I couldn't care less whether the topic gets shut down or not. The problem is that the topic is utterly devoid of actual content to talk about, beyond vague pessimism.

"The alpha test is for feedback. I am not in the alpha test, but here is my feedback based on... unclarified things I watched on the internet. My feedback is that it's not ready - no further explanation needed."

Plus a bunch of unnecessary preamble to try and convince us of their bonafides as someone who spent THOUSANDS (!!!) of hours creating content using the SDK, but didn't release any of it. As one does.

Genuinely, what are we supposed to do with that?

Edited October 13, 20241 yr by Scottoest

10 hours ago, fsxmissionguy said:

The point of alpha testing is to receive feedback. This is my feedback. I don't have to be on the Alpha testing team to provide feedback based on what I see others doing.

It would be a huge mistake to release this software in under 1 month. It is not even close to ready.

No successful software is released 1 month after this sort of alpha testing.

You have not tested 2024? And say it's not ready not even close? 

You have not released any products for 2020 because it does not met your requirements. That's fine. 

Question is, what exactly do you expect and do those expectations ever meet your requirements and help reach your goals? It's questionable. 

And....why you give your feedback here? If "this is your" feedback, then you should write it at the support forum MSFS. 

I'm finding this a bit strange here. 

Who is able to define the word "ready"? 

Ready Person A is not necessary ready for person B.....and there we go.....

Thousands different PC configs, thousands different users, thousands of different methods to use flightsim with totally different goals....

Asobo did surely have acted and set up rules for release.....and the outcome is a minimum viable product which probably meets or nearly meets their rules for release.....

Minimum viable or Some papers in which the product requirements and state of art is written down. Minimal viable is a wide spread definition.....and every Softwarehouse defines this differently.....

It's useless to discus what you think is ready or not. 

What is important.....?

Test, use the software and open Tickets for every issue you find. Each issue....one ticket per person.

Write concerns down and especially give your background why this concerns are so important from your point of view. 

Everything else is burned useless energy....not helping a little tiny bit. 

And....use the primary forum.....

Avsim is not primary.....for Asobo or MS. 

Edited October 13, 20241 yr by mpo910

20 minutes ago, Scottoest said:

...Genuinely, what are we supposed to do with that?

Nothing, or whatever you want.  It is just opinions being expressed - you can take them or leave them.  For some it is best just not to read them as the mods have said.

My own thoughts are based on watching around 12 hours or so of footage from the pre-release invite and the live alpha-testing (probably a lot more if I count Two-Tone-Murphy's marathon live stream).

I can't actually judge if it is fit for release or not, that is ultimately down to MS / Asobo as we know, and I am getting it anyway on the 19th. 
I am concerned about a lot of the glitches I am seeing in those videos though, but if I don't like it on launch day, I can go back to 2020, no big issue.

11 hours ago, fsxmissionguy said:

All ... I am posting this topic to allow for those who are alpha testing Flight Simulator 2024 to weigh in. I was one of the mission developers for Microsoft Flight Simulator: Acceleration! and released many "home grown" missions for Microsoft Flight Simulator X. Probably the most "known" mission was called "Palm 90."

And while I have some background in developing content for Flight Simulator, I will say that I am not Alpha testing Flight Simulator 2024 and chose NOT to release any missions or other content for Flight Simulator 2020 because it was not ready. 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.

I have seen the preliminary content released by those invited by Asobo/Microsoft to the Grand Canyon, and some of the content so far created by the Alpha testing team.

It is not ready. And it would be a mistake for it to be released on November 19. That is my view. I hope others will chime in with their view.

Sounds to me , like you are the one that is "not ready" for MSFS.  

5 pages of discussion on making judgement calls on a product not even out yet. A product that is currently available has been clearly signalled as stripped down and not representative of a release candidate.

you can’t make this up. Avsim certainly has hits moments.

11 minutes ago, bobcat999 said:

I can't actually judge if it is fit for release or not, that is ultimately down to MS / Asobo as we know, and I am getting it anyway on the 19th. 
I am concerned about a lot of the glitches I am seeing in those videos though, but if I don't like it on launch day, I can go back to 2020, no big issue.

Good gravy heavens below, do you not understand the word ‘alpha’, or the phrase ‘solely for telemetry’?!

MS: ‘This is a tightly limited alpha solely for the purpose of gathering telemetry’

Avsim boomers: ‘Is this a release candidate to be used as a strong indication of the final product?’

36 minutes ago, bobcat999 said:

We live in a place with free speech.  Maybe they are against that.

Isn't both sides of the argument demonstrating free speech?  There is a huge amount of pessimism directed at the Tech Alpha despite the clear statements what it has been released for.  It is clear from previous videos released by MS that clearly shows the Tech alpha is not the full deal.

Part of replying to this pessimism is to try and calm the nerves of those who don't appear to understand the purpose of the Tech Alpha.  I was disappointed not to see many of the new features in the Alpha, but those features are not what are being tested.

This topic is completely useless and in Kontext of the MSFS2024 Alpha completely "OFF TOPIC" and misplaced 

 

7 minutes ago, scotchegg said:

Good gravy heavens below, do you not understand the word ‘alpha’, or the phrase ‘solely for telemetry’?!

MS: ‘This is a tightly limited alpha solely for the purpose of gathering telemetry’

Avsim boomers: ‘Is this a release candidate to be used as a strong indication of the final product?’

Yes I do thanks, but as your understanding seems better than mine, are you saying the bugs and glitches we currently see (mainly from the preview event - I accept what you are saying about the alpha) won't be present at release then? 

Also, what do you mean by the phrase 'boomers'?  That's a new one on me.  A derogatory term is it?

17 minutes ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

Isn't both sides of the argument demonstrating free speech?  There is a huge amount of pessimism directed at the Tech Alpha despite the clear statements what it has been released for.  It is clear from previous videos released by MS that clearly shows the Tech alpha is not the full deal.

Part of replying to this pessimism is to try and calm the nerves of those who don't appear to understand the purpose of the Tech Alpha.  I was disappointed not to see many of the new features in the Alpha, but those features are not what are being tested.

Yes that's fine.  By all means, give a counter-argument to the criticism.  That's fine and needed for people to get a balanced view as you say.  I am on about people trying to get the discussion closed down.

PS.  I think most people get it about the tech alpha, including me.  But the title of the topic doesn't mention that.  My views are based on video mainly from the preview event, even if there is a long gap between there and release, because we were told on a twitch session around the same time (by Jorg I believe) that the code is now pretty much locked down.

I think we all want the same.....

A new flight sim

Without any bugs or very less bugs

Joy and Fun

Stability

As less issues as possible....

Boomers or not boomers.....understanding or no understanding....

We have common sense....

We like flightsimming

4 hours ago, Greazer said:

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

And you will be attacked for this view. Just mentioning the OBVIOUS state this product is in sends heads exploding. Only one side of this discussion is getting emotional and it isn’t those pointing out the obvious. Hilarious reaction from supposed adults. 

An this is exactly why an NDA is actually the right way to go and invite only the people that can understand and rationalise the ask. 

Edited October 13, 20241 yr by Carts85

Unbelievable how people who seem to be able to  digest a thick manual on how to operate a multi-engine aircraft, learn complex navaids and procedures are unable to read the simple notes that they are trying an extremely stripped down version of a piece of software for the sole purpose of allowing the developer telemetry to gauge their new client /server architecture. 

I'm sure they packaged this bare minimum build to allow this test to occur, and have no doubt about they are not going to tweak or add to this build to polish it for "release".  It is a simple latency test and will be binned (deleted) once it's purpose is served.