New MSFS 2024 Trailer - Release date: 11/19/2024

[F737MAX]

48 minutes ago, rjquick said:

The developers may very well say (not publicly perhaps) that 90% of their new users are most interested in watching baggage loaders and AI passengers boarding a plane and could care less about a cold and dark startup. So, that is who we are going to develop for.

MS has incurred expense on bringing the Working Title team quasi in-house for improvements to the CJ4, to multiple Garmin units and support with AAUs.

They've also have contracted out development of aircraft to give us the most detailed default ones ever seen in a flight sim.

Following the less than stellar launch version experience of MSFS2020, there has been acknowledgement and work delivered towards improving the physics in the sim.

If MS wanted to give us an arcade-y, game-y, GTA V style version of flying, we wouldn't have all these improvements to realism.

Development of the new sim is not a binary choice between the wants and needs of gamers vs those of flight simmers. Both groups are being attended to simultaneously, as demonstrated by the large increase in the headcount of developers working on MSFS.

Edited June 11 by F737MAX

[urthgental]

This is a very interesting thread, the best for a while in this forum.

I think the vision for MSFS now becomes fully apparent. And this transformation can be seen with excitement or with fear. Both is valid.

What started with a tech demo was sold at MS with a vision to reach everybody who is interested in the sensation of aviation and the wonders of the world. This was their communication from the beginning and is more valid now than ever. Nobody would do such an investment for a few thousand enthusiasts.

But there is a fine line not to loose those who believe  being the only one that could land this thing as a passenger if both pilots get an simultaneous heart attack.  Those will be the niche in MSFS but the most important one. Without thiose MSFS will ultimately fail, because they set the requirements everybody else is benefiting from. Nobody will be interested in this anymore if MSFS does not represent aviation in all its realism and professionalism. I do not expect this to turn into a game, and I am excited about the future of MSFS. I hope it will be successful for a long time. And once this journey is over, I go back into the niche where I came from.

[scotchegg]

37 minutes ago, F737MAX said:

MS has incurred expense on bringing the Working Title team quasi in-house for improvements to the CJ4, to multiple Garmin units and support with AAUs.

They've also have contracted out development of aircraft to give us the most detailed default ones ever seen in a flight sim.

Yeah, they’ve made some pretty clever choices on where to outsource and where to do / bring in-house.

Obviously can’t please all the people all the time, but we’re lucky to have someone as smart, dedicated and energetic as Jorg at the helm.

[rjquick]

1 hour ago, scotchegg said:

I think you have a very selective memory of what you said yourself. You clearly did the standard ‘serious simmer’ thing of mocking people that might be interested in the missions shown in the XBOX SHOWCASE, in your first post in the thread, quite dripping with spleen:

The irritation is at the attitude of some ‘serious simmers’ believing their use case is the only legitimate one for desktop flight simulation, as they tap on their keyboards over their inexpertly calibrated controls and non FAA-approved desktop sims. Wanting higher fidelity for your use case is not the problem. Sneering at others when they get higher fidelity / more options in their use case and then changing your tone when you’re called out on it, may be more of a problem.

I was the first kid on the block with the 'pong' game hooked into our TV. I have loved arcade games and video games all my life and still do. I completely understand and I've posted that several times. I also have loved Flight Simulator since FS3. What has set FS apart is that its core users were interested in aviation along with computers and graphics simulation. The improvements of the visual world have been astounding and appreciated. Always at the forefront was a dedication to improving the core flight simulation (the planes, avionics, instruments, ground equipment etc.). 'As Real As It Gets' used to be the tagline. Fantasy gaming were left to others.

There have been plenty of video games out there where you could fly planes. I recall Jane's Navy Fighters where you could launch off a carrier in an F14 and go on missions and destroy targets and then go back and land on the carrier. Great fun, but the aircraft systems were nothing like FS. DCS now does a great job in that line.

So, I have nothing against the 'gamer' crowd as I am part of it.

What I believe has happened is that people that like traditional gaming saw the promotions for FS2020 and tried it out. They liked the graphical part of it, but found they were not really interested in the aviation part of it and have no interest in any real learning about operating an aircraft. It was boring as many things that someone is not interested in tend to do. Like piano lessons when you like to listen to music, but have no interest in playing it. They would, however, like to have the Flight Simulator 'world' to be used in a more gaming fashion. Now, we are in some sort of fusion mode.

My post was stating that the gaming ('arcade'. Yes. That very evil word lol) force of users have won and that is now the future direction of the franchise. I still think that is the case. I can certainly be wrong. I can certainly be right and most everyone will be happy about it. So be it.

If the franchise doesn't make money, then it will go away. So, they will do what they have to do. If the old, boomer, 'Serious Simmers' are down to a dwindling few, then what is the point of catering to them?

Edited June 11 by rjquick
Grammar correction.

[Sweetd31]

1 hour ago, rjquick said:

There are still issues with basic navigation things like ILS approaches and VASI lighting as you near the runway that actually worked better in FSX and even before that

FSX has its issues with IlS as well, depends on the airport and runway. At Nellis the glideslope is nor at the correct altitude, at hobby (houston) one runway that claims to have an ils, the glideslope is non existent, and flying out of dfw the atc will frequently smoke a doobie and forget i exist during IFR. Same thing happened approaching JFK from New jersey. So it depends

[scotchegg]

13 minutes ago, rjquick said:

If the franchise doesn't make money, then it will go away. So, they will do what they have to do. If the old, boomer, 'Serious Simmers' are down to a dwindling few, then what is the point of catering to them?

They’re not, as has been patiently laid out for you several times in this thread. 

Serious investment has been made in avionics / fm / weather and in most areas improvement over previous MS mechanics has been significant.

That your takeaway from a short trailer at an XBOX SHOWCASE (caps intentional) is that your use case and all who prefer it are under threat is a notion patient explanation seems unlikely to disabuse you of.

If I were you I’d wait until the FSExpo presentation and see how much of your needs are likely to be met in 2024.

[Andrew2448]

[cyril972]

2 hours ago, rjquick said:

The answer is that I think you have it backwards. Did you notice how you mocked 'Serious Simmers'? I have no issue at all with people wanting those 'other aspects' or improvements with the world we're flying in. I understand it completely. The anger seems to be at people that want the fidelity of the simulator preserved, especially where it has slipped. There are still issues with basic navigation things like ILS approaches and VASI lighting as you near the runway that actually worked better in FSX and even before that. I can only guess that the developers have little interest in fixing these things because they are never improved. So, when you see they are working on showing creepy AI passengers walking towards the airplane, I don't think it is out of line to think that they may have lost the plot or, perhaps, changed the plot. Hopefully, much of that will be corrected '24. Fingers crossed. Some of their statements are encouraging. We'll see.

The developers may very well say (not publicly perhaps) that 90% of their new users are most interested in watching baggage loaders and AI passengers boarding a plane and could care less about a cold and dark startup. So, that is who we are going to develop for.

I'll bet there are a lot of users that would love to go through the flight process as starting from inside the passenger terminal walking out to the plane and sit in seat 2A as the AI pilots fly the plane to the destination. Maybe have the AI flight attendant bring them lunch and then they de-board into the airport terminal and then out to the street. I can dig it, but that is a different thing. Can it all exist under one roof? IDK.

Imagine you had a favorite ice cream parlor that sold great ice cream. The menu consisted of the different flavors. Time goes by and people complain that they don't sell salads. So they start selling them and then the list goes on and on of other things they should sell and they accommodate. Eventually the menu contains all kinds of things and the ice cream part is relegated to some fine print in lower right corner. You see an ad for the ice cream parlor (still called that) and the ad has little to do with ice cream. When asked about it, the owners say they are still dedicated to ice cream. Finally, the owners announce that they will no longer be selling ice cream as there is little interest in it. The good news is that it will still be called an ice cream parlor and that they will be introducing a new hamburger that contains no meat. Sales are great.

Let's do a small recap:

- Working Title is elevating default avionics to unprecedented levels (G100, G3000, G5000 and G3X), they are also producing study-level planes like the SR22, the CJ4, and the Citation Longitude. They are also leveraging their expertise to completely revamp navigation in the new sim. Their is strong evidence they are curently working on the Honeywell Epic avionics for the PC12NGX we saw in the last MSFS2024 trailer
- Inibuild is bringing their well-known A310 from X-Plane to MSFS as a default plane and building a new, high-quality A320Neo V2 to replace the old one. It seems Inibuild is now in charge of all things Airbus-related in MSFS.
- Microsoft is incorporating the excellent study-level Flight FX Cirrus Visionjet G2 as a default plane in MSFS2024.
- Asobo is recruiting a well-known developer from IL2 to help improve flight dynamics in the new sim. Additionally, Asobo has released countless updates to enhance various aspects of MSFS2020. The latest addition in SU15 includes improved ground physics with parameters backported from MSFS2024, which will feature a completely revamped ground physics system. They are also seeking an ATC expert to revamp the ATC system.

There is so much more going on, but I'll stop here.

Do you really think all this work has been done just to dumb down MSFS2024? That idea is beyond ridiculous. Why would they invest so much in improving physics, avionics, and bringing default planes to study-level quality, purchase well-known excellent products to make them default, and pay Inibuild to develop all those planes, only to release MSFS2024 as an arcade platform? 

You don't seem to realize how nonsensical this is. Maybe you think Microsoft is foolish enough to pour all that money into improving MSFS2020 only to waste it in the next version of the sim. After all, Microsoft is such a new company—they surely don't know how business works, right?

I apologize if I come across as a bit rude for some AVSIM users, but this mantra really frustrates me.

Edited June 11 by cyril972

[F737MAX]

1 hour ago, urthgental said:

Nobody will be interested in this anymore if MSFS does not represent aviation in all its realism and professionalism.

Precisely.

54 minutes ago, rjquick said:

If the old, boomer, 'Serious Simmers' are down to a dwindling few, then what is the point of catering to them?

Two-fold:

1. They're being replaced by Gen X, Millennials and Gen Z, so the demand for 'serious flight simming' remains.

2. There's potentially more to MSFS than Xbox gamers, irregular users and serious flight simmers. On one of the development updates, a professional version of the sim is listed as 'under investigation'.

Given the value of contracts, I'm sure MS would love to get in on the commercial/professional scene.

Edited June 11 by F737MAX

[Sky_Pilot071]

Flight Simmers - Sheesh! 😇

sp

[ca_metal]

44 minutes ago, rjquick said:

If the franchise doesn't make money, then it will go away. So, they will do what they have to do. If the old, boomer, 'Serious Simmers' are down to a dwindling few, then what is the point of catering to them?

Their intention is to make the hobby grow. How? Making easier to get in, but also having space for more complex activities. This is why they invest on AI to help the newcomers with tutorials and assistencies. But they also partner with third parties like inibuilds, and hire groups like Working Title to improve the instruments and systems.

You can say they failed here and there, but at least they are listening and progressing. The Developer Streams, roadmaps and public lists (whishlists and buglists)  proven that. They are always listening and taking into account all opinions, but it's not always possible to deliver things fast. Force Majeure events can delay the development a lot (pandemic, bad weather etc). Some of the World Updates, as an example, were delayed because of bad weather, governments taking more time than expected to authorize them etc.

All in all, I think most people are happy with the present and future of the franchise. But of course, it won't please everyone.

[rjquick]

3 minutes ago, ca_metal said:

Their intention is to make the hobby grow. How? Making easier to get in, but also having space for more complex activities. This is why they invest on AI to help the newcomers with tutorials and assistencies. But they also partner with third parties like inibuilds, and hire groups like Working Title to improve the instruments and systems.

You can say they failed here and there, but at least they are listening and progressing. The Developer Streams, roadmaps and public lists (whishlists and buglists)  proven that. They are always listening and taking into account all opinions, but it's not always possible to deliver things fast. Force Majeure events can delay the development a lot (pandemic, bad weather etc). Some of the World Updates, as an example, were delayed because of bad weather, governments taking more time than expected to authorize them etc.

All in all, I think most people are happy with the present and future of the franchise. But of course, it won't please everyone.

Working Title, for certain, is a very shiny bright spot over the past few years. Nothing but respect for what they have done and are doing.

[espent]

1 hour ago, rjquick said:

If the franchise doesn't make money, then it will go away. So, they will do what they have to do. If the old, boomer, 'Serious Simmers' are down to a dwindling few, then what is the point of catering to them?

Are you saying that they are spending too much money? Should they made a cheaper simulator instead? I am not sure I understand this. 
For us that have bought into this it is looking like we will get at least 10 fun years out of this - probably much more if they keep it interesting and innovative. 
 

I would never trade that for a worse sim even if it was around for longer. 

[lwt1971]

1 hour ago, Andrew2448 said:

Nice thanks for the heads up, was wondering when they'll add themselves to the schedule. Per https://flightsimexpo.com/schedule that looks to be 6-7pm EDT (0100 Z) on Sat June 22.

Hopefully a follow-on to the kind of details they gave at last year's expo. I imagine they'll be doing various interviews like last year too with helisimmer, msfsaddons, fselite, etc which hopefully is another opportunity to give us details or tidbits 🙂 
 

Edited June 12 by lwt1971

[rjquick]

12 minutes ago, espent said:

Are you saying that they are spending too much money? Should they made a cheaper simulator instead? I am not sure I understand this. 
For us that have bought into this it is looking like we will get at least 10 fun years out of this - probably much more if they keep it interesting and innovative. 
 

I would never trade that for a worse sim even if it was around for longer. 

No. I think they are spending money on what the majority of users want. Which is a good thing overall. My concerns may or may not turn out to be valid. I hope not. Flight Simulator will be fine either way. It just may evolve into something I'm not as interested in, which doesn't matter in the overall scheme of things.

Edited June 12 by rjquick