is the 33% discount of XP 12 on Steam, only 3 months after XP 12's release. The 33% discount on XP 12 came even before XP 12's official release! I don't even recall MSFS going on sale, either in the Microsoft store or on Steam, 3 months after release. This is another sign of desperation, that LR didn't hit their sales target and had to give a discount on XP 12 so soon. 

Next, aside from Avsim, just take a look at Twitch.  On any given day, there may be over 1K people streaming MSFS on Twitch, but not even 10 people streaming XP 12.  While Twitch isn't entirely representative of the market share, it gives another small hint.

Finally, last but not least, XP 12 was panned by so many content creators, who were formerly XP 11 users.  You have Twitch streamers like Chewwy and LondonController panning XP 12, and both used to stream XP 11.  You have CptCanada on Youtube also panning XP 12, another former XP 11 user. Those content creators giving XP 12 such a bad review, only hurt XP 12's sales, of course, because they have a lot of followers.

Put it all together, it seems like XP 12 sales are probably pretty underwhelming.  And IMO, this shouldn't be surprising because XP 12 was not revolutionary. XP 12 needed to be revolutionary, to recapture the consumer market.

Now I didn't say MSFS has 10 million current active users.  I said the opposite in this thread, saying that 10 million users may have tried MSFS in some form or the other, but MSFS does not currently have near as much as 10 million active users.  Having said that, MSFS users are probably at a much more healthy number than XP 12.

BTW, do you know what was revolutionary? MSFS was revolutionary.  MSFS had so many problems on its release, but despite those problems, it captured a huge chunk of the consumer flight sim market on the first year of its release. That is what revolutionary products that sell at a reasonable price can do - capture a huge chunk of the market on their release (assuming there is proper marketing/advertisement as well for that product).  XP 12 was not that revolutionary product, and the likely poor sales of XP 12 is a reflection of that.

For the record, you are now perpetuating the XP12 vs MSFS argument in an MSFS thread.  So I'll throw in a small fact for you to ponder.  X-Pane 12 has sold almost 20 000 units in 3 months on steam, alone.  That's the beta version, from a small, self funded team of indie developers.  To date, it's total revenue, on steam, is $814 000.  Steam represents a very small percentage of total sales, because far more people buy it from LR.  Considering this, it's safe to say we can multiply that number by at least 5 (very rough, very conservative guess, based on 10 million sales of MSFS compared to the peak users on Steam on MSFS.  If I went by the 10 million to 6000 ratio that MSFS holds, the number would be a lot higher).  So we're looking at somewhere between at least $4.5 million to $5.5 million in revenue...in 3 months.  I'd say that's a success and the reason LR are hiring more developers.  

How do I know these figures?

https://vginsights.com/game/2014780

Laminar are not desperate for anything.  

X-Plane 11 steam figures are also up there.  

https://vginsights.com/game/269950

How about we bury this pointless feud, and just enjoy what you enjoy, and simply don't concern yourself with the X-Plane forums, Laminar Research, X-Plane, etc...

No one is claiming that X-Plane is outselling or more popular than MSFS.  It's obvious that MSFS has far more users.  My question is, why do you care so much??

X-Plane and LR aren't going anywhere.  LR have a road map, that has been fully planned out and funded for X-Plane 12.  Every version of X-Plane, from 9 to 12, has seen increased popularity.  

And on a side note, you mentioned some prolific streamers who have panned X-Plane.  Are you aware that the streamers you mentioned received considerably expensive merchandise to endorse MSFS?  This is no secret, because they streamed themselves while at Seattle, at Microsofts expense, testing a pre-release version of MSFS and announcing they were given merchandise/hardware.

And more power to them!  If I was a streamer, trying to get my viewer count up, I would grab whatever merchandise I could get.  But I wouldn't say their opinions are 100% objective.

Edited December 19, 20223 yr by GoranM

27 minutes ago, GoranM said:

For the record, you are now perpetuating the XP12 vs MSFS argument in an MSFS thread.  So I'll throw in a small fact for you to ponder.  X-Pane 12 has sold almost 20 000 units in 3 months on steam, alone.  That's the beta version, from a small, self funded team of indie developers.  To date, it's total revenue, on steam, is $814 000. 

 

Is this true? Just $814,000 from Steam after 3 months, including the 33% discount?  Wow, people were saying that PMDG probably made more from the their sales of the 737 in MSFS.

If these numbers are true, I really do think PMDG may have made more sales from their line of 737 on MSFS than LR made selling XP 12 across all platforms!

27 minutes ago, GoranM said:

I'd say that's a success and the reason LR are hiring more developers.

This is the problem. Austin should have hired more developers before releasing XP 12, to make XP 12 as revolutionary as possible. So many of the XP diehards keep saying Austin is very wealthy, and that XP is just a hobby for him.  If Austin is that wealthy, then from the very start, he should have hired more developers to make XP 12 as revolutionary as possible, so that it could compete against MSFS.

 

Edited December 19, 20223 yr by abrams_tank

10 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

Is this true? Just $814,000 from Steam after 3 months, including the 33% discount?  Wow, people were saying that PMDG probably made more from the their sales of the 737 in MSFS.

If these numbers are true, I really do think PMDG may have made more sales from 737 on MSFS than LR made selling XP 12!

You keep posting things like, "I think..." and "I'm guessing..." and "it's probably..."

No one knows PMDG's true sales figures.  You can speculate all you like, but speculation is as valuable as a falsity.  

Based on what I know about sales figures of 3rd party add ons in MSFS (3rd party developers actually have a Facebook group we all go to and discuss things.  MSFS and X-Plane developers alike.  And it's actually a very pleasant group to be in), 20 000 sales of a 3rd party add on, in 3 months, would be considered an unattainable miracle.  I do know the record for 3rd party add on sales in P3D/FSX combined, and that number is 93 000 units sold.  Over a 4 year period.  No one has beaten it.  Not even an MSFS add on.  If you want to discuss things properly, rooted in facts, I'm all for it.  If you want to speculate, you'll be doing it with someone else.

 

As for Austin should have hired more developers, he did.  About a week after XP11 was released, he took on several developers to work on XP12.  With Vulkan being the priority.  That, in itself, is revolutionary.  Now that XP 12 is released, he's hired even more. 

Edited December 19, 20223 yr by GoranM

Why do people (seem to) care so much about what others think about the sim they play. I couldn't care less if 737NG Driver finds this the best or the worst sim ever. Neither should anyone. Geez, people, make up your own minds. Like what you like and ignore the rest. I have been simming since the eighties and always simply preferred the sim I myself preferred. I never preferred a sim just because some random dude preferred it. Why should I. And why should anyone. Do you like XP12? Great. Enjoy it. Do you like MSFS? Great. Enjoy it. I am beginning to get really tired of the evangelists who constantly try to convert people to like THEIR sim. Why should you even TRY to do that. Flying a certain sim won't make you go to heaven and flying another sim won't make you go to hell. It is of no importance AT ALL which sim you fly or which sim you prefer. That constant and never ending 'my sim is better' debate is getting extremely old and tiresome. Seems some people can't truly enjoy the sim they play if the rest of the world prefers another sim. I just don't get it.

Sigh. Never mind. What a waste of time this is.

I chose MSFS for one main reason, VISUALS. The other two main sims don't offer that even with tons of add-ons.

I don't need a 737 Pilot to verify what I and "we" already know.

Lots of vapid back and forth will never change reality.

Time to draw a line under yet another “my sim is better than your sim”.

Just enjoy the sim of your choice. These discussions never end well.