7 hours ago, Sonosusto said:

Performance can take a hit randomly

not the simulators fault. your CPU and GPU are several generations behind. at over 100 fps (RTX 4090 + 7800X3D) performance is excellent.

16 hours ago, Krakin said:

Jorg: in response to that guy on Avsim, I can confirm that we've sold X amount of units.

 

OzWhitey: That doesn't mean much. Can you show us a list of every game code sold? 

Hey, I suggested that other guy look up “straw man fallacy” in the dictionary. Maybe you can dm him and see what the phrase means?

Also, I’m still waiting for one of you word not allowed to link a single piece of data that contradicts the Steam and Google trends results. I’ll check back in 24 hours, see if you can get the data to us by then. 

Ta!
 

1 hour ago, turbomax said:

not the simulators fault. your CPU and GPU are several generations behind. at over 100 fps (RTX 4090 + 7800X3D) performance is excellent.

Meh, I’d describe MSFS performance as mediocre. If it wasn’t, I wouldn’t be spending 6K trying to get it to run good.

If the question was “What does MSFS do not best”, performance would be somewhere fairly high on my list. Somewhere up near “retain users” and “have a proper long haul aircraft”. 😉

It's kind of funny to observe into what kinds of pretzels and side shows detractors bend themselves into to "mansplain" MSFS.

Let us briefly summarize the "main line of attacks", starting with the prerelease of MSFS:

1) "MSFS will be like Microsoft Flight"
2) "MSFS is for the XBOX kiddies"
3) "MSFS is a scenery simulator
4) "MSFS isn't for proper IFR flying"
5) "Asobo knows nothing about airplanes and flying"

They trot out "evidence", they make "arguments", they quote (largely meaningless) data and trends....

....meanwhile MSFS goes from strength to strenght 12 Worldupdates, numerous Sim Updates, 2 major avionics updates, etc.

...,but, yeah, let's argue about whether MSFS is "successful" or not. 😁

25 minutes ago, OzWhitey said:

I wouldn’t be spending 6K trying to get it to run good.

I spent half of that ($ 2.875) for stellar performance.

$ 300 X670 motherboard,

$ 300 - 64 GB DDR5,

$ 475 - AMD 7800x3D CPU,

$ 1.800 - RTX 4090

32 minutes ago, Ricardo41 said:

let's argue about whether MSFS is "successful" or not.

wasted thread.

1 hour ago, OzWhitey said:

Meh, I’d describe MSFS performance as mediocre. If it wasn’t, I wouldn’t be spending 6K trying to get it to run good.

If the question was “What does MSFS do not best”, performance would be somewhere fairly high on my list😉

I am laugh….

14 minutes ago, turbomax said:

I spent half of that ($ 2.875) for stellar performance.

$ 300 X670 motherboard,

$ 300 - 64 GB DDR5,

$ 475 - AMD 7800x3D CPU,

$ 1.800 - RTX 4090

His chassis is probably made out of gold lol

You know that a thread is over when trolls aren’t even intelligent enough to be smartly provocative just tiresome

Edited May 19, 20233 yr by Dominique_K

1 hour ago, OzWhitey said:

If the question was “What does MSFS do not best”, performance would be somewhere fairly high on my list.

And there's me constantly marvelling at the performance I get with this sim given the quality of what I see on my screen compared to any other sim. It must be the drink. I'll look again...

On 5/17/2023 at 8:50 AM, ErichB said:

Despite some obvious quirks and required improvements, MSFS still delivers immersion like no other sim ever did.  On that basis I can see past many of the flaws, which,  in non-immersive sims like P3D,  bugged me every time i used it.

 I am not far from what Erich said.

Even if I am not sure to understand what immersion is though. Like beauty, it is in the eye of the beholder. When I read posts complaining that the inability to open aircraft doors breaks the immersion, I sit and scratch my head in wonder 😄.

 But if immersion means anything and of course it does,  it is a holistic not an analytic concept. 

 At the end of the day, what does really matter ? The flight model is good but could be better, same for the weather, the imagery, the mesh and so on and so forth but does MSFS fool myself in thinking that I fly an aircraft ? You bet it  does.    

Here comes my answer to the OP 's question (What Does MSFS Do Best?) :  Asobo's alchemy has concocted a sum which is greater than the parts. 

Edited May 19, 20233 yr by Dominique_K

19 minutes ago, Dominique_K said:

But if immersion means anything and of course it does,  it is a holistic not an analytic concept.

precisely

19 minutes ago, Dominique_K said:

Asobo's alchemy has concocted a sum which is greater than the parts. 

That says it all very well, indeed.

6 hours ago, OzWhitey said:

Meh, I’d describe MSFS performance as mediocre. If it wasn’t, I wouldn’t be spending 6K trying to get it to run good.

Can you tell us what components of your computer you spent 6K USD on, and MSFS still doesn't run good for you? If you could list the components and the price you paid, maybe we could give you some advice on why you are overspending and under achieving.

FYI, if you don't specify the currency, the default currency in most English international forums is USD. If you meant a different currency other than USD, you should probably have specified it.

Edited May 19, 20233 yr by abrams_tank

5 hours ago, turbomax said:

I spent half of that ($ 2.875) for stellar performance.

$ 300 X670 motherboard,

$ 300 - 64 GB DDR5,

$ 475 - AMD 7800x3D CPU,

$ 1.800 - RTX 4090

Things aren't so cheap where I live, matey. The RTX 4090 alone was over 3K in AUD. Yes, my upgrade is solely for MSFS and it's going to cost more than 6K once I get the new CPU/Mobo etc in. I'm happy to do it to try and get a smooth MSFS experience, but the sim does not have stellar performance (with the recent exception of DLSS for flatscreen). Of course, X-plane, P3D and DCS are not well optimised either so unless you're flying Aerofly (which only about 3 people are), you need some pretty chunky hardware to get good frame rates with complex use cases.