58 minutes ago, JonathanC said:

Lol.. if you think ANY company will release a consumer flight sim/game which works ONLY as the "REAL PILOTS" expect for a ~$100-200 one time cost.

Even if every single "REAL PILOT" in the world bought this amazing sim, the company would go out of business. 

Like it or not, ALL sims cater to this "certain audience" that you denigrate, which will never have a chance to operate/play/race/sail/fly/farm/ etc. the real thing. 

For you "REAL PILOTS", I assume you can use your airline's simulator or just buy that same thing for your house, assuming you can afford the many millions it costs. 

I'm afraid that you missed the point here. 

Leaving aside these unnecessary remarks about the "real pilots", which, by the way, there are plenty of them here, we also have PC pilots who understand the shortcomings very well and can compare different features available and well-designed on other platforms. 

I'm not denigrating, I'm stating real facts. And talking about the people that don't have a chance to " operate/play/race/sail/fly/farm/ etc. the real thing. " it's not their fault or mine. People like you should appreciate inputs coming from real pilots or PC experienced pilots, take notes, and join us in the hope of improving this platform for the benefit of all. 

1 hour ago, LRBS said:

There is a considerable amount of "still not good enough" about the MSFS 2024 evolution, especially after such a long time since release. A few highlights here, and many of them are listed on the internet.

The main problem starts with ASOBO, who, unfortunately, has limited knowledge of certain aspects and is unwilling to address many obvious items. 

The other problem is related to a certain audience that has no knowledge about aviation and is interested in flying the airplane from the outside, landing heavies on 1,000-foot runways, jerking flight controls like no tomorrow, not calibrating flight controls, witnessing melted buildings while having PG, and arguing that it is OK, etc we will never ever have a good/real "flight simulator". 

Besides what was listed here, I wonder why they removed the "REACTIVITY" adjustment in the flight controls sensitivity section. All their airplanes have aerodynamic issues; this was a setting where you could tone down certain peripherals and make it plausible. Why don't they have linear sensitivity adjustments? Why don't we have a setting to set a certain visibility value or an RVR? All the other Sims have/had that important and realistic feature? Even if we fly under VFR or IFR rules, there are certain minimal visibility requirements that we should be able to set manually. Maybe someone would like to do a close pattern at their home base and set a minimum FAA, ICAO, or CAA required visibility to practice, or shoot a hand-flown ILS to the minimums.      

There are so many aspects that can be easily improved to create a very nice simulator (game) that others have already implemented. All this unwillingness to fix the obvious will/create lots of dissatisfaction.

THIS!!

In MSFS (be it 2020 or 2024) accidents due to runway overrun due to low friction, falling from the sky due to icing on the wings*, failure of control surfaces, failure of <fill in with many other failures> ... you name it, will probably never happen because it would overcharge the (attention trigger word 😄) X-Box crowd.

Others already mentioned that the clouds may have improved visually, but flying through a thunderstorm is still terrifying harmless.

As a nice looking game MSFS is fine, but simulationwise still lacking a lot.

* I remember having seen a video of 2020 on YT some years ago, where the windshield of a GA-plane iced up and the video creator was VERY impressed about that. However, he didn't realize that he actually should have fallen from the sky due to worse flow around the wings and the plane weight. Visually it was indeed nice, but SIMULATION: zero. This is only one example.

54 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

Believe it or not, a lot of users want MSFS to be as realistic as possible, and want it to be more useful for real life pilots, and that's what they upvote.  Here is the Wishlist section, with the most highly upvoted wishes: https://forums.flightsimulator.com/c/official/wishlist/163/l/latest?order=votes. If you look at the Wishlist and sort it by the most upvotes, it's pretty obvious most people that are voting want more realism.

Some of the things that were upvoted, were eventually acted upon. Historical weather is one. A lot of the "hard core flight sim users" and real life pilots, wanted historical weather. It was upvoted enough, that it got onto Jorg and the MSFS team's radar, and it made it into MSFS 2024.  Another one is being able to avoid the walk around, which was very controversial.  Well, you can avoid the walk around now, and there is a hot key that you can bind to just jump right into the cockpit. 

Another one is the World Hub which was upvoted and also acted upon.  Almost everyone would prefer taxiway markings/signs and other airport markings to be accurate. That is what the World Hub is for, and it was running for a little while, but paused during MSFS 2024's release, but it will resume soon.

The MSFS team doesn't act on everything that is upvoted. But they do act on a lot.  And a lot of the upvotes are from the community who want more realism in MSFS. I think the best way to get some of the features you want added, or get a feature that was removed to be added back in, is to either upvote a wishlist item that has it, or start a new wishlist item yourself.

I totally agree that we want more realism, and that was my point. Right now, regardless of the present "wish list" and the past one, there are still many items not addressed. Now, as you mentioned, and I understand that ASOBO/MSFS doesn't act on everything that is upvoted, but they don't have a clear understanding of certain aspects of a"flight simulator", and it shows in their priorities of addressing or removing certain features. We can go up and down on this discussion, and nothing will get addressed, despite what we say. They need some really qualified people in this aviation field, and let the programmers do their job. 

For some unknown reason, others manage to get it to an acceptable level.

4 hours ago, GSalden said:

Using multi monitor in Fs20 and Fs24 and it works fine here….

What do you miss ?

Missing or Limited Features
•     Independent Camera Control
You can't fully specify pitch, bank, and heading for each monitor view independently. This limits realistic cockpit setups where each screen should represent a unique angle.
•     Custom Field of View (FOV)
All views share the same FOV on a single PC, which is a major limitation. There's no support for asymmetric FOVs or frustum configurations.
•     System-Level Multi-View Configuration
There's no centralized way to define multi-view setups across aircraft or scenarios. Each configuration must be manually adjusted, which is tedious and error-prone.
•     Monitor Alignment and Scaling
There are issues with aligning monitors correctly. Even though Windows knows the physical layout, MSFS doesn’t use that data to auto-configure views. You often have to manually drag and scale views, which are frustrating.

"What is still lacking for you in FS2024 since SU3?"

a compelling reason to upgrade

Audio Stutters at times

PG melted buildings or inconsistent, including performance issues

LOD issues (popping in) despite several adjustments, settings etc

Career mode: dont really care for it but maybe some day. 

 

Overall, I really like 2024 despite a few issues. Love landings and seeing the cars below hurrying off to work. Appreciate that a great deal of my most favorite planes work nearly flawlessly. General aviation is where this sim truly shines IMO.

Having a 100-180 hz gsync-compatible monitor makes my brain hurt with gsync settings, fps capping and frame generation. Makes my brain hurt trying to figure out the best settings. Thats me, not the sim. 😅

Edited September 3, 2025Sep 3 by Sonosusto

57 minutes ago, LRBS said:

People like you should appreciate inputs coming from real pilots or PC experienced pilots, take notes, and join us in the hope of improving this platform for the benefit of all. 

I've been simming for 20 years across all sims, so I get that it's nice to have experienced pilots or simmers improving the platform.

However, "people like me" don't like the gatekeeping and elitism of some real-world pilots or simmers who think that just because they have been simming for x years (or fly the plane in real life or whatever), they get to talk down to other people. There's a lot of that here on AVsim and if I was a young kid getting into simming, I would run away.. and then you would have no audience to enjoy this improved platform.

You could have made your point without talking down to people (and likewise the other poster below you with his "X-box crowd" jab). 

 

Yes, but to be fair, this is supposed to be a flight simulator. I mean, it's right there in the title.

I have personally not even entertained the thought of going back to 2020.  I don't seem to have the issues some others do.  I didn't "need" SU3, or 2 or 1 for that matter.  

I don't get the problem with realism, MSFS has always needed 3rd party add-ons to bridge that gap.  

I think the thing that gets lost is that not everyone wants everything to be study level.  For example a 3rd party business jet recently released.  I don't need every switch and system to be modeled, I'm not training to be a business jet pilot, and I'll never even get to ride on one of those fancy jets during my lifetime.  Now, should there be study level addons for those that want them?  Of course!  However the gatekeeping comes in when people expect everyone to sim just like them.  

The other thing is - if you want to request features, reach out to the developers.  Here you are just talking to fellow simmers.  Discussion is fine of course, just realize that you're speaking to simmers, not developers.  Why not send your feedback to the people who can actually do something about this?  I think the frustration starts when this becomes people's "soapbox to MS or whatever vendor".  There's the old cliche about "preaching to the choir" that I think applies. 

I'm having a new computer built with all the latest hardware, mainly to take advantage of the new sim platforms, although I'm starting to have some doubts. I'm a real-world pilot and flew for a major airline for 25 years, so realism is the top priority for me. I'm not interested in flying with an X-box controller, but if that's your thing that's fine. Say what you will about P3D, but for real world airline type flying, it's realistic and also very stable. Sure, it doesn't have all the eye candy that MSFS has, but as so many of you have pointed out, no sim is perfect. The downside of P3D is the fact that it's been abandoned by scenery and aircraft developers. You gotta go where the money is, I guess. Happy Flying everybody.

1 hour ago, JonathanC said:

I've been simming for 20 years across all sims, so I get that it's nice to have experienced pilots or simmers improving the platform.

However, "people like me" don't like the gatekeeping and elitism of some real-world pilots or simmers who think that just because they have been simming for x years (or fly the plane in real life or whatever), they get to talk down to other people. There's a lot of that here on AVsim and if I was a young kid getting into simming, I would run away.. and then you would have no audience to enjoy this improved platform.

You could have made your point without talking down to people (and likewise the other poster below you with his "X-box crowd" jab). 

 

I'm sorry, I think that you are overreacting. I really don't get it. I'm not talking down to people; I made statements that are true and can be seen in many YouTube clips proving that many have no idea what they do and praise it as OK. Asking somebody to appreciate inputs about something is in no shape or form a manifestation of talking down to people, or taking notes and participating in any discussion that might lead to improvements for the benefit of all. 

I really hope you'll have a better day. Nobody is looking to disrespect or have an unproductive discussion with you.

1. fully functional weather radar

2. realistic turbulence (cat, clouds, thermals, terrain)

3. realistic icing (ground, air, airframe, engines, cold soak)

4. lighting in cloudy/foggy conditions during daytime (als, runways, taxiways, aprons, buildings, roads, headlights, cities)

5. shared cockpit

6. better cpu performance

7. overhauled control presets

8. birds (I still don’t understand why the flightsim includes deer and elephants, but not birds that are related to aviation)

9. hf, satcom

10. on screen taxi camera, cabin camera (sdk for devs)

I wish the PAPI's were properly aligned, some airports are way out.

https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/black-lines-in-the-water/443618/158

4 hours ago, UrgentSiesta said:

I highly recommend you invest in the likes of Taogs OH-6/H500C

I’ll give it a try, I assume that’s with the Heli assist turn off?