4 hours ago, Maxis said:

To me this was one of the better livestreams as the responses indicated more attuned issue awareness and the responses were more thought out and credible. 

Agree very much. This was my biggest takeaway from the stream.

6 hours ago, ryanbatc said:

......

I'm not in agreement with your general opinion though.  I just recall the beginning of 2020, it had soooo many bugs.  I think what happened is that we were all surprised at the huge jump 2020 was from FSX or P3D that we were simply okay with the buggy release state.  IMO people expected the 2024 release to be bug free and build on the successful state that 2020 was 4 years after it was released.  No sim in the Microsoft Flight Simulator franchise has ever had a bug free release in the first year.  2020 wasn't in a solid state until almost 2 years in... and that basically coincided with payware releases from popular developers as well.  I recall FSX RTM running like garbage on new systems at the time too lol!  FSX wasn't truly sound until SP2/Acceleration.

......2

 

I think this goes forgotten or unknown by many unless you're an older simmer like some of us...on release FSX was unplayable on my system, a slide show no matter what i did.....and I was forced to buy a whole new PC or do something else ....and P3D only got better performance after going 64bit...I still have "OOM" nightmares...

With MSFS2020 and 2024 I can play them well with reasonable settings as I'm far more pragmatic as I get to 60....on my I7-7700K/GTX 1080Ti I don't look at the FPS count, I instead bought expensive hardware like a full G1000 suite and CDU panels and have never had as much simming joy.......but it's my birthday today and I'm ordering a new PC as I figure my wife bought herself a new car I can get away with spending 1/10 😛 (that's in Aussie dollars) without her noticing. .....and when the PMDG 747's come out I'll renew my love affair with the Queen..my first love, sorry wife...

Edited July 24, 2025Jul 24 by YMMB

My random thoughts...

#1: One of the releases back in the day (FSX? FS9? I can't remember) was so poorly suited to the hardware available at the time that even top of the line PCs were getting stuttery performance, and people without $10,000 machines were looking at slide shows on landing. That was one of the things that turbocharged my interest in non-MS flight sims. Now we seem to have turned a corner... affordable PCs can display awe inspiring graphics at 30+ frames, and the trend seems to be towards even better performance. We're looking at a future when most of us are not hardware limited; the limits come from MSFS controlling terrain stutters through streaming, etc., in other words dev- and server-side limits to performance. That's an amazing transformation.

#2: Back in the day, you bought MSFS on hard media (disc) and there were no updates until the release of a new flight sim 4 years later. Because there was no internet ecosystem back then, the releases all had to be bulletproof. These days, the devs have the ability to push out fixes, and that lets them include a greater tolerance for errors, knowing that a fix can be out in weeks or months. Naturally that's going to affect the team's impression of what's ready to release. That said, there's an unfortunate distinction made between entertainment apps and productivity apps. MS would never publish a buggy version of productivity software thinking they could tolerate a slow launch followed by months of bug fixing after the release. Still, it is what it is. As long as the entertainment crowd sends them money, they'll see the "hotfix" model as viable.

#3: This one really concerns me. The ecosystem is now so complex that when you combine the "hotfix" model (which may include several years of SU updates), with the delays in SDK refinement, with the complexity of add-on development, we're looking at an ever longer time until maturity. When development happened quickly, we were all not only happy with a 4-year cycle for new simulators, but we eagerly looked forward to new iterations. Now that it takes 2-3 years for a product to mature, and 3-4 years for 3rd party developers to be fully in the game, the whole process is delayed in a way that's worrisome. Perhaps we should wait 8 years, not 4, for a new sim. If we stick with a 4-year replacement cycle for the base sim, we may never reach a steady state where the sim of choice and its add-ons are all in good harmony. Which in a way is kind of like the conundrum in #1 above, where we can envision the potential but never realize it.

I don't have any solutions, I'm just a user not a dev. But since good hardware is getting within the grasp of many (most?) users by now, maybe a reasonable thing would be for MS to commit to an 8-year cycle for upgrades. Improve MSFS 2024 until at least 2032, don't derail improvements in the platform by forcing users and 3rd party developers to switch to something new. Recognize that maturity used to take 2-4 years, but now takes 4-8 years.

Just thoughts.

Thanks to all of you for your reactions and comments. It's interested to be part of this community. I do read all or your input. Thank you again. I take it for granted and don't wish to rehash that MSFS2024 was released publicly in an unfinished state, and that the whole situation is incredibly complex. We are always very good in the diagnosis and to look back in the past. That’s OK. But I’d like to refocus the discussion here on two points, shaping the future, if you don't mind :

1. “How can I help as a simmer?” This is an honest question. I beta test, I provide feedback, I engage with the community daily. I even develop and share freeware sceneries to give back. But I wonder: Is there more I can do? Are there other ways we, as simmers spread all around the world, can contribute meaningfully to the evolution of MSFS beyond the usual channels?

2. Rethinking the Live Dev Streams I deeply appreciate the transparency and effort behind these streams, but perhaps it’s time to evolve the format? I mentioned in my initial post, to consider shorter, more focused sessions. I'm even not sure if it sounds right. It was just examples. Introduce new voices from the dev team to bring fresh energy and insights? I believe the current format has served us well. Very well. I truly think that. But adapting it might help rekindle the enthusiasm and make the communication even more effective. As a confirmation bias 😉 the MSFS blog update just announced today (CET) that a new Beta SU3 with performance improvement in schedule for mid-next week.

I share these thoughts not out of criticism, but from a place of genuine support and passion for the sim and its future. Curious to hear how others feel.

Edited July 25, 2025Jul 25 by vbazillio

18 hours ago, kerosene31 said:

Am I the only one who has never watched one of these streams?  For me they are far too long.  I just don't have the time.

 

Same here. Maybe watched a few snippets here and there. Too much talk, as Arnie would say. 

Then, again, I'm a simpleton. Barely graduated community college. 

I’m grateful for all the work MS/ASOBO have put in. 
Yes FS24 may have released a bit too early, but what we have now already is pretty amazing.

For those of you around the FSX/P3D days, we had basically NOTHING from the developers for a very long time, then FSX was cancelled and the world/simulator we had was static. If there was a bug, it was a bug and the community tried add fix/adapt to it.
 

Right now we have the core sim developers at ASOBO engaging with the community, 3rd party developers, actively fixing and updating, I’d give them credit where due. 

They are too long and rambling.  Jayne does a much better job now; after all these years she has become more confident and direct, but maybe they need to cut them down to an hour (would maybe suit everybody) but maybe do one a month on a fixed schedule so we all know when to tune in.  And if someone isn't available (holiday etc.) substitute someone else in.  David Dedeine was brilliant on his one appearance.

They don't necessarily need to cut content to shorten it, but just look at their own performance answering the questions. 

I like Sebastian a lot - he does come across as genuine and really seems to want to solve the problems as a simmer himself, but his answer on the Simconnect issue was ridiculous as just one example.
He just rambled on for a long time repeating himself, and by the end of that segment he never even answered the question!  That is one example where time is being wasted.

And they keep showing the long backlog / suggestions list.  Don't, just post it online as they do - that is the place to go through 70+ issues, not a twitch session.  Most of the list is the same each time anyway.
They only need to talk about what they are working on over the next month or two.  The information on SU4 was good and what a lot of us wanted to hear.  Looking at main thread optimisation again - superb news!

I don't want to see these sessions disappear though; it is the best news / feedback we get.  And the format doesn't even need to be changed that much, it just needs to be a bit sharper.

I have to facilitate management / directors meetings myself, and I would be pulling my hair out if they were like this.

Edited July 25, 2025Jul 25 by bobcat999

I still say a well written monthly blog is far better than a bumbling Q&A where they still fail to answer questions properly, by all means do them two or three times a year to keep up appearances and showcase Partners and such.

I am grateful that the top leadership takes time away from their busy schedules to provide information and insight into their plans, activities and responses to issues and questions raised by the community at large. Very, very few other software developers provide such access!

My only recommendation is to restructure the order of the material. Put key dev activities, schedule and updates at the front, then guests, and lastly Q&A which some may not be interested in but is available for those who are.

Edited July 25, 2025Jul 25 by Gulf76

Just my opinion here and it doesn't at all align with the OP.

We are so lucky to have the sim we have.  In fact, we have two - MSFS2020 and MSFS2024.

We could easily be just stuck, still sticky taping together FSX and P3D, however we have the best possible sim many of us could dream of and for very little cost.

I love the fact that ASOBO are dedicated and constantly working on this project.  They update us weekly with what they are doing and whilst some things may not be fixed, at least they are invested, trying and communicating. 

Just think back 5/6 years ago to what your simulator looked like and what you needed to do to run it. 

We are very lucky. 

Jase

3 hours ago, MarcG said:

I still say a well written monthly blog is far better than a bumbling Q&A where they still fail to answer questions properly, by all means do them two or three times a year to keep up appearances and showcase Partners and such.

Given all your well thought out insights into Asobo's Q&A and your trenchant and on-point comments on flight simulation software development, I'm very surprised Asobo and Microsoft haven't offered you a full time position yet. 

IMHO these Q&A streams where literally almost every answer is something along the lines of "it's complicated, a lot of work, we'll see, no promises, we hear you" have been a thing going back to MSFS2020's launch.

there are SO many aspects of MSFS2020 that were barely addressed despite being a constant focus of the community, like better ATC and AI (among many, many other things, obviously) and for some reason we just don't hold them to account for it. i guess it's more or less because MSFS is the only modern civilian flight simulator that has real appeal to average folks and so we "take what we can get" as they say. and that's not to say it's not an amazing sim packed with great features already, but it has far more potential than what we actually got IMO.

i think sometimes what happens in game development is a core team of "MVPs" creates a game and is responsible for the most challenging and time consuming aspects of development, like rendering technology or artwork like modelling and sound, and once the game releases, the talent and/or the resources that talent relied on are taken away and from that point on, it's no longer feasible to continue developing core features in a significant way. it feels like that's what happened with MSFS2020 and 2024 (except with 2024, it feels like even during the core development phase, it was more of a 'B team' project...)

all just my humble opinions, take it or leave it, take it with a grain of salt, yadda yadda yadda.

11 hours ago, MarcG said:

I still say a well written monthly blog is far better than a bumbling Q&A where they still fail to answer questions properly, by all means do them two or three times a year to keep up appearances and showcase Partners and such.

A blog is a terrible idea, if it replaces the Q&A. The best thing about the Twitch Q&A is that we can ask them questions in real time and put them on the spot.  And I have to say, over the years watching, they have often taken many tough questions from the chat during the stream. They don't answer all the questions, as there are way more questions from the chat that are asked, that they can answer.  But they have taken many tough questions on the spot, especially if the chat keeps repeating it.

If they replaced it with a blog, the communication would be 100x worse.  We can't follow up if there is something they don't understand. In the Twitch Q&A, if they answer the question and the chat thinks their is some misunderstanding, the chat will often correct them in real time, and sometimes they pick up on it. That will never happen with a blog, the misunderstanding would persist indefinitely.

12 hours ago, bobcat999 said:

They are too long and rambling.  Jayne does a much better job now; after all these years she has become more confident and direct, but maybe they need to cut them down to an hour (would maybe suit everybody) but maybe do one a month on a fixed schedule so we all know when to tune in.  And if someone isn't available (holiday etc.) substitute someone else in.  David Dedeine was brilliant on his one appearance.

They don't necessarily need to cut content to shorten it, but just look at their own performance answering the questions. 

I like Sebastian a lot - he does come across as genuine and really seems to want to solve the problems as a simmer himself, but his answer on the Simconnect issue was ridiculous as just one example.
He just rambled on for a long time repeating himself, and by the end of that segment he never even answered the question!  That is one example where time is being wasted.

And they keep showing the long backlog / suggestions list.  Don't, just post it online as they do - that is the place to go through 70+ issues, not a twitch session.  Most of the list is the same each time anyway.
They only need to talk about what they are working on over the next month or two.  The information on SU4 was good and what a lot of us wanted to hear.  Looking at main thread optimisation again - superb news!

I don't want to see these sessions disappear though; it is the best news / feedback we get.  And the format doesn't even need to be changed that much, it just needs to be a bit sharper.

I have to facilitate management / directors meetings myself, and I would be pulling my hair out if they were like this.

One just needs to remember the FSX and P3D blackouts to disregard format details.  BTW, these guys have day jobs.

dd

I have never watched or read any of the live stream Dev material.  But I do have decades of experience, prior to the asteroid killing off all the dinosaurs, facilitating communications and problem resolution involving very large corporations and very large hardware vendors.

My experience tells me that a rambling, impromptu, and online Q&A or "discussion" seldom reaches the technical heart of the issue or provides sufficient detail to those directly involved with problem resolution.  Those who can actually make a change to fix things are frustrated at the lack of detail and upper management "salesmanship" or "customer coddling" while those who think they understand but have no actual responsibility for making things work truly believe the discussion helped fix things. 

My preferred method is to have the online discussion about general issues, directions, and methodology.  Then the technical experts for the customer WRITE well documented descriptions of the problems and provider experts respond in writing with technical detail at the same level as the initial problem/issue description.   This will be an ongoing back and forth process until the two parties converge on the appropriate solution.  While maintaining the back and forth both customer and provider are fully aware of the status of the issue, the sticking points, and the possible solutions.  

I have spent a lot of time trying to find out what happens to my zen desk and bug reports but it seems they flutter off with the breeze and may or maynot land on an appropriate desk. 

I have spent hundreds of hours trying to understand the VRAM issue from a very technical level but find no similar technical feedback from MS/Asobo.  There is a huge online library of usage and performance details about DX12 and VRAM in places such as MicroSoft Learns or the DX12 SDK but none of the MS responses about VRAM come close to providing that level of detail.   

SO - change the Live Stream Dev to be flag waving, announcements, and general discussions with no expectation of technical details.

AND - create several new very detailed discussion groups for interactive review of problems.   Users can submit detailed questions with the expectation of receiving acknowledgement and detailed answers or an explanation of why their question is not worthy of further discussion. 

And at the same time provide concrete technical details about status, technical difficulties, and proposed solutions - in WRITING where we technical nerds/users can learn and maybe contribute from a user perspective. 

PS - I gave up the problem solving and provider/customer dispute resolution business when it became obvious that IT was no longer going to be a centralized service managed by experts.  

Edited July 25, 2025Jul 25 by TacomaSailor