7 hours ago, CO2Neutral said:

And what allegation is that exactly?  If you are unable to find these videos that's on you, why would I care since I'm not trying to prove anything?

You are trying to prove the videos exist, and because of that, the burden of proof is on you.

and since you refuse to do it, I’m just going to assume you’re lying.

If you don’t want to directly link, fine. You could give clearer instructions on how to get there, or maybe a video title.

Edited November 11, 20241 yr by Tuskin38

No, I’m not trying to prove they exist, that’s all your need … what’s your mission?  Are you looking for links so you can report to Microsoft under the assumption they’re under an NDA?  But if you really want to look, the fact others here are aware of the floating UserID all over the screen on Dev builds is pretty good start on the path of existence.  Best of luck with your mission.

41 minutes ago, CO2Neutral said:

No, I’m not trying to prove they exist, that’s all your need … what’s your mission?  Are you looking for links so you can report to Microsoft under the assumption they’re under an NDA?  But if you really want to look, the fact others here are aware of the floating UserID all over the screen on Dev builds is pretty good start on the path of existence.  Best of luck with your mission.

No. Since you made an allegation here that some "marketing" people (whatever that means) have been given this mysterious build to post videos with no usernames on them (which even press won't get until release day), we're asking you to provide evidence.

As Tuskin said, you can't, so we can safely assume you lied, for whatever reason. People spreading falsehoods and misinformation to make some sort of point about MSFS, Microsoft, or Asobo is nothing new.

Edited November 11, 20241 yr by Abriael

1 hour ago, CO2Neutral said:

Are you looking for links so you can report to Microsoft under the assumption they’re under an NDA?

I'm not a snitch lol

8 hours ago, Abriael said:

No. Since you made an allegation here that some "marketing" people (whatever that means) have been given this mysterious build to post videos with no usernames on them (which even press won't get until release day), we're asking you to provide evidence.

While I couldn't find any videos like CO2 claimed, I was browsing the devsupport forums, and I noticed some devs had watermarks in their 2024 bug report screenshots, and some didn't.

Edit: I figure it out, newer builds removed the water marks, what I was seeing were screenshots from an older build.

Edited November 12, 20241 yr by Tuskin38

On 11/5/2024 at 11:18 PM, Abriael said:

Toliss isn't even remotely comparable to Fenix. Not even in the same ballpark. 

Hotstart is closer, but it still runs on an inferior sim. If you think a significant number of people are gonna buy a different sim and spend $114 for an aircraft, plus all the addons needed to make the other sim even remotely viable, because they can't fly the Fenix for a few days (again, assuming that's the case, it very possibly won't be), I'm sorry (not) I see a big delusion here. 

Even more so considering that these few days, most people will be busy exploring all the new content and options. 

Hi, just a quick note from my side regarding this post... I just feel like I need to say something. I’m currently using FS 2020, XP11, XP12, and P3D v5. How does one come to say (a) that X-Plane is ‘inferior’? I understand anyone who says, ‘I prefer Simulator A over B because…’ but inferior? Today, we’re fortunate enough to have a variety of simulators to choose from. And yes, I have to accept that some people express their disregard for competition in this way, but to me, it quickly crosses into disrespect for users as well. When I call a program inferior, in my view, I’m also demeaning its users. Because essentially, I’m implying that they’d rather use something inferior than something of higher quality. I find such a perspective and judgment quite terrible. Even though, unfortunately, it’s becoming the norm online.

And (b) To say that Toliss and Hotstart aren’t on the same level as Fenix... sorry, I don’t get that at all. The Challenger not on par… sorry, but I have to assume the person doesn’t actually have the Challenger, and Toliss is an excellent system simulation. Yes, it has some graphical weaknesses; there’s no need to argue that. But it’s easily on the same level as the Fenix. And as for the countless addons required for XP12... sorry, but that’s just empty bashing. The idea that no one will switch from FS 2020 to XP… no clue. I couldn’t care less. But to kick other simulators and their users like that – I find that shabby, even though it’s normal online. Sometimes, I feel that while Asobo has done a great job expanding the community with FS 2020, the tone has become deplorable.

@Tim_ELLX

I 100% agree with you. I was about to answer but considered that pure trolling. When someone states that the Hotstart is „closer“ to the Fenix when it actually blows it away as well as any other jet-based addon in any sim, it‘s a bit weird. And just an ego-statement. And Toliss and Fenix are both excellent addons and on the same level, with some small differences. But adding to that, that XP is an „inferior“ simulator when it has been used by NASA, allows aircraft-manufacturers to build real aircrafts, is also used in many flight-schools and is known for it‘s very good flight-behaviour, it becomes even weirder. The only correct answer is that each sim has pros and cons. And it‘s down to personal preferences at the end, exactly like you said. It‘s sad to have these kind of religious statements that are disrespectful to others. I have always stated being potentially interested in MSFS2024, that‘s why I follow the topics here from time to time. Ufortunately these comments are the perfect examples of why I sometimes don’t want to be part of that community.

1 hour ago, Franz007 said:

It‘s sad to have these kind of religious statements that are disrespectful to others

Agree, someone bringing in their religion is disrespectful to those of us that are NOT religious, but rarely is the disrespect ever considered for non-believers … only the believers seem worthy of “respect”?  Not to mention it’s entirely irrelevant to the discussion and respect is a two-way street.

I’d suggest you don’t let others comment control your participation or not.  I don’t care that someone has called me a liar because I didn’t help them find MSFS 2024 videos, their accusations don’t make any difference to what I do or don’t do and I have zero interest in proving anything … not my mission.

I think Fenix have done an outstanding job, and for free.  Plenty of really nice aircraft in XP and P3D/FSX … Hot Start TBM 900 is a joy, IXEG 737 is another favorite … just as Majestic Q400 and FSLabs A3xx and A2A series in P3D … just as iFly 737 and Maddox X for MSFS.

As far as the OP’s original statement, just a matter of time so just wait it out as needed … having pre-release dev builds isn’t really that much of a benefit.  Ultimately, we have to test all over again on final release build which could be just a few days before actual release.

Oh boy, the usual suspects are here again. This thread needs to be locked. 

15 hours ago, Tim_ELLX said:

Hi, just a quick note from my side regarding this post... I just feel like I need to say something. I’m currently using FS 2020, XP11, XP12, and P3D v5. How does one come to say (a) that X-Plane is ‘inferior’? I understand anyone who says, ‘I prefer Simulator A over B because…’ but inferior? Today, we’re fortunate enough to have a variety of simulators to choose from. And yes, I have to accept that some people express their disregard for competition in this way, but to me, it quickly crosses into disrespect for users as well. When I call a program inferior, in my view, I’m also demeaning its users. Because essentially, I’m implying that they’d rather use something inferior than something of higher quality. I find such a perspective and judgment quite terrible. Even though, unfortunately, it’s becoming the norm online.

And (b) To say that Toliss and Hotstart aren’t on the same level as Fenix... sorry, I don’t get that at all. The Challenger not on par… sorry, but I have to assume the person doesn’t actually have the Challenger, and Toliss is an excellent system simulation. Yes, it has some graphical weaknesses; there’s no need to argue that. But it’s easily on the same level as the Fenix. And as for the countless addons required for XP12... sorry, but that’s just empty bashing. The idea that no one will switch from FS 2020 to XP… no clue. I couldn’t care less. But to kick other simulators and their users like that – I find that shabby, even though it’s normal online. Sometimes, I feel that while Asobo has done a great job expanding the community with FS 2020, the tone has become deplorable.

Brand new account... only 4 posts, almost immediately coming to the MSFS forum to try to advertise another simulator. Certainly an interesting debut. I considered not bothering, but this thread has played its course anyway (to be fair, its Karen take never had any validity to begin with). 

Here's the deal. Criticizing a product, saying that it's "inferior" or whatever one thinks about it is not equivalent to "disrespecting" the people who use it. A FIAT 500 is inferior to a Ferrari, but mentioning it is no disrespect to FIAT 500 drivers. It simply is. We are talking about products.

If you feel personally attacked because someone criticizes the simulator you use, you're the one who brings preference for a flight simulator to an irrational, religious level. I criticized a product made of 1s and 0s, and you're reacting like I bashed your religion. 

My opinion is that X-Plane is an inferior product. It's an opinion that has matured over almost 40 years of experience with all flight simulators starting on the Spectrum 48K and almost 25 years of professionally reviewing software. I'm certainly not the only one who feels that way, and the market certainly and overwhelmingly agrees with me. You disagree? Perfectly fine. Enjoy your FIAT 500. I have great memories of mine. My opinion of X-Plane's inferiority does not undermine its right to existing or to be enjoyed by whoever wants to. 

That doesn't make my opinion any less valid. Someone implied that the (assumed, not really confirmed) lack of a specific add-on at launch would cause people to jump to other simulators, and I simply responded with my view that it's a ridiculous assumption, as I see these simulators as inferior products, which you may want to realize, is a very, very widespread opinion. The number of people who are going to suddenly buy a different simulator that doesn't even come close to offering the same features and content, on top of all the add-ons required to make it even remotely passable, because they won't be able to fly on the Fenix for a few days is absolutely negligible if not zero. 

You think we're fortunate to have a variety of simulators to choose from, and that's your opinion. I think we're fortunate because MSFS came to yank this hobby out of the rut in which P3D and X-Plane shoehorned it with their developers' refusal to embrace new users and to keep up with bare-minimum tech that even small indie game developers have embraced years before. I think we're fortunate because Microsoft has decided that the investment is worthwhile and we're getting MSFS 2024 to continue that trend. 

This genre had become obsolete and insular to a level that was absolutely unbearable with not only chronic lack of new blood, but people quitting over sheer boredom, and we have Lockheed Martin and (albeit to a lesser extent, but they're not exonerated) Laminar Research to thank for that. It has now been renewed and rejuvenated, brought up to date, and is getting much-needed new blood, and we have only Microsoft to thank for that. Neither LR nor LM moved a finger in that direction (actually, they actively rowed in the opposite direction), and that weighs heavily on my judgment of their products, as it should.

It's great that you feel that all simulators are good and that kind of Kumbaya, but not everyone is required to feel that way. I don't, and I'm far from the only one. That's why I don't bother invading the P3D and X-Plane forums. As a matter of fact, I find that "ecumenical" view detrimental. Excusing other simulators for their lack of progress only encourages their developers to stick to that path, which isn't good for anyone. That lax attitude is part of the reason why we ended up in the horrible pre-MSFS situation to begin with. 

As for the rest, the fact that you'd consider Toliss on par with Fenix tells me all I need to know. There is an abyss between their respective levels of quality as products and the graphics have absolutely nothing to do with it. Toliss sells a good and respectable, albeit slightly outdated product, but Fenix's A32X line is absolutely excellent and one of the best add-ons in the history of flight simulation. 

 

Edited November 13, 20241 yr by Abriael

56 minutes ago, Abriael said:

Brand new account... only 4 posts, almost immediately coming to the MSFS forum to try to advertise another simulator. Certainly an interesting debut. I considered not bothering, but this thread has played its course anyway (to be fair, its Karen take never had any validity to begin with). 

 

You obviously have not read his post he uses all sims and was in no was advertising just one. Sorry you seem to really drag people compared to what you use to. Maybe take a step back.

33 minutes ago, carlanthony24 said:

You obviously have not read his post he uses all sims and was in no was advertising just one. Sorry you seem to really drag people compared to what you use to. Maybe take a step back.

Nah. I'm not particularly interested in letting people try to censor an opinion as simple as "Simulator X is inferior to Simulator Y" in the name of some sort of fake ecumenism and the absolutely false and disingenuous concept that if you find a product inferior you magically disrespect all of its users. Incidentally, his post mentions all sims in passing but then focuses on one specific simulator and its add-ons, so yes. I've read it. Did you?

Thinking all simulators are good shouldn't be a requirement, because quite simply, it's not true. It hasn't been for a long time. 

This is a market in which we're sold products for money, which doesn't grow on trees. As customers, we are and should be entirely entitled to mention that not all products are good because well, they are not. 

If criticizing a simulator was equivalent to disrespecting its users, then MSFS users would have to feel insulted on the daily by people coming here to say that MSFS is "not a real simulator but just a game" and all the hundreds of variations on that silly theme. Luckily, most of us have thicker skin than that. 

Edited November 13, 20241 yr by Abriael

52 minutes ago, Abriael said:

Nah. I'm not particularly interested in letting people try to censor an opinion as simple as "Simulator X is inferior to Simulator Y" in the name of some sort of fake ecumenism and the absolutely false and disingenuous concept that if you find a product inferior you magically disrespect all of its users. Incidentally, his post mentions all sims in passing but then focuses on one specific simulator and its add-ons, so yes. I've read it. Did you?

Thinking all simulators are good shouldn't be a requirement, because quite simply, it's not true. It hasn't been for a long time. 

This is a market in which we're sold products for money, which doesn't grow on trees. As customers, we are and should be entirely entitled to mention that not all products are good because well, they are not. 

If criticizing a simulator was equivalent to disrespecting its users, then MSFS users would have to feel insulted on the daily by people coming here to say that MSFS is "not a real simulator but just a game" and all the hundreds of variations on that silly theme. Luckily, most of us have thicker skin than that. 

Hes literally referring to X-plane like you was but mentioning MSFS. Have a day off you seem to not have thicker skin. Since no one can have opinions without you jumping down throats.

Edited November 13, 20241 yr by carlanthony24

20 minutes ago, carlanthony24 said:

Hes literally referring to X-plane like you was but mentioning MSFS. Have a day off you seem to not have thicker skin. Since no one can have opinions without you jumping down throats.

Lol. They literally joined this thread after it was pretty much done to directly attack me and my opinion, and I'm the one who is jumping down throats? Goodness, the hypocrisy. 😂

Don't worry about me. I'm perfectly fine. Someone addressed me in a rather aggressive way (with clearly inflammatory terms like "shabby," "deplorable," "terrible," and so forth) and I responded with clear-cut arguments without even using terminology nearly as negative, personal, or aggressive. If that bothers you, well, too bad, but the hypocrisy is *deafening*🫡 

Edited November 13, 20241 yr by Abriael

4 hours ago, Abriael said:

You think we're fortunate to have a variety of simulators to choose from, and that's your opinion. I think we're fortunate because MSFS came to yank this hobby out of the rut in which P3D and X-Plane shoehorned it with their developers' refusal to embrace new users and to keep up with bare-minimum tech that even small indie game developers have embraced years before. I think we're fortunate because Microsoft has decided that the investment is worthwhile and we're getting MSFS 2024 to continue that trend. 

This genre had become obsolete and insular to a level that was absolutely unbearable with not only chronic lack of new blood, but people quitting over sheer boredom, and we have Lockheed Martin and (albeit to a lesser extent, but they're not exonerated) Laminar Research to thank for that. It has now been renewed and rejuvenated, brought up to date, and is getting much-needed new blood, and we have only Microsoft to thank for that. Neither LR nor LM moved a finger in that direction (actually, they actively rowed in the opposite direction), and that weighs heavily on my judgment of their products, as it should.

Very well said!  This describes exactly how I feel about flight simulation in the 10 years before MSFS came out.  I remember when I saw the trees for Microsoft Flight, which was released back in 2012, and that the trees were a significant improvement over FSX trees:

The video for this screenshot of Microsoft Flight is here. Unfortunately, Microsoft Flight never got popular in the flight simulation market, but remember that this was back in 2012.

Fast forward to 2019, before MSFS was announced.  Both P3D and XP 11 in 2019, had worse looking trees than Microsoft Flight did from 7 years earlier! It was just sad. I was thinking, how can the two leading flight simulators in 2019, have worse looking trees than a flight simulator released 7 years before?

In a nutshell, one word describes the home flight simulation market at the time: complacency.  The competition was just so weak between P3D and XP, and neither company was motivated to make substantial graphics improvements (and Lockheed Martin wasn't even targeting the home market, which made it even worse).  When the first videos of MSFS were released in 2019 though, I was actually shocked.  Shocked because I realized what a flight simulator heading into 2020 could look like. 

Whether you love or hate MSFS, it's MSFS that is pushing the boundaries of flight simulation again, utilizing the latest technology to its advantage.  The best example of this is when NVidia announced the 4000 series cards and the new frame generation technology for it.  The CEO of NVidia was using MSFS in his presentation of frame generation for the NVidia 4000 series. Think of this for a moment. A flight simulator was being used by the CEO of NVidia to demonstrate the latest breakthrough graphics technology.  A flight simulator was the first to use frame generation and had beaten out thousands of other video games out there in utilizing this technology. A flight simulator was the forefront of graphics technology, something that was a pipe dream in the 10 years before MSFS 2020 released. And we know now that frame generation is invaluable for flight simulation, it can improve the experience of MSFS immensely.

This was all possible because the MSFS team is extremely forward thinking.  They got together with NVidia, realized how good frame generation could be for MSFS, and decided to spend the time and resources to implement it. Now the MSFS team could have said no to NVidia and said it's not worth their time or resources.  But they didn't, because they grasped how useful frame generation technology could be.  They were forward thinking.

Fast forward to MSFS 2024.  MSFS 2024 is using AI to place rocks, boulders, and other objects around the world, to make the ground look more realistic. And AI is being used to improve the terrain.  This is why the ground and terrain look so much better in MSFS 2024. And they are also incorporating navigation charts (LIDO charts) in MSFS 2024, something unheard of in a flight simulator! Once again, the MSFS team is forward thinking.  At the moment, they are the exact opposite of being complacent!

I am so glad that MSFS returned to flight simulation and I look forward to MSFS 2024. And above all, I am glad that by 2020, the trees in flight simulation finally surpassed the trees from 2012 🤣

 

 

Edited November 13, 20241 yr by abrams_tank