8 hours ago, CO2Neutral said:

To each his or her own, I'm perfectly happy flying around but as posted, weather depiction is not accurate and seems have no real impact on my flight planning nor enroute ... I never divert because I know I can land it in any condition presented in MSFS in any aircraft.  Fuel planning is almost useless without proper weather depiction especially when most aircraft try to hop on a jet stream ... just not simulated at all in MSFS.

For some, shooting things provides the "purpose", for others like myself, flight is a challenge WHEN the environment is simulated enough to make it a challenge ... right now MSFS just doesn't do that for me ... and sadly I doubt it will ever do just because I don't think the majority of users are interested in a high level of simulated fidelity ... I'm forever a niche user looking for a massive investment in development of a flight simulator that does it all and does it well so that I do feel challenged ... catch-22 ... there will never be a large enough user base to support the level of development needed to make flight realistic and a challenge.

So for me "purpose" is a realistic simulation of every aspect of flight from weather to ATC to ground surface and sadly that doesn't really exist to any degree where it would impact my flight or decisions during a flight.  But with that said, shooting and blowing things up is probably a much easier task to simulation for Asobo and my hunch is we'll see something like that in future -- anyone else remember Microsoft Combat Simulator 1 and 2 and 3 based on the same engine?

 

Well, while I agree with your definition of the flight simulator we would love to have, I thing that regarding weather modelling MFS is not that bad, and could get even better with an open SDK allowing for those who know how's done to do their magic...

I can't, all being taken into consideration, find a better weather model among any of the desktop flight simulators I have ever used, including some that do go deeper in modelling, for instance, the Jetstream constellations and their average yearly variation (Aerowinx PSX). And indeed Jetstream wind does get fed into MSFS by the Meteoblue feed, and together with X-Plane 12 and PSX, and in some aspects Airlinetools A32x, MSFS even models geopotencial height variation (non-standard only pressure gradient) due to high / low temperature!

Even visibility, with the limitations that MSFS still has, having to base it in an "aerosol" concept, does work rather acceptably, and some special weather injection tools could use it even more effectively...

9 hours ago, CO2Neutral said:

To each his or her own, I'm perfectly happy flying around but as posted, weather depiction is not accurate and seems have no real impact on my flight planning nor enroute ... I never divert because I know I can land it in any condition presented in MSFS in any aircraft.  Fuel planning is almost useless without proper weather depiction especially when most aircraft try to hop on a jet stream ... just not simulated at all in MSFS.

For some, shooting things provides the "purpose", for others like myself, flight is a challenge WHEN the environment is simulated enough to make it a challenge ... right now MSFS just doesn't do that for me ... and sadly I doubt it will ever do just because I don't think the majority of users are interested in a high level of simulated fidelity ... I'm forever a niche user looking for a massive investment in development of a flight simulator that does it all and does it well so that I do feel challenged ... catch-22 ... there will never be a large enough user base to support the level of development needed to make flight realistic and a challenge.

So for me "purpose" is a realistic simulation of every aspect of flight from weather to ATC to ground surface and sadly that doesn't really exist to any degree where it would impact my flight or decisions during a flight.  But with that said, shooting and blowing things up is probably a much easier task to simulation for Asobo and my hunch is we'll see something like that in future -- anyone else remember Microsoft Combat Simulator 1 and 2 and 3 based on the same engine?

 

Yep!

Imho the development of Live Weather largely reflects the content of the article: at the beginning it was said "we're making a sim for simmers", but with SU5 (XBox compatibility) it became clear in which direction it was going. SU7 (METAR synthesis) then served all those for whom weather that looked somewhat similar to the report was enough. We were back in the Olden Days, so to speak, with clouds that correspond surprisingly closely to the satellite image in terms of coverage, but largely lack meteorological precision due to their cumulus-heavy nature. Performance considerations, especially with regards to the weaker consoles, probably lead to a significant limitation in the layers shown, so that, for example, there is no plausible distinction between warm- and cold fronts in the sim.

Since then, aircraft, scenery and the basic simulator have been constantly improved and further features (e.g. Dune) added.
We fly around with airliners whose simulation depth is hardly inferior to the original, if it weren't for the completely unrealistic lack of a decent weather radar (my opinion. I know the discussion, so no need for it here), which would make most flights impossible in reality.

In the early days, Jorg Neumann said "Weather is one of those things. It’s where planes live, it’s got to be awesome. We will get it as good as you can get it. That is really the goal", only to never talk about the further development of the weather again.
I can only assume that the technically possible implementation of all missing or inadequate weather aspects would be unattractive from a cost perspective, which would be another parallel to the content of the article.
For me, avoiding flying into bad weather ("dodging clouds") would be equivalent to hitting an opponent in a shooting game, but I learned that most Simmers unfortunately don't seem to be interested in creating the most realistic atmosphere possible. A common standpoint can also be found in this thread: "It's not perfect, but it's better than the competition and sufficient for me." With that widespread attitude, there's no incentive for the developers and no progress is to be expected.

That's why I also think that content will continue to have absolute priority. Not a bad thing per se, but a missed opportunity in terms of simulation depth. I'd be happy to be surprised if MSFS2024 should be a major improvement in atmospheric simulation beyond the representation of tornadoes, which I consider to be more on the content side of things.

I fail to see what that article has to do with MSFS?  The video game industry as a whole is going through some major turmoil, basically companies investing heavily in live service games that nobody wants, causing a lot of very high end "flops".  Games that cost years and tons of money to make that don't even come close to getting their money back. 

Microsoft made that big (and controversial) purchase of Activision/Blizzard, and then were forced to fire some staff (around 8%).  That's the kind of thing Phil is talking about. 

Even with the massive growth of MSFS, it is still a niche in that big pond.  Phil is talking about games like Call of Duty, not MSFS.  There have been tons of layoffs in those studios. 

11 hours ago, DD_Arthur said:

Er…um…🤔

Er… um… indeed.

I distinctly remember an interview of Lionel Fuentes where he was grinning recalling the challenge of cramming the code into the Xbox S at the time of SU5.  Such a coincidence that the cloud degradation came at the same time knowing that I understand that the team wants one code for all.

METAR, if my memory serves me well, are airport areas only.

 

15 hours ago, CO2Neutral said:

To each his or her own, I'm perfectly happy flying around but as posted, weather depiction is not accurate and seems have no real impact on my flight planning nor enroute ... I never divert because I know I can land it in any condition presented in MSFS in any aircraft.  Fuel planning is almost useless without proper weather depiction especially when most aircraft try to hop on a jet stream ... just not simulated at all in MSFS

I agree that a better weather depiction would be welcome even if FS20 is, in my opinion, better than any of its predecessors I had the joy to fly.

The weather irself but also the information system about the weather (planning stage and ingame) where there is room for improvement. Weather is not only about eye candy , it is also about consequences, decisions as you rightly say. 

I am optimistic, it may come in futures updates or versions. I am no programmer but it seems to me that the complexity of programming an air combat simulator is far superior than improving the weather engine 😉.

Edited April 1, 20242 yr by Dominique_K

It seems to me having turbulence and wind effects in clouds and dense weather is highly doable--right now it's just absent.  What's to prevent Asobo from adding physic effects?  We understand with greatly enhanced multithreading there will be more resources available to do just that.  I hope we do see some of that added it doesn't seem all that difficult, at least to do more of it than essentially none.

"Purpose" in desktop simming is a real issue because most of all--there is absolutely no downside, no skin in the game, no consequences for screwing up your behavior as a pilot, and that is the major difference between this activity and flying real planes in real life where everything matters.  I don't like "flying in circles" aka flying around it's not as boring in MSFS as it was in FSX/P3D because the graphic environment is so rich, even atmospherics, despite the lack of physic effects in the latter, but still....So what I did in FSX/P3D was add purpose thru scoring my piloting prowess, and used FSCaptain.  Now I use both A Pilot's Life for its scoring and RW routing, but much more challenging is using Self Loading Cargo whose scoring feature is much deeper and it's much more than that and is a truly remarkable piece of work.   This adds major purpose and meaning and keeps me attentive throughout the flight from preboarding to deboarding.  Here's a quick look at recent flights:

Purpose, this is what lacks in all flight sims forever and also keeps MSFS shutdown since many months. I am simming since FS5.1, have a PPL. But still, MS just feels dead.
I hope MSFS2024 brings back purpose to get me back flying the sim.

i know many people here do not want something like FSEconomy or a pilot’s life in the Sim. But a global, online global career mode by Asobo with reward and recognition would be really motivational for me (hopefully). If this is then called gamification and Microsoft style, so be it.

 

 

19 hours ago, Cognita said:

If I really wanted that I would save my money and buy time on a proper commercial simulator.

You wouldn't find it in a commercial simulator either ... I got that opportunity and it was very much the same as what we have now with the exception of every system implementation (almost) and more variety in failure simulation ... in most cases it seems commercial simulators are about procedures/checklists and working emergencies and keeping pilot's trained on new equipment.  Perhaps military use simulators are more full coverage, air, land, sea.

I believe we have the processing power to accomplish this at "affordable" costs for those of us very "serious" (don't take that the wrong way) about our flight simulation.  But the development cost to accomplish is why I may never see it in my lifetime.  Maybe the Elon Musk's of the world will spend the money on such development adventures rather than on meaningless social media development ... I'm sure $44Billion would be enough for the type of flight simulator I'd like to see 🙂 (good tax write-off)  ... but instead we got an endless hate exchange tool called X (aka Twitter).

I know some might think just go buy a real aircraft and keep it maintained, certified, stored, fuel, and licensed as a cheaper alternative ... unfortunately cost of aircraft ownership is MUCH higher (unless you fly unlicensed and in experimental aircraft).

Edited April 1, 20242 yr by CO2Neutral

2 hours ago, CO2Neutral said:

You wouldn't find it in a commercial simulator either ... I got that opportunity and it was very much the same

 

2 hours ago, CO2Neutral said:

I'm sure $44Billion would be enough for the type of flight simulator I'd like to see 🙂 (good tax write-off) 

2 hours ago, CO2Neutral said:

I know some might think just go buy a real aircraft and keep it maintained, certified, stored, fuel, and licensed as a cheaper alternative ... unfortunately cost of aircraft ownership is MUCH higher (unless you fly unlicensed and in experimental aircraft).

Assuming there's $44 Billion to invest... I'm wondering how the project requirements are going to be written up to develop an idealized flight simulator. My specs would include teeny weeny relatively trivial requests which would simply include...realistic windshield wipers, pilot-controlled lighting, intelligent ramp crew, getting rid of dark lines on water to start with... and maybe also availability of a Combat MSFS add-on, expansion, fork or whatever one wants to call it. lol   

8 hours ago, Noel said:

I don't like "flying in circles" aka flying around it's not as boring in MSFS as it was in FSX/P3D

@Noel Regarding your comment about how it was boring in FSX/P3D, this might have helped. Check this vomit-inducing video in P3D... 

These Turbulent Times - Prepar3D (youtube.com)

11 hours ago, Noel said:

seems to me having turbulence and wind effects in clouds and dense weather is highly doable--right now it's just absent.  What's to prevent Asobo from adding physic effects? 

Last Q&A they said they’re working on fixing that 

On 3/31/2024 at 11:01 PM, CO2Neutral said:

To each his or her own, I'm perfectly happy flying around but as posted, weather depiction is not accurate and seems have no real impact on my flight planning nor enroute ... I never divert because I know I can land it in any condition presented in MSFS in any aircraft.  Fuel planning is almost useless without proper weather depiction especially when most aircraft try to hop on a jet stream ... just not simulated at all in MSFS.

You are so right. Pre SU5 I started to feel MSFS was going in the right direction with the weather.  It was still too 'on rails' so landing was never a challenge.  Even now,  one can take off and land in whatever direction you wish, regardless what the winds are doing.  Recent additions like 'study' level aircraft, AI ATC and real traffic with AIG/PSXT can give a reasonable sensation of being in a procedural world, but the weather remains poor.

19 hours ago, Tom_L said:

only to never talk about the further development of the weather again.

You haven't been paying attention

4 hours ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

You are so right. Pre SU5 I started to feel MSFS was going in the right direction with the weather.  It was still too 'on rails' so landing was never a challenge.  Even now,  one can take off and land in whatever direction you wish, regardless what the winds are doing.  Recent additions like 'study' level aircraft, AI ATC and real traffic with AIG/PSXT can give a reasonable sensation of being in a procedural world, but the weather remains poor.

Exactly

"study' level aircraft with poor weather" .

There is nothing more absurd than that.

 

4 hours ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

You are so right. Pre SU5 I started to feel MSFS was going in the right direction with the weather.  It was still too 'on rails' so landing was never a challenge.  Even now,  one can take off and land in whatever direction you wish, regardless what the winds are doing.  Recent additions like 'study' level aircraft, AI ATC and real traffic with AIG/PSXT can give a reasonable sensation of being in a procedural world, but the weather remains poor.

Savage cub landing with 15 knots crosswind component says.... Hmmm!

Well that does it. I'm deleting MSFS and returning to Angry Birds