3 minutes ago, SeedyL said:

Hello @JonathanC,

For clarification, that is not what I said. I posted that third-party developers get access to the pre-release build to test their add-on products in advance of its final release by opting in to the public beta. This gives them several weeks/months (however long the beta lasts) to update their products as needed or to submit bug reports to the SDK team via the DevSupport forums.

Thanks,

SeedyL, MSFS Community Manager

Ah thanks, I misunderstood you. So we all (devs, beta users) get access to the beta at the same time, then.

In that case it makes sense that all the add-on makers are currently working on fixing whatever is broken. @micstatic there's your explanation.. the devs are busy working right now 😄

 

Edited September 9, 2025Sep 9 by JonathanC

I understand what seedy said.  But perhaps asobo should be more proactive with the big payware devs.  They are the ones that keep the hobby going.  I don't think that can be debated.  Either way it's not critical since we all retain the ability to roll back to release version. If we were electing to select an alpha I'm with you.  But since it's a beta I view that differently.  As we all should

2 minutes ago, micstatic said:

I understand what seedy said.  But perhaps asobo should be more proactive with the big payware devs.  They are the ones that keep the hobby going.  I don't think that can be debated.  Either way it's not critical since we all retain the ability to roll back to release version. If we were electing to select an alpha I'm with you.  But since it's a beta I view that differently.  As we all should

Except we are flighting which has different interpretations.  I like the fix it now approach even in production.

dd

 

9 minutes ago, micstatic said:

If we were electing to select an alpha I'm with you.  But since it's a beta I view that differently.  As we all should

Hello @micstatic,

Please see my earlier post about definitions re: alpha, beta, etc. Internally we don't use those terms at all. We refer to the ongoing pre-release test as "flighting". However, since most end-users of the sim aren't familiar with that software development term, we call it the "SU4 beta" when discussing it publicly because most people have heard the term "beta" before and understand it to mean a non-final work-in-progress build for testing purposes. 

Thanks,

SeedyL, MSFS Community Manager

Edited September 9, 2025Sep 9 by SeedyL

16 minutes ago, micstatic said:

But perhaps asobo should be more proactive with the big payware devs.

Totally understand what you are saying but unfortunately for them this is a bit like a dog chasing their own tail as even if they had prior access there is nothing to say the very next build will not break/undo what they just did so a lot of them are adapting a:

"we will give it a shot and if it works great and if it doesn't we will worry about it when we get the final build"  It's pointless to try and keep fixing things with every flighting build

So there really is no way to guarantee an add on will work until it's built to work with the release build.  😞

But if people prefer stability and just knowing things work consistently then obviously plenty of options outside of the beta.  

It's a great time to have options for whatever people prefer although a rock solid 2024 that didn't require all these beta's would be even better 🙂 

35 minutes ago, SeedyL said:

This gives them several weeks/months (however long the beta lasts) to update their products as needed or to submit bug reports to the SDK team via the DevSupport forums.

The problem here is that most developers will NOT do a lot of work on their products to make them work with Beta updates because they are Beta and a lot can change between each beta update and then final Release (aka not Beta).

Just not enough development resources to re-test everything on each beta update, hence waiting for final release to start work on testing one’s product.  Can be pretty expensive to do a lot of adjustments on early Beta updates only to have to undo them in later Beta updates because of impacting changes.

You see that sentiment reiterated on numerous add-on content developer’s public websites and non-public. 

Edited September 9, 2025Sep 9 by SayAgain

Who has what expectations?

dd

9 minutes ago, psolk said:

had prior access there is nothing to say the very next build will not break/undo what they just did so a lot of them are adapting

You beat me to it … was posting exactly that as you were posting.  

26 minutes ago, SeedyL said:

Hello @micstatic,

Please see my earlier post about definitions re: alpha, beta, etc. Internally we don't use those terms at all. We refer to the ongoing pre-release test as "flighting". However, since most end-users of the sim aren't familiar with that software development term, we call it the "SU4 beta" when discussing it publicly because most people have heard the term "beta" before and understand it to mean a non-final work-in-progress build for testing purposes. 

Thanks,

SeedyL, MSFS Community Manager

Understood. Thanks. Appreciate you being here 

5 hours ago, Vitold69 said:

And what is POM? 🤔

Parallax Occlusion Mapping (POM) effects are rendered on terrain surfaces like rocks, roads, and buildings. This feature adds realistic depth and shadowing to flat textures, making surfaces appear more three-dimensional without increasing polygon count.

Just completed a night LPFR - LPPT in SU4, only default everything, starting with the Inibuilds A32N.

All was smooth, sound, really enjoyable, real world weather even added some turbulence where it was expected, ATC accepted my request for a "direct to" into an intermediate approach fix even after having assigned me a STAR, and AI Traffic was consistent.

So far I am enjoying SU4 !!! 

Will stay with all default until I read from Fenix, FSLabs, Inibuilds and iFly that I'm able to try their airliners in SU4, but I will give my gliders and helis a try during next weekend for sure !

5 hours ago, MarcG said:

The Ugly;
The mouse doesn't work in VR #FacePalm can't really do much so will have to park the beta until this obvious issue is fixed.

My mouse is working just fine in VR, Reverb G2, Oasis driver

3 hours ago, FPVSteve said:

It would be so much help if there was a way to run the MSFS beta side-by-side with a stable installation though. Not to bring X-Plane into the discussion but that's one thing they really do well.

could always buy a second copy on another store front when it goes on discount.

Steam and MS store use different install and appdata folders

I did that back in 2020 for a bit when testing AIG because there was a crash only effecting the steam version for some reason and I needed to get some data. Mind you my MSStore copy I won in a giveaway, I didn't buy it.

 

 

 

Edited September 10, 2025Sep 10 by Tuskin38

Just completed a flight on SU4 beta with:

Fenix A320, FSHud, SkyTrack (my VA ACARS), SLC from Edinburgh to Gatwick.

Probably the smoothest session in MSFS I've had - I don't think there was a single stutter... quite honestly the sim felt "light" if that's a thing.

Positive so far - two issues though:

1) Fenix showed -44.0T. FOB expectation on arrival on the FMC, although it had no effect on the flight

2) FSHud seemed to not get any enroute traffic injected from FSLTL although there were aircraft on the ground at both departure and arrival airports. FSLTL injector was still running and showing traffic, but they weren't in the sim while I was off the ground for some reason.

No biggie, it was just a little lonely 🙂

 

they seem to have made shadows switch to lower quality a lot sooner as you get away from the source object.

Edited September 10, 2025Sep 10 by Tuskin38