3 hours ago, RobJC said:

But you can’t have it both ways. Either the alpha software being tested is not representative of the underlying code, or it is. If it isn’t then the value of the test is suspect. If it is, then Houston, we have a problem. 

Kinda backed into a corner. Hopefully it’s the former rather than the later lol. 

The drama in this place is quite astonishing, and I am talking about both sides of the argument here.

5 hours ago, fsxmissionguy said:

All ... I am posting this topic to allow for those who are alpha testing Flight Simulator 2024 to weigh in.

What are they meant to 'weigh in' with? The fact that it's a short-run server stress test alpha on a build that is probably 6+ months out of date, meaning it has zero bearing or parity with the main branch build, tells us exactly nothing about the current internal state of the simulator. So it's a fishing expedition for kneejerk reactions from people who don't even understand what they are testing, as a call to delay it? Am I getting that right?

I have no idea if 2024 is ready or not but I will say that some on here really don’t seem to remember the launch of 2020.  2020 was not even close to being what it is today at launch and I would argue was not even really a sim that was close to being ready when it launched.  It was so bad that I basically stopped playing flight simulator for over a year because the sim was not enjoyable for me.  There in lies the pessimist approach that is justified around 2024.  For those expecting 2024 to just take off right from where 2020 left off with full compatible everything and a pretty flawless sim as 2020 is now are bound to be disappointed in 2024 at the start.  I suspect that 2024 will not be as bad at launch as 2020 was but it’s without a doubt that those wanting 2024 to basically be 2020 on day one with better graphics and more content are going to need to recalibrate.  It’s almost certainly going to be filled with a lot of bugs that the community will discover very quickly and ASOBO will once again take the approach they did with 2020.  History almost always repeats itself.

4 minutes ago, Sethos said:

Am I getting that right?

Absolutely - spot on!

15 minutes ago, jspilot said:

I have no idea if 2024 is ready or not but I will say that some on here really don’t seem to remember the launch of 2020.  2020 was not even close to being what it is today at launch and I would argue was not even really a sim that was close to being ready when it launched.  It was so bad that I basically stopped playing flight simulator for over a year because the sim was not enjoyable for me.  There in lies the pessimist approach that is justified around 2024.  For those expecting 2024 to just take off right from where 2020 left off with full compatible everything and a pretty flawless sim as 2020 is now are bound to be disappointed in 2024 at the start.  I suspect that 2024 will not be as bad at launch as 2020 was but it’s without a doubt that those wanting 2024 to basically be 2020 on day one with better graphics and more content are going to need to recalibrate.  It’s almost certainly going to be filled with a lot of bugs that the community will discover very quickly and ASOBO will once again take the approach they did with 2020.  History almost always repeats itself.

This is incredibly subjective, and arguably extremely hyperbolic. 

MSFS 2020 did not launch as perfect software (no software does), but it was already an extremely accomplished simulator that millions enjoyed right at launch, without any update on top of it. 

The fact that you were not satisfied and turned off for a whole year is a very personal point of view, but also the point of view of a vastly outnumbered minority (otherwise it wouldn't have been as successful as it has been).

Hence, saying that it "justifies" the pessimist approach around 2024 is very, very debatable.

I remember very well the launch of MSFS 2020. My memory isn't in any way impaired. I also remember just as well that the first months were plenty enjoyable. Were there issues? Sure. Did they prevent me from enjoying the sim? Not one bit, and I'm very confident the vast majority of users will match this opinion. 

But this thread doesn't represent a "pessimist approach" anyway. It's clear-cut (and not even thinly veiled. It's all out in the open and clear as day and pretty ridiculous) FUD.

Edited October 13, 20241 yr by Abriael

I see the point of the OP, and respect it.

I am so so so critic of MSFS in the flight dynamics and weather modelling areas and never used missions, or practically never in any of the previous versions, with the exception of my preferred ever version of MSFS - MS FLIGHT!

But! From what I am getting from this Alpha I am in for sure... Why? Because I have to accept the "future" in desktop flight simulation for masses is definitely in MSFS, and now particularly in 2024.

I am unable to use 2020 anymore... It's something to do with my way of being 🙂 So, looking fwd for November 19 😉

And... maybe one day we can taste a good mission developed by the OP, because ASOBO has given him, as well as to other valued developers, a better SDK !  This would be particularly important to me in the weather modelling area, where I would love seeing Active Sky finally being able to do it's MAGIC now in MSFS 2024...

 

4 hours ago, John Fields said:

I wish I was wrong, but I truly believe that the real beta testers will be those of us who buy MS24 on November 19th.

Regards

That has always been the case. 

- - - 

For anyone having doubts about MSFS 2024 : 

Keep on enjoying MSFS 2020 with all its working addons and just wait purchasing MSFS 2024 till you find that its good enough for your needs…

Edited October 13, 20241 yr by GSalden

I,m in no hurry to switch to MSFS2024, I got 2020 running great will wait until some of the developers planes work in 2024 like Fenix etc and bugs are ironed out.

Its guaranteed MSFS2024 will be buggy on release.

When MSFS2020 was released it was  full of bugs . I kept using P3D for the first 12 months before I retired it for good and started using MSFS2020

Edited October 13, 20241 yr by jason74

4 hours ago, ca_metal said:

They test an alpha without a clue on what they are seeing, they don't even read release notes. 

To make it even more complicated some people like the OP do not even have access to the alpha and yet claim the right to test it 🙂

Edited October 13, 20241 yr by DAD

The more I see of this sim, the more concerned I am getting.

7 hours ago, fsxmissionguy said:

The SDK was not ready. I have spent probably thousands of hours using the SDK for Flight Simulator 2020 to build airports and other content, but chose not to release any of that content, hoping that the SDK's shortcomings could be improved.

It's funny because other airport developers have released hundreds of them just fine with the tools that were given. 

I'm ignoring everything else about MSFS24 Technical Alpha as quite clearly you are another one that doesn't understand the plain English written in the description.

 

Edited October 13, 20241 yr by MarcG

I really don’t understand the negativity and paranoia with this technical alpha.
 

Considering the limitations they clearly articulated on this technical alpha, the signs are exceptionally positive. 

Edited October 13, 20241 yr by Suff1xed

I'm also testing the tech alpha of 2024 and, I'm positive. The performance gain I received on my system is phenomenal even though my system spec is high-end (Intel 13900k, 64 GB RAM, RTX 4090 OC). I'm using almost all settings based on preset Ultra but turned down terrain LOD and object LOD to 100. Framerate is set to 50% VSync which equals in my case to 30 fps and I'm not using Frame Generation. The result is really smooth and good, and my GPU is not hammered (which is also good for power usage). Whatever I do, it stays smooth and silk at 30 fps. Even the Aerosoft EDDF with Germany 2 photogrammetry enabled doesn't kill this (you can enable those when you copy over the right packages from MS2020).

Things that I appreciate the most:

• Performance / Smoothness in all situations after loading the flight
• Loading times
• Adaption of hardware profiles based on aircraft
  (this will reduce the need of external tools and therefore reduce the SimConnect load)

To all the stuff that is not working as expected, well it's a pre-release version. We do not know when this sim was branched out and prepared for this campaign. I'm pretty sure it's not reflection the latest on main branch and you see that a lot of stuff is missing. The vessels, for example, look funny somehow and too large etc. but I guess there are only a few ship models included right now, so mapping of those is not working as it should. Well, that will be sorted out for release. Another example: the hardware mappings are missing. Yeah, they will be there for release, you can be sure.

So, I guess let's not judge the sim before it's out. The team has a lot of stuff to do until then, but the fundamental technology behind seems to be an impressive step forward and that's what this tech alpha was all about for me to see.

Edited October 13, 20241 yr by AGuther

6 minutes ago, Suff1xed said:

I really don’t understand the negativity and paranoia with this technical alpha.
 

Considering the limitations they clearly articulated on this technical alpha, the signs are exceptionally positive. 

It's a fundamental lack of understanding what the Technical Alpha is, I've seen it here, Reddit, official forums, Facebook, absolutely everywhere. It's gamers thinking they're getting a final preview build when it's clearly written they aren't, but they struggle to understand that because they've pre-convinced themselves when signing up that that's what they'll get.

So when they get it they then get disappointed, because they held extremely high hopes and they were dashed. I've seen similar with other games & simulations in the past and present so it's nothing new and not specific to the flight sim community, it's a general misunderstanding really. 

 

Edited October 13, 20241 yr by MarcG