Hello,

for instance, C172, C208, Vision Jet, I didn't try all, but they look visually great. While others, like Cessna Longitude, looks like has been made in one afternoon. CJ4 is even worse, looks like a cockpit from FS9 - or was it FSX, where VC became reality.

What's up with that?

Edited February 13, 20251 yr by Simon_C

12 minutes ago, Simon_C said:

What's up with that?

Different 1st party addon developers and no quality control or common standard by MS/Asobo.
Or no more money for the devs, who knows. 

Some were made in house at Asobo, some contracted out to various third-party developers. Not all developers are equally skilled at producing 3D models, hence the different quality levels. (The same holds true for the systems modeling and the "level of bugginess".) 

The 2024 planes in many cases are revised versions of the 2020 planes with variable LOD added.   To my eyes, they are visually inferior to the 2020 originals.  Most unfortunate..

Well, I guess I will limit myself to flying the "good" ones and then get whatever addons I like. Thanks for the explanation.

On 2/13/2025 at 5:34 PM, Simon_C said:

While others, like Cessna Longitude, looks like has been made in one afternoon.

So, in your opinion, they added opening various doors and providing a cabin for the Longitude - and "they" did all this in an afternoon?

😆

1 hour ago, Ricardo41 said:

So, in your opinion, they added opening various doors and providing a cabin for the Longitude - and "they" did all this in an afternoon?

Sure. Just ask GPT. 😁

On 2/13/2025 at 1:00 PM, Bert Pieke said:

The 2024 planes in many cases are revised versions of the 2020 planes with variable LOD added.   To my eyes, they are visually inferior to the 2020 originals.  Most unfortunate..

I did a comprehensive side by side comparison of the 2020 DA-62 and the 2024 DA-62 in MSFS 2024, and can say with 100% certainty that the 2024 version is a considerably better model and higher quality all-around. I do not think it is the same model as 2020, as there were clear differences in the quality of the curved elements, for example, and the textures were also superior in the 2024 version.

This is an easy one that anybody who has 2020 can check. Just load up both versions in 2024 and see the difference yourself.

The 2024 DA-62 also flies pretty good... unlike the absolute train-wreck that the DA-40 is. I also checked those models too, and the 2024 model, like the DA-62 is also better. But the 2024 DA-40 is unflyable, so I have the modded 2020 DA-40 installed. Too bad, because the new model IS nice.

It's funny to see the Longitude disparaged here.

I reckon it's one of the more detailed - closest to being payware quality jets in the sim right now.
WT did a massive overhaul of the avionics and systems and gave it a lot of depth back in 2020.
And in 2024 it has a fantasic model with a cabin and probably the most amount of openable hatches / doors in any plane I've seen.

I've been flying it a lot and it's find it fantastic.

I'll agree that DA-62 is also very good. I will also mention that I get some weird stutters with the Longitude and also that it's visually better than C4J.

Actually I think the quality differs in one sim too. I can only speak for 2020. For instance, I find the Baron and G36 of lesser quality texture wise than the rest of the planes in MSFS2020.

There are also some outstanding LOD issues in 2024 that make the longitude, for example, look bad at distance. 

Oh yea, did I mention the catastrophe the PC-24 is? Missing FMA at times, weird ATHR behavior, unstable in flight... how can that even pass any kind of QC.

1 hour ago, Simon_C said:

Oh yea, did I mention the catastrophe the PC-24 is? Missing FMA at times, weird ATHR behavior, unstable in flight... how can that even pass any kind of QC.

With some caveats - don't use the AT, for example - the PC-24 is perfectly flyable. 

Here's a good how-to video:

Pilatus PC-24 in MSFS 2024 - A Tutorial Video

In addition, with SU1 Beta Working Title has made numerous improvements to the Avionics system. 

I actually watched that video already, but of course thank you.