If He thinks the other sims are inferior, that is his opinion and he is entitled to it. Newer sims tend to be better than older sims. It is called progress.

21 minutes ago, CO2Neutral said:

So you originated the context free comment on “inferior” other sims as starting X vs. Y, vs Z, … sim, but then try to pin it on me for wanting some context behind your ORIGINAL statement?  And you speak of logic?  

I personally don’t mind the X vs. Y vs. Z sim debates, but rarely do I see anyone able to communicate what specifically is better or worse and fall into opinion … your sweeping statement of “everything is better” is definitely not improving on context.  

In my experience with MSFS, FSX, P3D, XPlane is that they all have some things they do better and some things they do worse than the other platform.  I’m more than happy to provide context but that thread type doesn’t seem to have a home at AVSIM as it will likely get shutdown even though there are facts (not opinions) that all platforms can demonstrate is better or worse.

So who is writing the words that gets posted in this thread if they aren’t you?  

I'm sure you're capable of distinguishing the writer from the topic. If you aren't, oh well.

Your experience is what it is. You're entitled to base your own conclusions on it

My experience includes one simulator that isn't included in yours. It's called Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024, and it's the topic of this thread. Someone mentioned "looking elsewhere" and my experience leads me to the conclusion any available "elsewhere" doesn't even come close to comparing. Hence the comment. I didn't provide further details because it'd be outside the scope of this thread, and after having written literally thousands of words about MSFS2024, it'd be quite redundant.

Edited November 7, 20241 yr by Abriael

Opinions without context are pointless … meaningless jabs that provide no substance to a discussion.

9 minutes ago, CO2Neutral said:

Opinions without context are pointless … meaningless jabs that provide no substance to a discussion.

If every opinion required a dissertation, even more so when redundant, writing on any forum would be a full-time job. I already have one. 

According to my opinion, MSFS 2024 is far superior to anything available on the market and I'm far from alone thinking so among those who tried it. The explanation has been provided by myself and others in multiple forms (written, video, discussion, etc) and in many places. It was briefly expressed in direct response to someone's related statement and kept to the point without going into needless tangents. Don't like it? Though luck. I'm done discussing this.  

Edited November 7, 20241 yr by Abriael

Some of these post make me LMAO like anyone at MS/Asobo can honestly say Fenix, Leonardo, iFly will work on day one when none of them even tested them in the sim or do not even acknowledge them in the first place. Don't kid yourselves they will need work on the first day moving on when MS2024 releases when they finally get a crack at the SDK. Bunch of nonsense going around here.

Edited November 7, 20241 yr by JBDB-MD80

10 hours ago, CO2Neutral said:

In my experience with MSFS, FSX, P3D, XPlane is that they all have some things they do better and some things they do worse than the other platform.  I’m more than happy to provide context but that thread type doesn’t seem to have a home at AVSIM as it will likely get shutdown even though there are facts (not opinions) that all platforms can demonstrate is better or worse.

 

I bought FSX back in 2006 and stopped playing it after the last patch which came in 2008/2009 or so, and then lost the CD key to it. I then rebought FSX again when MSFS 2020 came out because the Rod Machado lessons in FSX were better than the lessons that came with MSFS 2020 at the time.  There may be a few things FSX does better than MSFS 2020 (such as the Rod Machado lessons, but the lessons have improved immensely in MSFS 2020 since 4 years ago), but overall, MSFS 2020 is far more advanced than FSX.  To deny that MSFS 2020 is far more advanced than FSX overall is to be extremely biased, IMO.

What you're saying is that a flip phone from the early 2000s is comparable to the IPhone 16 because the flip phone does a few things better.  No, a flip phone from the early 2000s is not comparable to the IPhone 16 just because it does a few things better. The IPhone 16 will do better than the flip phone from the early 2000s on almost every other feature.

I know that the "i" word triggered you from an earlier comment.  So instead, I will use the "a" word and I will simply say that overall, MSFS 2020 is the most advanced civilian flight simulator on the market and it's not even close, in my opinion.  And from the video and feedback I have seen of MSFS 2024, MSFS 2024 will be even more advanced than MSFS 2024.

 

Edited November 8, 20241 yr by abrams_tank

10 hours ago, JBDB-MD80 said:

Some of these post make me LMAO like anyone at MS/Asobo can honestly say Fenix, Leonardo, iFly will work on day one when none of them even tested them in the sim or do not even acknowledge them in the first place. Don't kid yourselves they will need work on the first day moving on when MS2024 releases when they finally get a crack at the SDK. Bunch of nonsense going around here.

You laugh at those that expect these addons to work on day one but you are equally as word not allowed when you insist these won't work.

We just don't know yet. Some aircraft might work fine, soms may work with a few handicaps and some might not work at all. If most the 2020 aircraft don't work at all then clearly Asobo did not tell the truth when they said that most addons would work.

6 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

I bought FSX back in 2006 and stopped playing it after the last patch which came in 2008/2009 or so, and then lost the CD key to it. I then rebought FSX again when MSFS 2020 came out because the Rod Machado lessons in FSX were better than the lessons that came with MSFS 2020 at the time.  There may be a few things FSX does better than MSFS 2020 (such as the Rod Machado lessons, but the lessons have improved immensely in MSFS 2020 since 4 years ago), but overall, MSFS 2020 is far more advanced than FSX.  To deny that MSFS 2020 is far more advanced than FSX overall is to be extremely biased, IMO.

What you're saying is that a flip phone from the early 2000s is comparable to the IPhone 16 because the flip phone does a few things better.  No, a flip phone from the early 2000s is not comparable to the IPhone 16 just because it does a few things better. The IPhone 16 will do better than the flip phone from the early 2000s on almost every other feature.

I know that the "i" word triggered you from an earlier comment.  So instead, I will use the "a" word and I will simply say that overall, MSFS 2020 is the most advanced civilian flight simulator on the market and it's not even close, in my opinion.  And from the video and feedback I have seen of MSFS 2024, MSFS 2024 will be even more advanced than MSFS 2024.

 

Even the hated Dovetail's FSW had better lessons than MSFS 2020. They never really aimed that part of the simulation. But they improved a lot in the career mode, I liked what I saw. 

18 hours ago, CO2Neutral said:

Opinions without context are pointless … meaningless jabs that provide no substance to a discussion.

Are you new on the internet?

6 hours ago, Allard said:

 

We just don't know yet. Some aircraft might work fine, some may work with a few handicaps and some might not work at all. If most the 2020 aircraft don't work at all then clearly Asobo did not tell the truth when they said that most addons would work.

Well tell me in what sim did any 3rd party aircraft worked on day 1 without a hitch well it never happened for FS9 to FSX, P3D v5 to v6, XP11 to XP12 etc but to make us believe this will be different for MS2020 to MS2024 but if they did than WTH did the developers do to improve the physics, systems etc and so on to make this possible. It simply never happened before in the history of software development. Programs needs updates every time to make it compatible. I am done with these nonsense talk.

Edited November 8, 20241 yr by JBDB-MD80

Incompatibility is progress. If the planes should work 100% every iteration of the sim than improvement is on hold.

13 minutes ago, bvdboomen said:

Incompatibility is progress. If the planes should work 100% every iteration of the sim than improvement is on hold.

Ironically, that was the positive aspect of Microsoft's decision to stop development of FS after the release of FSX. It gave third party developers a chance to release products without having to worry about compatibility updates for future versions. We may have been standing still as far as progress is concerned, but stability does have its benefits

Edited November 8, 20241 yr by Christopher Low

38 minutes ago, bvdboomen said:

Incompatibility is progress. If the planes should work 100% every iteration of the sim than improvement is on hold.

That is not how it works. MSFS' planes work by using their own flight model that is simply being supported by the simulator, but it's separate from MSFS 2024's flight model and features that are applied only to new aircraft and aircraft that get adapted purposely to them. 

Nothing is on hold, and I honestly wonder why people feel the need to keep dropping misinformation on the forums. 

1 hour ago, Abriael said:

That is not how it works. MSFS' planes work by using their own flight model that is simply being supported by the simulator, but it's separate from MSFS 2024's flight model and features that are applied only to new aircraft and aircraft that get adapted purposely to them. 

Nothing is on hold, and I honestly wonder why people feel the need to keep dropping misinformation on the forums. 

Also important to say they did that for 2020 back then. We had two flight models, legacy and the new one.

12 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

What you're saying is that a flip phone from the early 2000s is comparable to the IPhone 16 because the flip phone does a few things better.

Nope, never mentioned flip phones nor the iPhone, these are your words not mine and not relevant to software and simulation.

4 hours ago, scotchegg said:

Are you new on the internet?

I wish, but unfortunately I experienced the death of accuracy and spread of mis-information many decades ago ... the internet is an effective tool to lead people off a cliff especially when they are so receptive and don't do any fact checking because that takes "effort" ... easier to "just believe". 

But for reference, my exposure to the "Internet" (not really but a start) was circa 1983 CompuServe, prior to that it was BBS phone numbers over 300 baud.  The evolution has sadly been more negative than positive and far far from it's original intent to share research information across government, military, scientific communities.

Back on topic, Fenix will be in MSFS 2024 when they are ready to be in MSFS 2024.  MSFS 2024 Dev Builds vary, personally I don't like the flashing shower of my ID across the screen when I'm trying to test development work.  I know it's there to try to prevent posting of pre-release videos so the "Internet" doesn't drop off a cliff ... but there are some "marketing" people that don't have the flashing IDs Dev builds and apparently under some other constraints but are releasing videos ... so it really is pointless to put the flashing user ID in 2024 Dev Builds since it's already exposed to the "internet".