2 hours ago, Huascar said:

Purchased it this morning and went in with an open mind. I have to say that most of the criticism of 2024 is valid.

First, started a flight in Washington DC, and the first observation was jetliners running in all directions at the airport (completely illogical directions). Who would release a sim like this???

Second, the FPS is dismal,  and even with graphics set to medium, the performance was bad. I have an intel i9 CPU and Nvidia RTX 3080. 
 

Third, not super impress with the graphics. Building and LOD look dismal. What’s all the hype about?

Fourth, not a single key in my controllers works. With 2020, it was plug and play, by and large.

The main menu looks blurry compared to to 2020. 
 

I will give it time, but not impressed with what I saw this morning. This will take month/years to get to a decent state.

 

 

I recommend using the NVIDIA app to start with the optimized performance settings and then adjust from there. Also using NVIDIA filters will make it better. 

 

MS2024 is built on almost the same platform as the MSFS2020. Many would expect that after 4 years, they would not see many bugs carried over or certain aspects that worked acceptably being broken in this new version. The issue I see here is that breaking other features for some improvements is unnecessary. That's why many people are upset about ASOBO showing this kind of incompetence. Yes, WX has got some new, eye-candy, nice aspects, but one of the essential aspects, manually setting the visibility range in any flight simulator, is missing. In the graphics area, we still notice the melted buildings and particular issues with the ground textures, bridges, trees, and water. There are absolutely some flight modeling improvements, but unfortunately, some aircraft are way off and show unrealistic behaviors.

While certain people refuse to see those issues or say, "For me, it is OK," this does not make it right. Moreover, it is not normal for people to get bent out of shape because someone pointed out the obvious. Ultimately, it's all about improving a product. Perhaps we got used to mediocre or subpar software and bad decisions. 

14 minutes ago, Huascar said:

I think this is a question Asobo should be asking me when I request a refund.

I'd ask it to yourself on why you hit "buy now"? There is ample, ample evidence on this very forum that FS24 has serious launch issues. There are no shortage of people opining on these boards about their issues with FS24. One does not need to stray from AVSim to get a feel of how poorly FS24 is being received by the masses.

Not only that, but the plane you said in other posts you fly the most doesn't even work in '24. Not kinda buggy, sorta works sorta doesn't. Flat out does not work.

Yet, you boldly sallied forth, started it, had issues, and then refunded. I hear that Taco Bell causes digestive issues. I don't need to go sample their wares to see if it is true.

Waiting until at least the PMDG is ready would have been a better idea.

Edited December 27, 20241 yr by BrammyH

2 hours ago, Huascar said:

Purchased it this morning and went in with an open mind. I have to say that most of the criticism of 2024 is valid.

It may very well be if your system specs (which you should put in your signature so we have something to comment on), are not up to the job of running 2024.  My experience is very different to yours as I experience none of the problems you or many others mention. As others have already said, there are common hardware issues and settings causing many of the problems.

1.  Running out of VRAM.  The lower your VRAM, the lower the 2024 settings you need to run. Too high settings will fill your VRAM and cause blurry textures, stutters & crashes.
2.  Turn off Dynamic FPS, use settings that will not overstress your PC in preference to this option.
3.  Is something in your community folder not 2024 compatible?
4.  Is your PC clock set accurately?  If not, you may experience long loading times & crashes.

2024 is clearly an upgrade to 2020 on my PC, and I don't think all the issues many are seeing can all be put at MS/Asobo's door.

Edited December 27, 20241 yr by MrBitstFlyer

49 minutes ago, BrammyH said:

Waiting until at least the PMDG is ready would have been a better idea.

Not necessary as the Fenix A320 and Just Flight RJ series are 2024 compatible.

Edited December 27, 20241 yr by MrBitstFlyer

Just now, MrBitstFlyer said:

N0t necessary as the Fenix A320 and Just Flight RJ series are 2024 compatible.

Yeah, but he said in another thread when he was learning the Fenix that he has decades of use in the PMDG and that is the bird he usually flies.

I don't know if he has the RJ, and I wouldn't get 24 to just fly the Fenix right now. The ini birds aren't bad, but there are issues with them INI has submitted to MS but aren't deployed.

As an aside, if you do go the refund route, I'd spend that money on the iFLY Max. Sure it's another 737, but with enough differences to stand out.

I think you would enjoy that more than FS24.

2 hours ago, Huascar said:

Purchased it this morning and went in with an open mind. I have to say that most of the criticism of 2024 is valid.

First, started a flight in Washington DC, and the first observation was jetliners running in all directions at the airport (completely illogical directions). Who would release a sim like this???

Second, the FPS is dismal,  and even with graphics set to medium, the performance was bad. I have an intel i9 CPU and Nvidia RTX 3080. 
 

Third, not super impress with the graphics. Building and LOD look dismal. What’s all the hype about?

Fourth, not a single key in my controllers works. With 2020, it was plug and play, by and large.

The main menu looks blurry compared to to 2020. 
 

I will give it time, but not impressed with what I saw this morning. This will take month/years to get to a decent state.

 

 

The praise for the graphics is largely restricted to flowers, rocks, rural areas, and small airports - the low and slow GA types are in heaven just like FS 2020 was when it was released. Look at what the "FS 2024 is beautiful " screenshots show. Ironically many don't even show any flying and focus on the ground, biomes, and such.

Unfortunately, for airline flyers who would never see flowers or migrating wilder beasts, the cities still look as bad as FS 2020; AI Traffic is worse than FS 2020. At large airports, I also have worse performance than 2020 with similar specs to yours, even with no AI traffic (actually, 3rd party airports perform better than the Asobo airports). At FL 350, 2024 looks no better than FS 2020, and at that level, I'm not convinced the clouds look better. Finally, I do not see the "seasons." In DC and NY the trees are green and full of leaves. Hey, but the night sky looks much better in 2024. I also think the lighting engine, especially in cities is much better. The default aircraft flight dynamics are better and even the 737 Max, while not iFly quality, is a very satisfying experience. As far as the better graphics engine - I'm also not convinced. You can get similar crisp detail with the Bing / Google map enhancement in FS 2020, so is it just better maps being streamed? I don't know. Similar with earlier versions fs FS 2020 where the clouds looked much better and then got worse towards the end, now clouds look better in 2024, but we started out with clouds that looked like that in FS 2020. So....

Look, two years from now, I assume that all the growing pains will be fixed (that's how long it took for FS 2020), and most will have moved to that platform - myself included (maybe even sooner, just waiting for FSLTL and PF3 and I'll move). But where the head-scratching for me comes in is that Asobo made the same mistakes as they did with FS 2020. They went from Alpha to release and the FS 2024 release was more of a disaster than 2020. Like FS 2024 They're spending all their time fixing biomes, city packs, etc, and very little time fixing the "FLIGHT" portion of the "FLIGHT simulator". What also causes head-scratching is many of the bugs are plain for all to see if you spend 10 minutes in the sim - do they not go in and test it?

At the end of the day, FS 2024 is less about flight simulation and more about being a test bed for Microsoft's streaming platform aspirations since they plan to do this exact same thing with the next version of windows. FS 2024 is just a fork of FS 2020 and inherited many of the same bugs as FS 2020. Actually, I'm convinced that the $75 - $200 cost of FS 2024 is less about development costs (does it really cost $70 minimum to fork code from existing code) and more about supporting streaming infrastructure costs over the next 4 years.

 

The real problem that is causing all this is that Asobo has cheated us all out of our money.

It is impossible that they did not know the state of their product.

I am not against early access and similar systems but they should always make it clear that they are selling a product that is not finished and will contain bugs.

From here if you still trust these people my advice is the one I have given here more than once, uninstall forget about 2024 for a year and in the future you will see where all this has come.

3 hours ago, Huascar said:

Purchased it this morning and went in with an open mind. I have to say that most of the criticism of 2024 is valid.

First, started a flight in Washington DC, and the first observation was jetliners running in all directions at the airport (completely illogical directions). Who would release a sim like this???

Second, the FPS is dismal,  and even with graphics set to medium, the performance was bad. I have an intel i9 CPU and Nvidia RTX 3080. 
 

Third, not super impress with the graphics. Building and LOD look dismal. What’s all the hype about?

Fourth, not a single key in my controllers works. With 2020, it was plug and play, by and large.

The main menu looks blurry compared to to 2020. 
 

I will give it time, but not impressed with what I saw this morning. This will take month/years to get to a decent state.

 

 

Like yourself i have i9 and a 3080 12GB. FS2024 has been looking and running ok for me the last few days (it did delete all my control configs on the last patch tho). However i started it up today and it looked like %#&@, fps way down, a bit like i imagine playing minecraft in bad fog.  Nothing has been changed. I have seen fs24 looking and flying incredibly, which makes the fact that it now looks like garbage frustrating. Ive turned it off for today, i will try it again tomorrow. Just wanted to let you know that it can look and play well with your cpu and gpu. Seems to have times when it just refuses to act like a good product tho.

1 hour ago, Ricardo41 said:

You clearly have a busted system, or are running everything on ultra, incompatible mods in the community folder, etc. Weak/inconsistent internet connection, and so on, and so on. 

I lowered the graphics settings  and the sim looks terrible. To suggest this thing looks and is better than 2020 is n completely inaccurate.

I can run 2020 with LOD set to 260 and DLSS set to quality (and 6k) and the sim looks amazing. 
 

I simply can’t see a reason for migrating to 2024, especially if my setting have to be ridiculously low.

2 hours ago, Aglos77 said:

The real problem that is causing all this is that Asobo has cheated us all out of our money.

The real problem are those who pre-purchased or bought it on day 1 or 2 and then complain about Asobo "cheating us out of our money".

Can't say this enough, and here goes again:

a) In this day and age if one is willing to pre-purchase a software product, especially as big and complex as MSFS, then one better be ok with it being a bugfest or worse in the initial days, as one of the possibilities.. if one is averse to such level of bugginess then it is rather stupid to pre-purchase or buy on day 1/2/etc. Those folks who're averse to bugs, regardless of the software manufacturer's marketing/claims etc the onus is on them to wait and see the state of the release before purchasing it

b) If there are people who're ok with the level of bugginess and still enjoying the sim because of whatever advancements/functionality that works without bugs, and/or they're not seeing the bugs on their systems that others are, then that's great.. those in group a) who're angry at people in group b) and think they're aiding MS/Asobo by "paying to alpha/beta test", well, deal with it 🙂 

c) If you've never used or bought MSFS 2024, but still feel the need to dump on it or constantly criticize it, here's a pro tip: relax, don't feel so insecure, it is totally great that you're still enjoying and using 2020 as it's a stellar and stable sim. Enjoy it.

d) For those who feel MS/Asobo should've pushed back the release date to release the sim with less bugs, then that's no different from waiting around until it gets to that state in time, and use 2020 or other sims in the meantime or forever 🙂🤷‍♂️
 

Edited December 27, 20241 yr by lwt1971

I flew on the Freedom Fox over Washington DC yesterday in MSFS 2020. LOD set to 260, DLSS (quality) and 6k resolution.

it was an absolute delight to watch the scenery and performance. 
 

The central question I have for those who swear by 2024, why the performance difference when I am flying over two identical photogrammetry cities? 
 

Better yet, what does 2024 offers that 2020 does not except 2024 tanks your PC performance.  To cheer 2024 over 2020 is to defy logic.

1 hour ago, LRBS said:

While certain people refuse to see those issues or say, "For me, it is OK," this does not make it right.

I suspect I am coming to the same conclusion - some people refuse to see and accept a deeply flawed product.  Why is my graphics on 2020 set to max without any significant performance issues and 2024 is destroying my PC? 
 

while my system is a few years old, it should handle 2024 without having to resort to medium or low setting. 

1 hour ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

which you should put in your signature so we have something to comment on), are not up to the job of running 2024.

I PC specs:

- i9-10900kf (clocked to 4.5 MHz)

- Nvidia RTX 3080

- RAM 128 GB

I have no/no performance issues in MSFS2020 with graphics set to stunning high levels. I should make a video just to share with you guys. 

 

 

7 minutes ago, Huascar said:

I suspect I am coming to the same conclusion - some people refuse to see and accept a deeply flawed product.

We can't say we didn't warn you.

The problem is, two people with the same rigs are seeing different results. Also, "flawed" is deeply subjective.

As others mentioned, they see different results from day to day.