9 minutes ago, keight said:

It's your interpretation that my post has negativity. It was my opinion, and it might be wrong, just as yours might be. My point is that there are many major aspects still missing/unadvertised (some of which were promised for FS20, btw), and instead of implementing them, the focus has been on improving things that were already not too bad. If we're talking about aviation, two things are more important than anything else: meteo and aerodynamics. These have to be almost perfect before focusing on details like flowers and giraffes.

Meteo and aerodynamics ARE being improved in 2024!  Videos have been released demonstrating these two items you find important.  Again, you isolate flowers and giraffes from the overall ground environment, just to suit your own opinion.  In general, the surface in MSFS 2024 has been improved for the large number of simmers like me, who spend most time in the sim at low level.  The 4000 times more detailed terrain is A HUGE deal for users like myself.  This improvement indeed shows MSFS 2020 ground environment is lacking.

You want a realistic airliner environment, and for the most part you have it,  but to downplay the many simmers who enjoy the sim for other reasons is pretty selfish imho.

Edited September 22, 20241 yr by MrBitstFlyer

8 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

Pretty sure their leadership knows how to balance their resources and prioritize development efforts much more so than internet forum users cosplaying as MSFS project managers.

True. I already regret that I wrote 🙂

6 minutes ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

You want a realistic airliner environment, and for the most part you have it,  but to downplay the many simmers who enjoy the sim for other reasons is pretty selfish imho.

You are doing the same but the way round lol

just kidding, its an endless dispute

Another observation about ground handling and big airliners was from this post: https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/649230-msfs-2024-global-preview-mega-thread/?do=findComment&comment=5164230 (re: the coming  737 Max from Asobo/WT)

Real-world career pilot that flies jets...my thoughts.

Just watched CptCanada's video. I'd recommend it over about 95% of the other videos out there because he goes into far more depth about a lot of the questions people are asking. He's also a legit simmer who does things properly.

He says the flight model is far better and the ground handling is night and day. His landing in the MAX seemed to show that. It was really cool to see how the plane stayed dead center in the touchdown until the nosewheel touched and then there was a little wobble to correct with the rudder. That's exactly how it is in real life and shows that the ground handling is far more detailed and multiple points of contact are being moddelled.

My biggest grip with 2020 (and why I haven't played it in years) was the twitchiness of the flight model. Even a C182 has weight when you maneuver it. CptCanada said the new flight model delivers that, that it's far smoother, and the planes feel substantial when you turn.
 

Edited September 22, 20241 yr by lwt1971

34 minutes ago, keight said:

, and instead of implementing them, the focus has been on improving things that were already not too bad.

That isn't true at all.

Flight simmers: Asobo, your ground handling sucks. Fix it!!!!

Also flight simmers: Why'd you waste time on something as useless as ground physics/handling????

16 minutes ago, Krakin said:

Why'd you waste time on something as useless as ground physics/handling????

Uh who said that?

3 hours ago, keight said:

Must be I'm the only one who still doesn't understand why, instead of proper physics, meteo, clouds, RVR, icing, turbulence, CAT, windshear, radar, winds, terrain-based wx, HF freqs, GLS channels, native ACARS & CPDLC, native shared cockpit, ground crew, there are improved bushes and flowers in grass in a flight sim. Was the terrain poor in FS20? No. Was there room for improvement in other more fundamental aviation areas? Yes.

Sounds like you're primarily an airliner guy - and a Serious Simmer, at that.

All good, but I'd bet pretty good money that MS Asobo are following the usage metrics and other data to which they have data in order to define the sim's road map.

I'm also of the opinion that the so-called "Digital Twin" is a long term strategic goal of theres, not only for consumer, but also for commercial & gov't use.

All this will easily explain why their priorities are what they are.

The thing is, even with the areas of needed improvement that you've highlighted, AFAIK, MSFS is still the best at most of those, so smile, your glass is half full. 🙂

43 minutes ago, Krakin said:

Also flight simmers: Why'd you waste time on something as useless as ground physics/handling????

??? No one here said that.

1 hour ago, keight said:

You are doing the same but the way round lol

just kidding, its an endless dispute

No, I did not do the same.  I did not say anything about the op's requirements to be not needed or important.

6 minutes ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

No, I did not do the same.

"In general, the surface in MSFS 2024 has been improved for the large number of simmers like me, who spend most time in the sim at low level."

answering you with your own statement:

You want a realistic low level environment, and for the most part you have it,  but to downplay the many simmers who enjoy the sim for other reasons is pretty selfish imho.

 

10 minutes ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

I did not say anything about the op's requirements to be not needed or important.

So did not I.

1 hour ago, UrgentSiesta said:

Sounds like you're primarily an airliner guy - and a Serious Simmer, at that.

All good, but I'd bet pretty good money that MS Asobo are following the usage metrics and other data to which they have data in order to define the sim's road map.

I'm also of the opinion that the so-called "Digital Twin" is a long term strategic goal of theres, not only for consumer, but also for commercial & gov't use.

All this will easily explain why their priorities are what they are.

The thing is, even with the areas of needed improvement that you've highlighted, AFAIK, MSFS is still the best at most of those, so smile, your glass is half full. 🙂

I'm just taking the word Simulator too closely. And my glass is full. Cheers 🙂

22 minutes ago, keight said:

<snip>

So, first thing out of the way: I'm in the minority that agrees with you.

That said, I will play devils advocate that the teams working on Cows, Flowers, and higher ground resolution aren't the teams working on aerodynamics and weather. 2024 has a massive number of dev teams and they're all hitting different critical area's. We don't lose anything by team A working on flowers if team B is chugging along on edge of envelope flying.

As for the important stuff like roll clouds, weather radar, proper airport lighting, proper turbine simulation, inertia and edge of envelope flying, it's coming. The lead engineer of IL-2 Sturmovik, Andrey (An.Petrovich) Solomykin - arguably the best in the business alongside DCS - was hired to work full time on MSFS in September of 2022. Now I'm guessing all his work the past few years is being put together into 2024, so we're going to see real results there. I for one was waiting for the "Wheels have volume instead of being a volumeless point" change, and we're getting that, and it looks fantastic. The soft body physics on the aircraft is another bonus. It's very well done.

I'm pessimistic so I don't think we'll see true weather simulation until either the next iteration or the one after that, but I am seeing changes. Not as fast as I'd like, but they're happening. Eventually more fidelity will be all they have left to work on, after all.

We're in good hands.

Edited September 22, 20241 yr by WestAir

2 hours ago, Tuskin38 said:

??? No one here said that.

The guy complaining about the improved terrain inadvertently is. Asobo had to make an aspect of the sim look prettier in order to crank up the realism of the ground physics.

Edited September 22, 20241 yr by Krakin

4th vid starting at 19:49

Wow! I find this amazingly intriguing!

 

In short: They originally had in mind to develop the very detailed ground-surface, and apart from that (in two parallel work-streams) the reaction of the plane on that detailed ground-surface (grip, skidding, slipping, sliding etc.).

But they found that the more detailed the ground-surface became the less they had to simulate the reaction of the plane on that ground-surface!

It kinda just happened logically, like in real life!!