10 minutes ago, cobalt said:

MS2024 radically alters the sense of immersion, and for the first time in any flight simulator truly looks like the real world, with real trees, foliage, rock faces, etc.

As long as you have PG off. Or are using the Bijan addon. Otherwise it’s blobs of trees. Not to mention the melted buildings. 
 

And I certainly wouldn’t say looking out of the window in a C172 in my local area looks like the real world. Sure it looks good, but it doesn’t look like the real world. I could pick out all the inconsistencies. Not to mention the cartoony feel sometimes. 
 

2024 is certainly very good for VFR flying that’s for sure. Or walking around. Or driving around. But, there is still a lot of work to do at Asobo. 
 

 

11 minutes ago, cobalt said:

I have to disagree with your statement that the scenery improvement from MS2020 to MS2024 is subtle and not dramatic -- are you basing your conclusion entirely on videos?  Comparisons from altitude (say, above a few hundred feet AGL) may not show much difference, but at anywhere close to ground level the change, to me at any rate, is mind-blowing. MS2024 radically alters the sense of immersion, and for the first time in any flight simulator truly looks like the real world, with real trees, foliage, rock faces, etc. In addition, the walk-around feature in the newer sim makes one's experience even more realistic. Try it and see for yourself. 

I'm glad that you are enjoying it. Maybe it is just me, but I'm not going to get excited about being able to 'walk-around' and look at rocks, grass and leaves in a 'flight' simulator. I'm sure they look great. You can look at detailed rocks, but still no terminal lighting at default airports. I suppose they did that because most of the younger flight simmers are more interested in grass and rocks than proper lighting. To each their own though.

12 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Is it not possible to retain both 20 and 24 and assess the progress of the newer sim before deciding to make the move?

This is what a non-passionated and rightfully minded simmer should have done..., or it should do...

2 minutes ago, edpatino said:

This is what a non-passionated and rightfully minded simmer should have done..., or it should do...

When you’re on the outside looking in it’s easy to think logically and with no stress. 😉

Whenever I see a thread like this one, where everyone is saying something DIFFERENT about their experiences with one version or the other, I always come to the same conclusion. 

Before I say that conclusion, let me say that I used 2020 until 2024 came out.  I have NEVER had a problem with 2024.  It works great.  It loads quickly and I think the VFR flying is superior than it was in 2020.  Why are there so many varied responses on these 2 sims?

My conclusion is that it's the COMPUTER you are using.  It's always the same issue.  Some computers seem to be able to work better with a particular program and the way you have it set up (based on the system's components) and some don't. 

The programs (sims) are the same for everyone.  How YOUR computer runs it and how you have it set up, is what you perceive to be your final choice. Just imagine how varied each of our computers are.  No 2 are alike.  That's the ONLY variable that I believe causes us to love or hate the sim we are using.

I'm sure many of you will find an argument here, but that is IMHO.

 

3 minutes ago, spilok said:

Why are there so many varied responses on these 2 sims?

That's easy.  The difference is that some are running tonnes of addons while the others, GA folks are not.

dd

Edited May 6, 20251 yr by Sky_Pilot071

Just now, Sky_Pilot071 said:

That's easy.  The difference is that some are running tonnes of addons while the other is not.

dd

That too!

4 hours ago, Ianrivaldosmith said:

Or walking around. 

The walking around can be amazing, lol.

Back in December, when 2024 was being particularly obtuse, I hooked our big, 4k telly up to my PC, set the lod to 400 and my wife and I climbed Helvellyn via Red Tarn and out along Striding Edge to the summit from the comfort of our sofa using a wireless Xbox controller.

With live weather it was astonishing....and much more entertaining than watching Spurs loose two-nil on the same telly...

 

6 hours ago, rjquick said:

I'm glad that you are enjoying it. Maybe it is just me, but I'm not going to get excited about being able to 'walk-around' and look at rocks, grass and leaves in a 'flight' simulator. I'm sure they look great. You can look at detailed rocks, but still no terminal lighting at default airports. I suppose they did that because most of the younger flight simmers are more interested in grass and rocks than proper lighting. To each their own though.

Let me clarify. My main point was that judging a simulator based on videos alone is not a great idea, and you need to look at the real thing to make a judgment. I have used MS2020 since its inception, and MS2024 since December, and I continue to use both alternately. That said, I there is no doubt in my mind that 2024 is a superior simulator in many respects (not just grass and trees). 

By the way, I am not exactly young -- as my grandkids will attest -- but thanks! 

Edited May 7, 20251 yr by cobalt

6 hours ago, rjquick said:

I'm glad that you are enjoying it. Maybe it is just me, but I'm not going to get excited about being able to 'walk-around' and look at rocks, grass and leaves in a 'flight' simulator. I'm sure they look great. You can look at detailed rocks, but still no terminal lighting at default airports. I suppose they did that because most of the younger flight simmers are more interested in grass and rocks than proper lighting. To each their own though.

Your slightly condescending tone aside, I think the rocks, grass, vegetations, etc are way more impressive and interesting than terminal lighting to me. There's payware scenery that covers that off, so if you're actually doing airliner flying you're probably sorted. I don't think anyone who takes that seriously relies on default airfields. 

But what I think the new sim nails – and is harder to fix with mods – is the feeling of actually travelling somewhere. As an anecdote, I had to check out this remote dirt strip up in the Northern Territory for an OnAir job. Before bringing a DC-6, I flew in just to check the place out in a small bush plane. The feeling of going from a city to landing in this remote airstrip at dusk in the middle of nowhere sold me on the sim. I ended up walking half the length of the runway to check for surface, rocks, etc. Just being able to stand on the touchdown zone, thinking about best ways to approach in a much larger plane while you're surrounded by the sights and sounds of the Australian wilderness was incredibly immersive. 

 

Edited May 7, 20251 yr by Georgleboui

Here I have MSFS 2020 with REX Atmos + Map Enhancement mod (Latest Bing HD ) + NV filters.

If I compare that to the default MSFS 2024 which I use since a couple of months (now beta SU 2) then the difference in look and immersion is not that much.

In MSFS 2020 I do not suffer from those melted buildingblocks but in MSFS 2024 I do. It are always the same type of buildingblocks that are melted. While other types of buildingblocks next to the melted ones look normal.

The clouds look slightly better but not that much.

An Fs friend of mine could not see the difference between my MSFS 2020 sim and my MSFS 2024 sim.

I now fly solely in MSFS 2024 and am waiting for REX Atmos 2024 to be released and hoping Nvidia will make their filters compatible with 2024 (GF Experience,not the App).

 Chios airport view 2024

Chios airport view 2020

 

Edited May 7, 20251 yr by GSalden

LGHI Chios Island National is a lovely little airport.

13 hours ago, spilok said:

My conclusion is that it's the COMPUTER you are using.

The only way that a customer can conclude that and upgrade would be worth it, is to try it for themselves. Many are either too cheap or afraid to just try it. I understand that the computer and internet connection can be a consideration, but for most of us is add-ons.

For me, I concluded that I like MSFS 2020 much better than v 2024. It's not my computer, but my add-on collection and game play. MSFS is a better sim overall and I doubt that this will change.

Why struggle?  Find the sim that works best for you and enjoy it?  Or, if you have the drive space, run both?  

I'm "all in" on 2024 right now, but I 100% understand that is not the right answer for everyone.  It is right for me and what I do (and don't) fly.  I'm a GA flyer and don't have time for airliners anymore.  I have all the addons I need and 2024 works great for me.  Not everyone is the same.  

I'm happy when people say they are staying with 2020.  What I don't like to see is people with "upgrade-itis", forcing themselves into 2024.  That's where all the heated discussions come about, but why?  I think people are arguing with themselves more than others.  

Our spare time is limited, you should be using that time as efficently as possible, and not struggling with something.  

MS is keeping both sims running for a reason.  

It isn't just flight simming either, I play the strategy game "Civilization" and the series just launched Civ 7.  There's tons of controversy, some major changes to game mechanics and a bunch of other drama.  Meanwhile, Civ 6 runs just fine, yet people seem stuck.  Running older versions of games is not that uncommon.  I know people running heavily modded versions of sports games that are 10+ years old.  

Edited May 7, 20251 yr by kerosene31

One of the main reasons I have not purchased MSFS2024 is (as far as I know)  not being able to Save a flight.