1 hour ago, Bert Pieke said:

Personally, I am impressed with how well MSFS runs on my 6 year old system..

Bert! Do you need a Go Fund Me page? LOL!  With your expertise, history, presence and assistance here you would likely receive 4x-5x-whatever vs what it would take for an up-to-date system, recognizing that term is for today only, as tomorrow it will be outdated. 🙃

Edited January 18, 20233 yr by fppilot

53 minutes ago, Sky_Pilot071 said:

To change the discussion - will MSFS become a long haulers sim or is it already?

sp

It is already.  You can take the BBJ on most any long haul route you want, and performance is great.

The sim is whatever you want it to be.

GA, tubes, warbirds, bush, you name it, you can do it.

Not sure why people continue to try and pigeon hole it into one specific niche.

Jase

1 minute ago, JaseMelbo said:

The sim is whatever you want it to be.

GA, tubes, warbirds, bush, you name it, you can do it.

Not sure why people continue to try and pigeon hole it into one specific niche.

Jase

Agree!

Moderators! Can you please move this discussion to the "Arguments over preferences" forum?

Edited January 18, 20233 yr by fppilot

It does any kind of flying I throw at it (other than firing weapons).

Maybe we could kidnap one of those 3 guys on the Q&A sessions and force MS to make the sim more to our liking? Or else!

Actually I do mostly warbirds and GA, but I noticed on the annual survey that airliners are what most users are flying. 

I only fly GA in this sim, but not because its not good with big stuff, just because it looks to good for me to waste my time in the flight levels:)

In the old sims i was 99% tube flying, because it didnt look good low and slow. 

GA (and helicopter) flyer here too. I don't like flying at FL320. I sometimes get to FL200 in a jet trainer but that's pretty much it.
I pretty much always see the clouds from beneath. 🙂 Not visiting big airports either.

If that means that my fps is better then that is an additional benefit. I do not look at FPS, as long as my sim is fluid.

 

I am currently working on taxi-ing an Airbus from LA to NYC  via Chicago O'Hare.

9 hours ago, sd_flyer said:

Just like in any other sim (FSX,P3D, XP11. Big jets + other add on calls for balancing PC resources lowering graphics and reducing traffic and so on....

I always want 100% AI airliner traffic when I am flying airliners into large airports.

18 hours ago, Sky_Pilot071 said:

Not to push too many buttons but it seems that MSFS is it its glory when flying VFR or GA aircraft. Ya gotta learn to push the right buttons 🤪

My observation is that MSFS struggles when using large airports with realistic AI traffic. and or large indepth skyliners.  This situation was also prevalent with FSX / P3D versions which is a reason I chose never to fly into airports like KSFO or fly the heavies.

Then like now I stick to high perfomace GA planes in and out of small to medium size airports.

Doing this I feel I can avoid substandard perfomance , CTDs and enjoy smooth flying.

I'm interested on what others think about this and is it simply a matter of obtaining an uber PC to acheive the required results?

Note that my equpment has always mid to high end.

sp

Err nope, quite happy with my sim as you can see, I have over 250 add-ons in the community folder, I am also using AI Ground, AI Flows and FSLTL (for AI) Flight SIM First Officer for co-pilot and ProATC/SR for ATC. And I have no doubt my performance would be even better if I was not streaming.

 

Its strange people complain about performance, I could never run other sims as good as MSFS. Was one of the things that really impressed me, all those detail with not much cost on performance..

Well, I guess if you cant run it, stick with your preffered sim of choice, nothing wrong with that.. 

10 hours ago, Sky_Pilot071 said:

 is it simply a matter of obtaining an uber PC to acheive the required results?

No.

9 hours ago, David Mills said:

I'm going to "one up" you, Bert. I'm flying MSFS on an 8 year old system. And my performance is excellent too. I can fly the PMDG 737 into any large airport and get good, smooth frame rates. The "secret" of course is that I carefully test and re-test the effects of each graphics option upon sim performance after each major sim update.

As I have pointed out before, practically all of the complaints on this forum about performance are from users who own very high-end systems and who won't settle for any graphics settings below ultra-mega-hyper-comic-super-fusion-turbo-nuclear-blackhole-overcrank.  

--> This

 

The scenery & weather alone put MSFS ahead of the other two popular sims. For Airliners just lower your settings a little bit or get a better/faster computer. This could also require a faster internet connection. MSFS is a modern, complex, flight simulator that seems to be getting better with every new WU. I will only recommend XP 11 or 12 to students who don't have a fast internet connection or fairly new desktop computer.

MSFS is fabulous as an airliner sim.  I have literally flawless performance using the highest end planes with the highest end settings, nary a stutter anywhere including in and out of the most complex airports any sim has to offer, totally fluid animation and that also includes the common addons to support commercial aviation in the big birds.  I marvel at its light years ahead performance this sim offers compared to my last foray w/ P3D, which was v4.3 which is I know not exactly current but as I say I remain blown away how it can be done.  My system is fairly high end until you start comparing to truly high end by today's standards.