46 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

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".

Absolutely, and all three of those should be used in heaps. But in the absence of the 2024 product itself, I can definitely go by the latter two on your list.  And employing those along with the clarity given by MS/Asobo at FSExpo, I'm of the strong opinion that they are not "milking" the community 🙂 (once again, selling a new product and charging a price in return for value, i.e. "doing it for profit", is very different from milking the community which is more akin to fleecing it). As I said from the onset, and this is very obvious and not even something to question, *all* businesses do stuff for profit. Apart from doing it for profit, the various other details/info/clarity given on why they are doing 2024 were quite useful for me. On on aside, they are also keeping 2020 going after 2024 so no one is being forced to move up to 2024.
 

Edited July 8, 20232 yr by lwt1971

8 minutes ago, Franz007 said:

 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.

The "hardcore" flight sim demographic has shifted to MSFS in the last few years, as per the Navigraph surveys over the last few years.

Edited July 8, 20232 yr by abrams_tank

44 minutes ago, Franz007 said:

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. 

Great,  keep feeling MS/Asobo's thinking as naive. You should clarify "almost no one" to mean you... best not to speak for "almost everyone" in terms of desire to improve scenery.

 

44 minutes ago, Franz007 said:

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.

Your guess about them supposedly realizing their development-costs being higher than expected is just that 🙂 and a naive one at that. Seems to me they are doing just fine given all the success with 2020 and how they are pouring all this money/investment into doubling the team size to 500+ which is rather unwise to do if they are struggling with development costs.

 

44 minutes ago, Franz007 said:

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 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.

Bitter much lol? You can try to cast 2024 in certain predicable ways and propagate narratives about it as much as you want, but details and clarity are out there now for everyone to see (with a lot more to come), and a lot of the community and 3rd party devs can see that.. sure is great to have a vast majority of all the major 3rd party devs stating they are developing exclusively for MSFS 2020/2024 isn't it.

My guess is that they will gain even more "hardcore simmers ™️" (already a significant majority of those are on MSFS per latest Navigraph survey), *and* also gain more "gamers" ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 

Edited July 8, 20232 yr by lwt1971

53 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

 

Bitter much lol? You can try to cast 2024 in certain predicable ways and propagate narratives about it as much as you want, but details and clarity are out there now for everyone to see (with a lot more to come), and a lot of the community and 3rd party devs can see that.. sure is great to have a vast majority of all the major 3rd party devs stating they are developing exclusively for MSFS 2020/2024 isn't it.

My guess is that they will gain even more "hardcore simmers ™️" (already a significant majority of those are on MSFS per latest Navigraph survey), *and* also gain more "gamers" ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 

I can clearly see why people at Asobo rarely visit Avsim forums. They just don't want to get depressed. 

14 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

I can clearly see why people at Asobo rarely visit Avsim forums. They just don't want to get depressed. 

It certainly does seem incongruous that we have to post VR topics in a separate forum as if isolated like lepers, but we don't have a separate subforum for these regularly scheduled "personal feeling" / hand wringing / subjective argumentative opinion posts.  Makes a fella (or fellette) openly wonder which of the two general subjects are less relevant to actually using the sim?

1 hour ago, lwt1971 said:

Great,  keep feeling MS/Asobo's thinking as naive

I was actually feeling your thinking as naive, not talking about Asobos’s explanations.

1 hour ago, lwt1971 said:

You should clarify "almost no one" to mean you... best not to speak for "almost everyone" in terms of desire to improve scenery.

I don’t remember having read about that in any forum or streamers complaining about that. The vast majority of the reactions were that it looks absolutely great. Otherwise please provide me the link to these complains.

1 hour ago, lwt1971 said:

Your guess about them supposedly realizing their development-costs being higher than expected is just that 🙂 and a naive one at that. Seems to me they are doing just fine given all the success with 2020 and how they are pouring all this money/investment into doubling the team size to 500+ which is rather unwise to do if they are struggling with development costs.

I don’t want to take away your euphoria, you can think that. I do not.

1 hour ago, lwt1971 said:

Bitter much lol? You can try to cast 2024 in certain predicable ways and propagate narratives about it as much as you want, but details and clarity are out there now for everyone to see (with a lot more to come), and a lot of the community and 3rd party devs can see that..

It has still to be seen. When we experience someone or something having disappointed, usually the most human reaction is to not believing them or it blindly anymore.

1 hour ago, lwt1971 said:

sure is great to have a vast majority of all the major 3rd party devs stating they are developing exclusively for MSFS 2020/2024 isn't it.

I guess for you it is. For others not. I don’t think it’s good to have a unique plateform without any alternatives. For now, MSFS could not really convince me and i think it is never a good idea to have a complete monopole in a market. Doesn’t that make sense to you?

I don’t want to predict that 2024 will be bad, I am just trying to keep a bit realistic, based on my past experiences.

Edited July 8, 20232 yr by Franz007

52 minutes ago, Franz007 said:

I was actually feeling your explanations as naive, not Asobos’s ones by trying to justify themselves. But the ones swallowing it.

Look again, you quoted Asobo's words from my post. All I did was quote Jorg/Seb from interviews re: their reasons for doing 2024 which you then quoted, there were no explanations given by me since it's always best to hear from them rather than trying to assume what their thinking is (that doesn't mean we are swallowing their explanations, it means we get some clarity and something to weigh rather than wildly speculating). In any case, keep swallowing your own explanations 🙂 
 

52 minutes ago, Franz007 said:

I don’t remember having read about that in any forum or streamers complaining about that. The vas5 majority of the reactions was that it looks absolutely great. Otherwise please provide me the link to these complains.

You not hearing forum members or streamers complaining about visuals, and then translating that to mean that "almost no one" is asking or appreciating further improvements in visuals is.. rather naive. Oh and newflash, despite MSFS 2020 visuals being great there are still complaints about some aspects of it on the official forums and here. I don't care to provide links for you for these since they are all over the place and easy enough to find. And even in the hypothetical case that no one is complaining about current visuals that doesn't mean "almost no one" is going to appreciate even better visuals in 2024.. more and more realistic world depiction is never a bad thing in the in-sim digital twin earth.
 

52 minutes ago, Franz007 said:

I don’t want to take away your euphoria, you can think that. I do not.

Great, keep thinking that. You said "My guess is that they realized their development-costs where higher than expected" and I countered that's rather unlikely given their expansion and investment into the team doubling its size to 500+ ... if you think that is "euphoria", then umm sure 😂
 

52 minutes ago, Franz007 said:

It has still to be seen. When we experience someone or something having disappointed, usually the most human reaction is to not believing them or it blindly anymore.

Yes very wise to not blindly believe, and no one is doing that. Also very wise to not blindly claim what 2024 will be like and the type of audience it will cater to until actually seeing it and using it, also especially given all the extra details we have now beyond the initial trailer.
 

52 minutes ago, Franz007 said:

For now, MSFS could not really convince me and i think it is never a good idea to have a complete monopole in a market. Doesn’t that make sense to you?

Never good to have monopolies of course, but the current sim market is what it is and given that, it's good (and natural) that the 3rd party devs have taken this position.
 

Edited July 8, 20232 yr by lwt1971

35 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

Look again, you quoted Asobo's words from my post. All I did was quote Jorg/Seb from interviews re: their reasons for doing 2024 which you then quoted, there were no explanations given by me since it's always best to hear from them rather than trying to assume what their thinking is (that doesn't mean we are swallowing their explanations, it means we get some clarity and something to weigh rather than wildly speculating). In any case, keep swallowing your own explanations 🙂 
 

Well, by quoting something you usually approve it, because it helps fortifying your point. Otherwise you have to state that you disagree with it. My point being i find it naive to believe their explanations as the real reason. Nothing more.

35 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

You not hearing forum members or streamers complaining about visuals, and then translating that to mean that "almost no one" is asking or appreciating further improvements in visuals is.. rather naive. Oh and newflash, despite MSFS 2020 visuals being great there are still complaints about some aspects of it on the official forums and here. I don't care to provide links for you for these since they are all over the place and easy enough to find. And even in the hypothetical case that no one is complaining about current visuals that doesn't mean "almost no one" is going to appreciate even better visuals in 2024.. more and more realistic world depiction is never a bad thing in the in-sim digital twin earth.

Not sure if you got my point here...of course there are some visual flaws that i know of. My point being that visuals are by far the big strength of MSFS 2020. So they should first improve what is missing before putting that much efforts in the area that most of people are very happy with. And some users already have complained about them putting too much energy in world-updates for 2020 when other areas were lacking. Seems like they will do the same again. But i hope i will be wrong.

37 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

but the current sim market is what it is and given that, it's good (and natural) that the 3rd party devs have taken this position

Monopolies are not good but at the same time you find good that some third-part devs will developp explicitely for that one sim? Hmm...isn't that statement a bit contradictory?

6 minutes ago, Franz007 said:

Monopolies are not good but at the same time you find good that some third-part devs will developp explicitely for that one sim? Hmm...isn't that statement a bit contradictory?

Many of the top tier developers "abandoned" FSX when P3D v4 went 64 bit. Almost all of them had never coded for XPlane in any version. Just saying.

Edited July 8, 20232 yr by hs118

23 hours ago, ca_metal said:

I'm feeling lately everything is too calm in the hobby. Nothing disruptive happening. But… there is a storm ahead of us. 

Do you think we are in the calm (the end of MSFS 2020 cycle) before the storm (release of the MSFS 2024)?

I’m really expecting a reinvigoration of the hobby next year. Awesome times ahead (and also turbulent times 😂).

I don't know what happened between your post and page 4 (probably the usual Avsim kindergarden, seems not to be worth reading), but I agree with you.

I am very much looking forward to MSFS2024 and all that it will bring to flightsimulation. In particular it will be interesting to see what the possibilities for third party developers will be like. Exciting times ahead for flightsimming.

Edited July 8, 20232 yr by RALF9636

2 hours ago, Stoopy said:

It certainly does seem incongruous that we have to post VR topics in a separate forum as if isolated like lepers, but we don't have a separate subforum for these regularly scheduled "personal feeling" / hand wringing / subjective argumentative opinion posts.

Oh we already have, it's called Avsim 👍

 

I think all that can be said about MSFS 2024 to this point has already been said. Anything else is just running in circles. Let's just focus on something else until we see some in-game footage and/or concrete informations to what will be added/changed and how. We'all speculating and arguing on the base of basically a 2-minute-trailer and tidbits of generalized phrases said in an interview.

1 hour ago, Franz007 said:

Well, by quoting something you usually approve it, because it helps fortifying your point. Otherwise you have to state that you disagree with it.

Lol no it doesn't mean that. In the face of wild speculation by many about why MS/Asobo are doing v2024, I find it useful to actually listen to MS/Asobo answer that very question (hence my posting of said quotes).. that doesn't mean one has to wholesale blindly believe what they say and no one is doing that, nor is anyone trying to "fortify" points here. But yes, as to *why* MS/Asobo did v2024 (which was the initial question at hand which I responded to), I'm gonna take more stock in what MS/Asobo themselves say than some randoms' speculation on internet forums.
 

1 hour ago, Franz007 said:

My point being that visuals are by far the big strength of MSFS 2020. So they should first improve what is missing before putting that much efforts in the area that most of people are very happy with. And some users already have complained about them putting too much energy in world-updates for 2020 when other areas were lacking. Seems like they will do the same again. But i hope i will be wrong.

Visuals is one of the biggest strengths of MSFS. And just because that's so doesn't mean MS/Asobo can't keep advancing it. And how do you you know they are putting too much energy into visuals vs other areas in the sim that are lacking? (especially given what we now know about 2024). And we have been thru this a gazillion times on these forums, just because one subset of the dev team are working on visuals and world updates doesn't mean those devs could help in other areas. With MS/Asobo being as deep pocketed as it is, and with 500+ devs, I'm going to assume they are able to handle multiple areas of the sim without one area losing out.  And re: v2020, it's blindly foolish to say all what we have gotten so far from initial release to currently in 2023 translates to them "spending too much energy on world-updates/visuals".

 

1 hour ago, Franz007 said:

Monopolies are not good but at the same time you find good that some third-part devs will developp explicitely for that one sim? Hmm...isn't that statement a bit contradictory?

Well, let me explain again. Monopolies are not good, yes. But the current sim market is what it is. So *given* this current sim market where a great majority of 3rd party devs' customers are on MSFS, then it's good and natural that those 3rd party devs are explicitly developing for MSFS and not wasting their resources other platforms (they also kinda sorta know best about their financial health, business priorities, and market conditions). If future platforms come along that changes the market, then by all means those 3rd party devs should act accordingly. If one doesn't like this current market, then perhaps one can hope for other platforms to come along to actually change the market conditions.
 

Edited July 8, 20232 yr by lwt1971

43 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

I'm gonna take more stock in what MS/Asobo themselves say than some randoms' speculation on internet forums.

That's exactly what i said. You quoted it because for you what they said, is the "real" reason.

43 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

Visuals is one of the biggest strengths of MSFS. And just because that's so doesn't mean MS/Asobo can't keep advancing it. And how do you you know they are putting too much energy into visuals vs other areas in the sim that are lacking

I explained that my opinion was based on what they already promised for 2020 and what then happened in the 3 following years. I never said i knew that they were necessarily putting too much energy into visuals in future. I said i am worried about that. I am skeptical on how accurate their statements really are, since we know that they are a company that has to sell a product at the end. Yes it's speculations. And perhaps i may be completely wrong. Who knows.

Edited July 8, 20232 yr by Franz007

This is yet another thread of bitter, hyperbolic fanfiction and moaning about MSFS's first service pack that Premium Deluxe owners will probably have to pay $30 for.

Seriously, haven't you all had enough of this discussion? It's happening, and no, Asobo did not promise you 10 years of content for $100. Literally no game dev works like that. It's too expensive.

Nobody complains about Activision releasing a new Call of Duty every 2 years with no improvements. Millions of people line up and pay $70 to get what is at this point a warmed over engine, MP full of hackers, and a transparently vapid single player story. Take your pitchforks over there.

We got a brand new, beautiful sim with a really responsive development team, Microsoft funding and resources, and a commitment not to abandon the franchise like MS did 15 years ago.

Isn't that enough?