Wish we could actually get decent stormy weather in the sim.

Edited July 8, 20232 yr by MikeH99

12 hours ago, ca_metal said:

Nothing disruptive happening

What kind of « disruptive » thing would you imagine?

4 hours ago, MikeH99 said:

Wish we could actually get decent stormy weather in the sim.

Then you need FS2024.

Wanna have hot air balloons and sky diving? then you need FS2024.

Wanna see bears, tigers and wilderbeast? then you need FS2024

Wanna get 5-10 times FPS then you need FS2024

etc.

7 hours ago, Tuskin38 said:

The permanent white dot doesn't effect everyone, and they're having a hard time narrowing it down because of that.

I see it if I move the camera with my controller, but it vanishes as soon as I top moving it. It does not appear if I move with the mouse.

How can you possibly know that? We've had zero, read zero communication from the developers about this bug. Only the usual nonsense from the moderators who don't know anything other than it will be fixed "in a future update".

30 minutes ago, Greazer said:

 

Wanna see bears, tigers and wilderbeast? then you need FS2024

Wait, what about giraffes, zebras, elephants? I vaguely remember them on the CD ROM cover for some flight sim a while back. I wonder how many old school floppy disks we would need to install this thing. I want to see ants crawling on blades of grass, gnats, flies, mosquitos that pop out of the screen and actually bite you. No limits as to what these new sims might offer.

16 hours ago, WestAir said:

We just have to survive another 2 years

Survive being the key word.............................

Why Microsoft decided to offer another incarnation of MSFS is made clear by a simple observation: "Would you all be happy with an operating system in 2023 called Windows 98 version 2,900,347?". If we live long enough we will see MSFS 2024, 2028, 2032 etc! And the reason is simple, "Perception"!

1 hour ago, SierraHotel said:

And the reason is simple, "Perception"!

The reason is even a bit simpler than that: money money money.

Edited July 8, 20232 yr by Franz007

7 hours ago, MikeH99 said:

Wish we could actually get decent stormy weather in the sim.

Well, that's their plan for 2024. They mention supercells, improved storms, tornadoes (tornadoes are actually simulated not scripted), etc at this timestamp from their FSExpo presentation: https://youtu.be/VPhScg_FINE?t=1111 
 

 

Edited July 8, 20232 yr by lwt1971

 

1 hour ago, SierraHotel said:

Why Microsoft decided to offer another incarnation of MSFS is made clear by a simple observation: "Would you all be happy with pay again for an operating system in 2023 called Windows 98 version 2,900,347?". If we live long enough we will see MSFS 2024, 2028, 2032 etc! And the reason is simple, "Perception"!

Fixed that for you.

Firstly, any business that releases products for sale are obviously at least in part doing it for the reason of money/profit (novel concept! 🤯). Secondly, the initial hot takes that some wanted to keep pushing right after the initial 2024 trailer were instantly shot down after the greater amount of clarity we got from FSExpo (i.e. they are in dire need of cash influx & v2020 was/is not doing well so that's why they need to v2024, bla bla)... the actual fact is, and what was evident to most people, and as all the surveys/data/etc out there indicated, is that v2020 has been immensely popular and financially successful.. so successful in fact that MS/Asobo have doubled their team size to 500+ and poured investment into 2024. There's also the tiny fact that MS is deep pocketed, and MSFS money is small potatoes to them compared to the other sides of their business.

And as always, very useful to hear from the horse's mouth as to why/what/how rather than assuming what their thinking is, in this case why MS/Asobo decided to do v2024 (tonnes of info in these interviews but picking out a couple of questions and answers):

https://www.helisimmer.com/interview/msfs-2024-helicopters-future-msfs-2020
Sergio: Another thing people are asking is “Why do we need a new version”? Why is Microsoft “milking the community”?
Seb: Oh, yeah. It's a lot of work, but I think we had to do a lot of architectural changes. So, you know, we have the list of all the stuff that people are asking for, all the stuff that we want to do, the wish list. And some of this stuff we've kept pushing and pushing because it requires huge architectural changes. And so at some point we said, okay, now we got to do all the long, the big, big undertakings and do the big changes, like reducing the size on the disk by changing the way the data is organized, improving drastically the flight model.
A lot of people have been asking for improvements on the flight model. And what we've done a lot recently is all the little changes, all the little adjustments, but the big, big changes require a new architecture here again.
And so, yeah, we had to start, I would say, a new simulator in order to do all the bigger, bigger things based on 2020, but a lot of long, long architectural changes that take a long time and also a long time to test and to make work. So how we're doing it, well, we have a huge team now.
Sergio: Jorg continued to expand on the need for a new sim and get us to understand why 2020 would not cut it anymore, in the future.
Jorg: I think you should think of 24 as a necessary step for the long-term expandability. Right? And that's the thing that's probably the key here. Right?
We saw our sim is now at 300 gig. You know, there's 3,000 add ons now. We think there's going to be like 10,000! We keep adding stuff with updates. And at some point, the architecture does not really support infinite amount of data.
So then you dump, sort over to the cloud, right? That is as much more. There's more this space. We can pretty much afford anything, which is why this was necessary.

https://msfsaddons.com/2023/06/25/exclusive-interview-with-jorg-neumann-and-sebastian-wloch-we-are-in-the-pursuit-of-the-perfect-sim/
Vasco: Was there always the intention to launch a new standalone versions of MSFS, or is this move motivated by the need for technological growth of the platform?
Jorg: It’s the latter. Technology is unpredictable, and some areas are accelerating much beyond anything we could have predicted. The rise of AI is just the beginning. We’re using machine learning for terrain detection, for example, but we don’t know where it’s going to go over the next five years. So, this move is born out of our analysis of the trend line. There was no preplanning for an MSFS 2024; we didn’t sit there in 2020 saying we’d launch another one in 2024. The acceleration in all areas, and the development of 3,000 add-ons in just a few years, was unexpected. If you extrapolate that, you might end up with 10,000 add-ons. So, our world updates, and many other things, have just evolved in response to these trends. We’re now at 300GB and at some point we’ll be at 1TB. It’s not feasible. So we need to go [and] we need to do something.
 

Edited July 8, 20232 yr by lwt1971

1 minute ago, lwt1971 said:

And as always, very useful to hear from the horse's mouth as to why/what/how rather than assuming what their thinking is,

Well they would never say in an interview that they do it for no other reasons than milking the community (if that was the case, not saying it *is*)), so that's merely as useful as the testimony of an defendant in court.

Just now, Fiorentoni said:

Well they would never say in an interview that they do it for no other reasons than milking the community (if that was the case, not saying it *is*)), so that's merely as useful as the testimony of an defendant in court.

Yes quite true, no business would ever explicitly state they intend to milk the community when they sell products to that community 🙄. Their words however are a *tad* more useful to me than a defendant's court testimony given all the context and details I got from those interviews. As I said, profit and money is *always* a factor (charging a price for fair value in a new product is very different from "milking" the community).. but as to other reasons why they're doing 2024, I'll take their own words over various randoms' takes on the internet 🤷‍♂️ If we're going to take everything that companies say about their intentions and products to be as useful as defendants' testimonies, then that's a rather difficult way to live in a free market world.
 

5 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

 If we're going to take everything that companies say about their intentions and products to be as useful as defendants' testimonies, then that's a rather difficult way to live in a free market world.
 

Independent reviews, track record, common sense...? If all that fits well with the company's statements, it's all good. If not, think twice.

Courtroom analogies aside I was raising an objection (okay that's the last one) against you using an interview with the company itself as a counterargument to someone saying "They only do it for profit". I think we can agree, though, that the dev's statements are part of the equation. A propositum I'd like to hear something more concrete about their intentions in regards to the major flaws of MSFS 2020 (AI traffic, ATC, photogrammetry/server issues etc.).

26 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

it’s the latter. Technology is unpredictable, and some areas are accelerating much beyond anything we could have predicted. The rise of AI is just the beginning. We’re using machine learning for terrain detection, for example, but we don’t know where it’s going to go over the next five years. So, this move is born out of our analysis of the trend line. There was no preplanning for an MSFS 2024; we didn’t sit there in 2020 saying we’d launch another one in 2024. The acceleration in all areas, and the development of 3,000 add-ons in just a few years, was unexpected

In my opinion this is quite naive. Almost no one asked them to improve the scenery that much, an area where they already excelled and provided us with tons of world-updates, during other things were missing or bugged. At the same time, they made some promises at the start that they could not fulfill. And now they will push the graphical side even further, making the same promises about weather and flightmodel again that they already made 3-4 years ago. I remember that i was blown away by the announcements about the dynamical weather. The results: they weren't even able to add turbulences in clouds and their atmosphere-model seems broken. This after 3 years. And now they are not only pushing the limits of graphics further (= not needed) but adding some stuff that i'm having the impression most of users already try to convince themselves that it will be great (fire fighting, elephants... etc.). And they sell us the whole again, with some in my opinion ridiculous "excuses" (rise of AI...., give me a break Asobo -> They already made use of it in a revolutionary way like no other sim). My guess is that they realized their development-costs where higher than expected. There is nothing wrong with them needing enough revenues but i just don't buy it the way they are selling it to us. My guess is that they will be able to gain even more "gamers" as users but the "hardcore-flightsim-folks" will be once again let behind because they will once again not focus on that group. I may be wrong, no idea. But it's a bit my impression based on my experiences with them.