32 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

shallow hubris

I like that phrase. I will remember it. I take it from your posts that x-plane is the bees knees and that everyone should move over to it. I'm guessing that freedom of choice just is not your thing? Happy Christmas.

24 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

The words "hardcore" and "serious" are being thrown around here as if they are well defined and somehow some/many/few folks are able to arbitrate if a sim is hardcore or not. How do you define what hardcore is? And how do you know that many of the survey respondents are *not* hardcore, or think that MSFS is *not* hardcore but still prefer it? (my point is we really can't know, and can only look at the data i.e. below)

Just considering these known facts from the surveys of last two years:

• 64% prefer IFR, 19% prefer VFR
• in a sim aircraft these were the most valued aircraft features: systems complexity - 38%, realism and authenticity - 26.6%, flight model accuracy - 17.4%, graphics/visuals - 10.4% .
• in last year's survey in terms of what aspect of a flight sim is most important to them, the answers were:
  •  the #1 factor was realistic aerodynamic model, with 60% rating it as very important, and 35% rating it as important
  •  the #2 factor was realistic world graphics, with 50% rating it as very important and 40% rating it as important
• it's well known that most of those who tend to use Navigraph, and/or take this survey, are simmers who aren't of the casual kind (to say the very least)

So given the above, is it that much of a stretch then to say that those who participated in this survey do "serious" simming? And given that ~70% of them prefer MSFS, then it's not too hard to infer they consider MSFS to be up to that task of serious simming? (one can use "serious" and "hardcore" interchangeably here as one wishes)

I consider myself one of these 70%, who until May 2022 was impressed by the world depiction fidelity of MSFS but very unimpressed with the only aircraft we had available at that time, the default ones. Fast forward to now, in addition to graphics fidelity, we also have numerous payware and much improved default aircraft of high fidelity in terms of FM/avionics/systems/etc and the base sim moving forward with CFD flight model tech (I consider only the ground handling to be a problem area and thankfully that's being reworked in v2024 with a partial backport to v2020 SU15). So a sim that ticks off most boxes, giving me *both* visual fidelity and aeronautical fidelity, of course I'd easily rate that as my primary sim (as did apparently ~16,600 people out of the ~23,700 surveyed).
 

Your implicit assumptions are surprising:

• Where did I (ever) say that MSFS isn't a "hard core" sim?
• Where did I (ever) say that "hard core" simmers don't use MSFS?
• Where did I (ever) say that a "hard core" sim can't also have "hard core" visuals?

23 minutes ago, Krakin said:

@UrgentSiesta You are now putting words in Abrams mouth that you know you shouldn't. It is ok to admit you misunderstood what he was trying to say. No one is going to think less of you if you do.

I am not and I did not. I am fine if we disagree, but don't presume to lecture me simply because you believe you're correct.

Just now, UrgentSiesta said:

Your implicit assumptions are surprising:

• Where did I (ever) say that MSFS isn't a "hard core" sim?
• Where did I (ever) say that "hard core" simmers don't use MSFS?
• Where did I (ever) say that a "hard core" sim can't also have "hard core" visuals?

Ok apologies, I'm misunderstanding you then 🙂 Perhaps you can be more clear.. are you trying to say most folks don't prefer MSFS *just* because it is "hardcore" (assuming in the non-visuals sense), but because it is *also* great in visuals? I'm guessing that from the above, not your previous posts hehe.
 

6 hours ago, MDFlier said:

I've never been in the same room with X-Plane but I assume that v11 is pretty old as well? 

The last version of it is less than 2 years. The laws of aerodynamics don’t change that quickly. And it is an extremely stable sim full of addons that users like to fly. There seems to be some misconception when people assume that all users want to only use the sim with the most fancy graphics. It needs way more to enjoy a sim and XP11 offers many things other sims don’t.

19 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

I am not and I did not.

Yeah you are, and yes you did.

Everyone else can see that.

26 minutes ago, Franz007 said:

The laws of aerodynamics don’t change that quickly.

Thanks for letting us know, who'd have thought!
 

26 minutes ago, Franz007 said:

There seems to be some misconception when people assume that all users want to only use the sim with the most fancy graphics. It needs way more to enjoy a sim and XP11 offers many things other sims don’t.

Where is this misconception you're seeing? I certainly don't in the surveys of the last two years.

And unsurprisingly you're being hyperbolic there with the "many things" bit but hey of course that's your opinion 🙂. Most users (including me) appreciate *multiple* things done well in a sim, and as I said above the survey bears that out clearly with the majority of folks who consider flight realism *and* visual fidelity as top factors also choose MSFS by a wide margin. Those of us who've used various sims over the years including FSX, P3D, XP, MSFS are now able to appreciate and expect multiple aspects of flight simming done well in a sim platform and its add-on products, without needing to settle for either/or.
 

Edited December 24, 20232 yr by lwt1971

1 hour ago, David Mills said:

I suppose there could have been a question on the survey to the effect of, "If MSFS ran on your Mac, would you purchase a copy?" But there was no such question. If there had indeed been such a question, I'm sure that some of the Mac users would have responded "yes," they would purchase and switch to MSFS as their preferred flight simulator

Funny, thats 100% assumption with nothing to backup. And Mac-users usually hate MS in general. I don’t own a Mac anymore. But as far as I know they can use BootCamp to run Windows-compatible software if they really wanted.

23 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

Thanks for letting us know, who'd have thought!
 

Where is this misconception you're seeing? I certainly don't in the surveys of the last two years.

And unsurprisingly you're being hyperbolic there with the "many things" bit but hey of course that's your opinion 🙂. Most users (including me) appreciate *multiple* things done well in a sim, and as I said above the survey bears that out clearly with the majority of folks who consider flight realism *and* visual fidelity as top factors also choose MSFS by a wide margin. Those of us who've used various sims over the years including FSX, P3D, XP, MSFS are now able to appreciate and expect multiple aspects of flight simming done well in a sim platform and its add-on products, without needing to settle for either/or.
 

It looks like you completely missed the point, like you already did above in another post. I simply explained to him the reason why some were still prefering « older » sims. Thats not an opinion, thats facts.

31 minutes ago, Franz007 said:

It looks like you completely missed the point, like you already did above in another post. I simply explained to him the reason why some were still prefering « older » sims. Thats not an opinion, thats facts.

Right sure thing 🙄 ... from what I can see no one is disputing or questioning why some are preferring older sims. And looks like you completely missed the point of my question, which is where is the evidence for what you stated?: "There seems to be some misconception when people assume that all users want to only use the sim with the most fancy graphics"

And no, as much as you'd like to keep pushing the narrative that XP does "many things" better than MSFS when it comes to non-visuals aspects, that doesn't make it fact. A lot of us who've used both sims feel as they currently stand feel it's a wash when it comes to non-visuals with the fidelity and implementation of the particular aircraft add-ons being the make-or-break rather than the underlying sim platform (that too is obviously an opinion).

Edited December 24, 20232 yr by lwt1971

10 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

A lot of us who've used both sims feel as they currently stand it's a wash when it comes to non-visuals with the the fidelity of the particular add-ons being the make-or-break rather than the underlying sim platform (that too is obviously an opinion).

Indeed, I estimate at least 70% of the quality you get comes from the addon and not the underlying sim.

... Merry Christmas everyone. 

18 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

Right sure thing 🙄 ... from what I can see no one is disputing or questioning why some are preferring older sims. And looks like you completely missed the point of my question, which is where is the evidence for what you stated?: "There seems to be some misconception when people assume that all users want to only use the sim with the most fancy graphics"

And no, as much as you'd like to keep pushing the narrative that XP does "many things" better than MSFS when it comes to non-visuals aspects, that doesn't make it fact. A lot of us who've used both sims feel as they currently stand feel it's a wash when it comes to non-visuals with the the fidelity and implementation of the particular aircraft add-ons being the make-or-break rather than the underlying sim platform (that too is obviously an opinion).

You may want to read his post:

 « I'm a little shocked to see some of those simulator versions still being used.

(…)

I've never been in the same room with X-Plane but I assume that v11 is pretty old as well? Just makes you wonder sometimes. »

Again: i explained him the reason. No need to troll my answer.

And for your other arguments i can only shake my head. Without wanting to make you hyperventilate (+ your friends), here a few examples since you don’t seem to be aware:

- the CL650 as best addon ever made is not available anywhere else
- better camera-steering
- Tower-views, fly-by
- 3D-weather-radars
- infinite zoom
- no mandatory-updates
- better popout-windows (that can be saved)
- very userfriendly and better replay-function
- flight dynamics
- Weather-accuracy with the use of ActiveSky
- other study-level planes (in general) not available anywhere else
- failures-simulation
- Hardware-profile for different addons
- possibility to built your own aircraft via aircraft-maker
- etc.

Again: facts. So if you still don’t understand the reason that would make somene prefer such a sim and use it, I cannot help you anymore. And I would also appreciate if you let the person I answered to react and not jumping into it (half out-of-topic).

3 minutes ago, Franz007 said:

No need to troll my answer.

Oh the irony.
 

3 minutes ago, Franz007 said:

Again: facts. So if you still don’t understand the reason that would make somene prefer such a sim and use it, I cannot help you anymore. And I would also appreciate if you let the person I answered to react and not jumping into it (half out-of-topic).

Again: opinions (as to why certain features are better or not). Keep telling yourself and trying to broadcast here whatever it is you want to make yourself feel better about the survey 🙂. You seem to be eager to keep talking about XP in this thread, so you keep doing you. I created this thread to discuss the MSFS aspects of the survey results.

Sad that you can't help me any more I guess, but thanks as always for trying! This is a discussion forum, you posted, I replied, etc etc. If all this triggers you then perhaps best to read and/or ignore? If you're not a mod then I'd appreciate it if you could not tell me when/where/how I post.
 

1 minute ago, lwt1971 said:

Again: opinions (as to why certain features are better or not)

A missing feature can hardly be same or better than one available. But nice try.

Your reaction is clearly the one of a troll. And you were the one here hijacking this thread with endless out-of-topic answers, when i simply explained the questionning of a user. You know exactly that starting such a debate will make the topic getting closed fast. Playing the victim now is very low-level.