20 minutes ago, turbomax said:

why not just improve on those aspects the community has asked for the most - for several years. I don't remember career mode was among them.

" the ‘other sim’ since it excels so much and is more realistic in all aspects…?"

who exactly said that in this whole thread?

The career mode has been something high on the list by the gaming communety, that also is a huge part of our communety wether we like it or not… And its been on my wishlist for a decade:). So Im super excited:)

Nobody said that, but it was just a remark for, whenever someone bring up that MSFS is becoming arcade and just cater for the xbox crowd…

Edited June 13, 20242 yr by Kaboki

1 minute ago, Kaboki said:

The career mode has been something high on the list by the gaming communety, that also is a huge part if our communety wether we like it or not… And its been on my wishlist for a decade:). So Im super excited:)

Nobody said that, but it was just a remark for, whenever someone bring up that MSFS is becoming arcade and just cater for the xbox crowd…

Same here, looking forward to it. Finally, they dumped the current mission engine completely. So there is hope that they learned from this and designed something that  is nicely embedded into the online system and offers purpose to flights.

MSFS is like supporting your favourite football team; everyone wants the team to do well, but not everyone agrees on the line up ahead of the big match, debates happen over the tactics of the manager, arguments rage about the own goal in the 95th minute, there's delight at the big win. 

Ultimately we all feel differently about MSFS in our own unique ways, which makes it special.

I look at it this way:

More than a decade after FSX was released, there were and probably still are daily complaints about this or that, and this was a sim that had been cumulatively improved through various updates for literally decades.

Still not good enough.

Xplane: The exact same thing; decades of development, updates up the wazoo.... still not good enough.

And now MSFS: Going on 5 years in, and you guessed it: not good enough.

15 years from now, it still wont be good enough.

I can't speak for others, but at a certain point I just glance at the controversy of the week, then go have fun flying.

16 minutes ago, urthgental said:

Seth specifically mentioned in a dev Q&A that there are limits on cloud density as this heavily impacts the way the rendering engine computes lightning and casts shadows.

Seb said that, and still DCS had these clouds for several years and before RTX 4090:

p.s. you mean Seb, not Seth and lighting, not lightning

 

5 minutes ago, HiFlyer said:

I can't speak for others, but at a certain point I just glance at the controversy of the week, then go have fun flying.

both can be fun, the difference: MSFS in VR looks better.

Edited June 13, 20242 yr by turbomax

40 minutes ago, turbomax said:

Seb said that, and still DCS had these clouds for several years and before RTX 4090:

p.s. you mean Seb, not Seth and lighting, not lightning

 

We got these clouds in DCS in 2021, approximately 1 year after we had volumetric clouds in MSFS… Also, in DCS, we have no live weather and just a small map, not injecting weather on a global scale and rendering of the whole planet. Dunno, its like comparing apples and oranges. 
 

Actually, I would love DCS, with the weather and world engine of MSFS, that would be my dream combat sim…

Edited June 13, 20242 yr by Kaboki

I think a major issue with the MSFS community is that there's this misconception that asking for more is the same as calling the sim bad. It's a false equivalency.

MSFS has 250 developers. We can ask for more cloud and precipitation types without having to fight an uphill battle amongst our own fellow simmers.

20 minutes ago, Kaboki said:

We got these clouds in DCS in 2021, approximately 1 year after we had volumetric clouds in MSFS… Also, in DCS, we have no live weather and just a small map, not injecting weather on a global scale and rendering of the whole planet. Dunno, its like comparing apples and oranges. 
 

Actually, I would love DCS, with the weather and world engine of MSFS, that would be my dream combat sim…

No doubt, DCS fantasy is to have all my favorite US air force bases mapped out. From San Antonio to Elgin and the gulf coast for starters. 

1 minute ago, WestAir said:

MSFS has 250 developers. We can ask for more cloud and precipitation types without having to fight an uphill battle amongst our own fellow simmers.

I'm pretty sure of the 250 developers at least some are hyperaware of just how much most users want to see a substantial improvement in the quality of cloud types and weather depiction.  They get it from visiting forums it's impossible to to miss.  I think it's mostly a question of how much more they can get out of the current rendering engine w/o breaking the performance bank.  Is it impossible to improve 3D pixel density to help facilitate making more distinct cloud morphologies a reality for those w/ the hardware to handle it?  The only thing I can think of is that voxel density is locked such that there is no way to make it more dense for those w/ better hardware w/o putting that demand on their minimum standard hardware, including Xbox.  This may be why we see such little progress toward that end.  I had proposed something like DynamicLOD for clouds, such that one can dial in improved resolution at close range, diminishing the farther away clouds are as a means to improving the appearance of clouds at close range where they currently are very poor, low resolution, blurry to some degree.  Perhaps we'll see a serious jump in 2028 when next gen Xbox debuts which MS is touting apparently as the "largest technological leap ever seen in a hardware generation..."

 

Nobody can be disappointed by anything in MSFS 2024. You guys just saw a preliminary video that showed what you maybe will get. This was not from the product, you will own and which will be called MSFS2024.

Edited June 13, 20242 yr by fsiscool

3 hours ago, Tuskin38 said:

don't spam the post button if your post doesn't go through right away, refresh the page and check.

I don't know if this works in FireFox or Edge, but in Chrome if you middle mouse click the refresh button it will open the same page in a new tab, so you can see if your post went through or not.

That should help in preventing accidental multi-posts.

It works in Firefox! (I never knew about this handy feature before)...

I would love to see the clouds whipping past the wings and obscure part of the wing as we descend into it.

https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxfqPd24ITpijb8l_qz7Npq-xDcyT5CTL0?si=I3YdpU6pc0EUZ6oT

 

2 hours ago, WestAir said:

I think a major issue with the MSFS community is that there's this misconception that asking for more is the same as calling the sim bad. It's a false equivalency.

MSFS has 250 developers. We can ask for more cloud and precipitation types without having to fight an uphill battle amongst our own fellow simmers.

Absolutely.. more can be asked for, and everything can be criticized and nitpicked, as that occurs here every day 🙂 Someone can come along and say well the sim doesn't simulate cirrocumulus exactly how they want it (or at all) and therefore it's a deal breaker and the sim sucks completely, etc etc 🙂 And that'd be perfectly fine course.

 

Where a lot of pushback comes is when people just start throwing out wild hyperbole or misinformation and claim stuff for which there is absolutely no evidence of. Examples include:

- I didn't see X or Y in this trailer, so the sim won't have it! (a 2 minute trailer meant for the Xbox games showcase event btw) 

- This trailer only showed aviation activities so omgeee they are totally only focusing on arcadey stuff and not core simulation! (despite how MS/Asobo have said clearly to the contrary, and shown even at last year's FS Expo, and despite these aviation activities being IRL activities)

- Omgeee MS and Asobo have totally caved to the Xbox kids!!

- They are reducing the fidelity of the sim!

- OMG they have not addressed my pet issue X yet so therefore everything (or most things) they say is lies!

 

These are just a sampling of the gems. What is ironic is that exactly *because* they have 250+ developers they are able to focus on multiple areas , and can walk and chew gum at the same time and also do whatever else to the gum at the same time hehe. Most of the MSFS community who transitioned over from legacy sims (with much smaller teams) still have that legacy mindset and just can't get their head around this.

They obviously won't get to address all what we want addressed in the core sim, but as long as MSFS 2024 is a superset of 2020 with fixes + improvements along with new features, what's really wrong then? (there is no way they will intentionally reduce fidelity or remove stuff, especially because they plan to support all add-ons with zero to minimal changes). We can all look at the delta between 2024 and 2020 and then decide if it's worth the price and move. Otherwise we also get to keep using 2020. 

 

Edited June 13, 20242 yr by lwt1971

Taken from Microsoft own weather video from 2020:

32 layers with density, shape, fuzziness

Full volumetric visible from any angle

Updraft, dissolution, formation

Native support of all cloud types

Why were we presented video advertising this when it is far from what is actually represented; especially the native support of all cloud types. If that was the case, why do we only ever see cumulous types or some variation of cumulous?