MSFS 2024 v.s. MSFS 2020 Side by Side Comparison Video

[Jazz 1,047]

3 hours ago, MarcG said:

and yes I'm fully expecting the World Map CTD to be fixed as that's obviously an internal game issue

When I saw that "half" of us were experiencing CTD's I rolled my eyes. Then I read that part about a map CTD being a thing and thought, "I have not experienced this"...... and then I launch my sim to try my new rudder pedals and went to the map and moved it and ......CTD.

Not sure if you all are just a gaggle of jinx's or I have just been lucky....... until now.

[lwt1971 7,469]

It's always great that the spectrum of folks from those who love MSFS to those who disparage it and everyone in-between seem to have eyes glued to this forum 🙂

In any case, w.r.t Krakin's OP in this thread, this was an interesting trailer breakdown/analysis that came out just after it dropped.. keep in mind this was before MS/Asobo revealed a lot more info at FSExpo and subsequent interviews and Q&A streams.
 

 

Edited November 25, 2023 by lwt1971

[Sky_Pilot071 583]

MSFS excels at provisioning the most assets to provide the best fsim experience.  If the world has a internet meltdown so-be-it.

sb

 

[Krakin 5,872]

Anyway, back on topic, There will be a Dev stream on Wednesday and although they have stated that they will not be taking any questions related to 2024, I do hope Jorg will let a few more things slip like he normally does lol.

[MarcG 3,047]

6 minutes ago, Krakin said:

Anyway, back on topic, There will be a Dev stream on Wednesday and although they have stated that they will not be taking any questions related to 2024, I do hope Jorg will let a few more things slip like he normally does lol.

I'd rather he answers questions as to why the Tile Loading bug still occurs X years on, why there's clearly more CTDs since SU13 (for some, including the world map CTD), why they clearly have no intention of fixing age old VR bugs, why they've struggled to fix UI related issues (white dot, Assistance settings etc), what measures they're taking to address these and other old issues within the current Sim.

MSFS2024 can wait, MSFS2020 still needs attention and needs answers from him on the biggest issues not just another pretty smiles and unicorns Q&A with cherry picked questions to make them look good.

[Krakin 5,872]

3 minutes ago, MarcG said:

white dot, Assistance settings etc

Um, one is fixed and the other is a beta issue with a fix already identified. Not a big deal.

 

4 minutes ago, MarcG said:

MSFS2024 can wait

Maybe for you but there's nothing wrong with getting more info in the meantime and I mean.....this thread is about MSFS2024..........

[lwt1971 7,469]

23 minutes ago, MarcG said:

I'd rather he answers questions as to why the Tile Loading bug still occurs X years on, why there's clearly more CTDs since SU13 (for some, including the world map CTD), why they clearly have no intention of fixing age old VR bugs, why they've struggled to fix UI related issues (white dot, Assistance settings etc), what measures they're taking to address these and other old issues within the current Sim.

MSFS2024 can wait, MSFS2020 still needs attention and needs answers from him on the biggest issues not just another pretty smiles and unicorns Q&A with cherry picked questions to make them look good.

Perhaps not getting weirdly triggered by Jorg and/or the way he smiles, might help ease the situation a bit. Yes all those things on your list would be great to get fixed, yet a lot of us will also manage to live and use MSFS 2020 even if they don't get fixed (the assistance settings bug in the current *beta* build is a problem, they've said they will fix it on a future beta build, before SU14 releases even.. I'd probably wait to see if this is the case with the SU14 release before lighting my hair on fire). The CTDs would be great to get to the bottom of for those who're experiencing it, but it's not a widespread issue as some would like to make it seem (count me in on the camp who's not seeing this instability). 

You can want MSFS 2024 to wait, for a lot of us it can't come soon enough 🙂
 

Edited November 26, 2023 by lwt1971

[Rimshot 1,180]

Guys, please relax. Life is to precious for this utterly silly bickering about a game.

[DD_Arthur 1,106]

Ten to nine on a Sunday night where I live.

What are you pre-schoolers’ doing up at this time?🤔

Bedtime now!

[Franz007 597]

53 minutes ago, David Mills said:

In a recent poll of XP users, some of their most-requested improvements for XP were: More realistic world scenery, better performance, better antialiasing, frame generation, reliably streaming "orthos" (i.e., photogrammetry), a more active developer community, better communication from the sim developer. MSFS is actually the sim you want and have always dreamed of. The water's fine here. I think a lot of XP users designed airports and other items that were later incorporated into the default XP. It's like moving away from a home you built yourself. It's emotionally difficult to do, even if your new home is much nicer and fits your needs much better.

I guess you are aware of MSFS-wishlist being way longer than just that? Literally hundreds of pages on the MSFS-forum. And even here a little glimpe, just less representative:

 

[Franz007 597]

11 minutes ago, Krakin said:

Tell me, does Msparks and the others with R1 in their sigs hate MSFS and are they incapable of debating it in a mostly nonpartial manner? I await your answer.

Perhaps you missed my question (see above). Tell me please where i spreaded « missinformation »? I don’t know why you guys cannot comment anything without personal attacks. Some other users already asked you to please stop attacking people without any reason. Can’t we have a normal discussion in the MSFS-forums?

[lwt1971 7,469]

9 minutes ago, Franz007 said:

Can’t we have a normal discussion in the MSFS-forums?

Oh we most certainly can, and do. Tonnes of normal discussion constantly ongoing in the MSFS forum as everyone can see, except for certain threads that the usual cast of characters come and do their usual things on 🙂

For this thread, the advice below should've been followed (as many agreed apparently). Looking at you Noel lol.

 

[lwt1971 7,469]

48 minutes ago, Noel said:

My chief want for MSFS 2024 is to amp up the realism level in the clouds w/ higher resolution more distinct types, and the addition of weather/cloud related turbulence.  Ground scenery is fabulous, and though what we have now has its merits for sure I hope this becomes major focus area and I think at this point it's been referred to, but have no idea what that will translate to.

All signs point to v2024 improving on this, of course proof will be in the pudding. Given what they said at the FSEXpo presentation about improved simulation of storms, supercells, tornados, etc all that would require cloud depiction in more detail and variety and improved turbulence within. Partly due to METAR integration and partly due to improving performance (as that was the #1 upvoted request at the time) they degraded clouds/etc from the pre-SU5/SU7 days. They've done a lot to improve that back since then, but I'm still a bit weary about METAR integration and how that might prevent them from providing a more global purely-Meteoblue-based weather experience from pre-SU5/SU7.

But that said, they're also aiming to improve performance dramatically by implementing proper use of CPU cores and better multi-threading, offloading computations (like the integral equations for the new atmospheric engine) to the GPU, etc. So all that in totality points to them being able to do the kind of next-level clouds details we'd like. That big re-work of weather they spoke about in the earlier Q&As I feel is what we'll get in v2024.

https://www.helisimmer.com/interview/msfs-2024-helicopters-future-msfs-2020

Q: All that makes a lot of sense. With more computational power, more stuff can be done. But I started to wonder about limits. How many cores can we eventually use for this? Sebastian answered that as well.

A (Seb):  So, we don't have currently a hard limit set, it's just the limit of the memory. At some point, it's gonna drop the performance, right?

What we measure right now, and we're not finished optimizing, we're already at a four to five times performance increase. And I think we're gonna maybe get 10 […] you can easily add 10 times more surfaces, right? It's very quickly, right?

And so, I think if people add 20 times more surfaces than before, well, then you may be gonna offload, you know, load the other threads. And the more you load, the more you take away compute power for the terrain, or other stuff, right? Which is using thread.

And at some point, it's gonna have an impact. I don't think we're gonna set a limit. We're gonna limit ourselves, we're gonna have recommendations, but just like today, a third-party aircraft can do a lot of stuff. If it wants to load up the machines, it can.

Memory can be a limit because that would crash. But performance, well... There's no limit.

Also, the new aerodynamics is a lot cheaper on memory than before. Like, this is three or four times cheaper, right? In terms of memory footprint. Which is also necessary because otherwise, if you put more stuff, then you run into memory issues. So, we optimize that as well.
 

Edited November 26, 2023 by lwt1971

[Franz007 597]

28 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

Partly due to METAR integration and partly due to improving performance (as that was the #1 upvoted request at the time) they degraded clouds/etc from the pre-SU5 days. They've done a lot to improve that back since then, but I'm still a bit weary about METAR integration and how that might prevent them from providing a more global purely-Meteoblue-based weather experience from pre-SU5.

Weather has always been my favourite topic. From what I have seen, this is a very dfficult task to make right. I guess the best they can do is trying to make the general forecast datas with actual local weather conditions (metars) match more « naturally » (and at the same time as accurate as possible). But it will always result in discrepancies. The main problem is that there aren’t any weather-database around with a full coverage of the actual conditions and enough in details (resolution). Or I am not aware of such a source. But I really think that having accurate weather (looking natural with enough different types of clouds etc.) is one of the most difficult tasks in the flightsim-world. Nevertheless it will be interesting to see what they will be able to do with the weather in the next version, knowing it should be improved.

Edited November 26, 2023 by Franz007

[Franz007 597]

11 minutes ago, Noel said:

Please take an honest look at what I asked people to do.

Perhaps your intention was valuable but when reading the first sentence, many readers may already be triggered by the use of the words « fans » (often used in a condescendant way) for the one and « users » for the other. So the risk of perceiving such a thread as provocative is huge. And that’s also exactly what happened.