Historical weather is absolutely a must

[ShawnG 1,823]

2 hours ago, seamutt said:I really do fail to see how this kind of feature would be that difficult to build (at least if you had full access to the MSFS code).

I think the idea has merit, I’ve thought that a fictitious but believable weather generator is a decent idea for a while.  However, this hobby is filled with people who descend onto apoplectic rage and/or compulsive twitching at the thought of literally anything fictional in This space.  So if it were to come to pass, it would likely be rejected by the same folks who can’t deal with 0730’s weather at 0300…

the highlighted part of your post though is the kicker.  You don’t think it’s that hard? Have you ever programmed anything?  A worldwide functioning weather engine with a granularity of data that is needed for flight sim?  You think this is easy?

[F737MAX 5,738]

4 hours ago, seamutt said:

I haven't seen a single poster in this thread acknowledge that the answer to this problem doesn't necessarily have to be a difficult to implement  "historic weather" system, but rather a "dynamic weather" generator could work just fine - in fact, even better.

👋 User of Real Traffic & PSXT here.

I regularly use the historical traffic data function (generally within the previous 24 hours).

PSXT relies on the correct historic QNH pressure setting in order to have AI land correctly.

Real Traffic, as the data source, pulls aircraft behaviour from whatever interactions real aircraft have with real weather at the time, e.g. Cb avoidance, etc. It's weird to see aircraft taking bizarre weather-avoiding routings in the sim, which is instead displaying CAVOK / NSW / NSC from current conditions instead.

A dynamic weather generator is a good idea. However, it doesn't meet my particular usage requirements.

[pmb 5,138]

6 hours ago, F737MAX said:

👋 User of Real Traffic & PSXT here.

.....

I can exactly mirror this.

Kind regards, Michael

[VHOJT 181]

The reasons for historical weather are clear. What I find amazing is the amount of people who come onto a thread about it and say “I don’t need that”.  Great.  Good for you. I don’t go to threads about 90% of features being requested I don’t care about making a nuisance of myself though. I suggest some here follow suit. 
 

For me, it is one of the main reasons I haven’t moved to MSFS. The reasons for it will become even more apparent with the release of long haul aircraft.
 

 

[ShawnG 1,823]

1 minute ago, VHOJT said:

The reasons for historical weather are clear. What I find amazing is the amount of people who come onto a thread about it and say “I don’t need that”.  Great.  Good for you. I don’t go to threads about 90% of features being requested I don’t care about making a nuisance of myself though. I suggest some here follow suit. 
 

For me, it is one of the main reasons I haven’t moved to MSFS. The reasons for it will become even more apparent with the release of long haul aircraft.
 

 

It's a matter of how it is framed.  I would never wade into a thread titled, "I would love it if they would institute Historical weather, and here is why"  Number one, it's a reasonable request, and number two, I agree. 

I will get involved when that becomes "Historical weather is an absolute must!!!"   because it really isn't.  a lot of us, even when we had it in AS didn't use it.  and when it's framed that way, It invites those responses.  By the way, I and most others posting in argument here flatly stated that we supported the idea of it being available.  I backed it on the official forum as well.  Hyperbole does nobody any favors when it comes to securing agreement.

[brucewtb 250]

On 6/22/2023 at 6:01 PM, Dominique_K said:

EDIT : I have to correct myself . I did a little search and MeteoBlue actually has historical weather archives !

 history+ | Weather History & Archive - meteoblue

The plot thickens, would MS be too stingy to  pay 😱 😄 ?

Maybe that's it.

Bruce

[VHOJT 181]

On 6/26/2023 at 10:13 AM, ShawnG said:

It's a matter of how it is framed.  I would never wade into a thread titled, "I would love it if they would institute Historical weather, and here is why"  Number one, it's a reasonable request, and number two, I agree. 

I will get involved when that becomes "Historical weather is an absolute must!!!"   because it really isn't.  a lot of us, even when we had it in AS didn't use it.  and when it's framed that way, It invites those responses.  By the way, I and most others posting in argument here flatly stated that we supported the idea of it being available.  I backed it on the official forum as well.  Hyperbole does nobody any favors when it comes to securing agreement.

They're saying it's a must for them. You're being facetious. 

[scotchegg 4,240]

40 minutes ago, VHOJT said:

They're saying it's a must for them. You're being facetious. 

Nope, the title is very clear. It’s ‘absolutely a must’, not ‘I think it’s a must’, or ‘it’s a must for me’.

If anything, the replies saying ‘not for me’, or ‘I don’t think so’, should be more acceptable for you than the OP’s title.

[Donka 654]

I personally have never seen the need for historical weather. The choice of live weather or presets (including making your own) work just fine for me.

[MrBitstFlyer 3,896]

1 hour ago, Donka said:

I personally have never seen the need for historical weather. The choice of live weather or presets (including making your own) work just fine for me.

I'm at work for 12 hours, get up at 4am, and I get home around 8pm. My total day is around 16 hours.  By the time I settle down to fly GA, any showers have gone and the wind has dropped.  RealTraffic/PSXT allows me to see historical traffic, but MSFS desn't allow historical weather to match.  Sometimes I'm too tired to use MSFS for a few days, so when I load it up it would be good to pick an interesting day of weather that matches the live traffic I see.

 

[RALF9636 1,998]

9 minutes ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

I'm at work for 12 hours, get up at 4am, and I get home around 8pm. My total day is around 16 hours.  By the time I settle down to fly GA, any showers have gone and the wind has dropped.  RealTraffic/PSXT allows me to see historical traffic, but MSFS desn't allow historical weather to match.  Sometimes I'm too tired to use MSFS for a few days, so when I load it up it would be good to pick an interesting day of weather that matches the live traffic I see.

 

My thoughts exactly.

But it won't be long until someone here will suggest we should just use a weather preset or create our own weather...

 

[F737MAX 5,738]

3 hours ago, RALF9636 said:

But it won't be long until someone here will suggest we should just use a weather preset or create our own weather...

As night follows day, it's the same refrain.

Can you imagine the backlash if those asking for historic weather responded to every request for AI traffic logic improvements with 'just use one of the third party AI traffic tools like FSLTL.'
In the same way FSLTL cannot overcome the limitations of the AI engine, preset or user-designed weather is a just as limiting experience.

We don't have to agree, but I really hate this prolific attitude of 'it's not important to me and I don't need it, so devs shouldn't waste their time...'
If the devs followed that attitude we would never have received helicopters, gliders, world updates, multiple new aircraft at the 40th anniversary, and we certainly wouldn't be getting MSFS2024, given all the early negativity.

[Stearmandriver 2,332]

On 6/25/2023 at 5:13 PM, ShawnG said:

It's a matter of how it is framed.  I would never wade into a thread titled, "I would love it if they would institute Historical weather, and here is why"  Number one, it's a reasonable request, and number two, I agree. 

I will get involved when that becomes "Historical weather is an absolute must!!!"   because it really isn't.  a lot of us, even when we had it in AS didn't use it.  and when it's framed that way, It invites those responses.  By the way, I and most others posting in argument here flatly stated that we supported the idea of it being available.  I backed it on the official forum as well.  Hyperbole does nobody any favors when it comes to securing agreement.

This is exactly right.  I don't think a single person here has said they actively want this not to be implemented.  Shawn is correct that basically every person who has chimed in about it not being an "absolute must" has said that they DO see reasons for it and would enjoy having it implemented.  I know I've said this.

It's just that not having it is categorically NOT the "completely unrealistic" game-breaker that some pretend it is.  That doesn't mean it wouldn't be NICE to have; I fully agree that it would.

But my god, could we maybe have a simple user-defined visibility control first?  😁

[F737MAX 5,738]

26 minutes ago, Stearmandriver said:

could we maybe have a simple user-defined visibility control first?

Just use a weather preset 👍

/sarcasm

[Mace 1,957]

@ShawnG and @scotchegg I think the OP using the "absolute must" title is taken directly from Asobo's own list of improvements, they used that exact phrase.

I mean, surely, the OP couldn't have somehow randomly matched that phrase word-for-word, right?

Anyway, maybe that explains the thread title. Asobo's words.  Not the OP's. (?)