5 hours ago, SayAgain said:

DLSS is a good example with fake frames so as to produce higher FPS

what's wrong with that? the whole MSFS sim world is "fake"

they will be fine. an example for you.

Many people have had proformance decreases since su5. Myself included. Does it affect them? Noope they just bring out a USA update for the grand parks and everyone laps it up and goes back to thinking they walk on water.

Some nearly 10 years ago when Rob A said "we should just appect stutters and lag" i always thought the devs and their pay master would be rubbing their hands in glee when they heard him say that,

It gave them carte blanc to turn out rubbish. The other devs followed in suit and now we have a plethora of unfininished garbage and the normal gate holders will then shoot you dont if you ever question or critise anything to do with flightsimming in general.

They are about to release GTA 6 at roughly the same price that ms2024 is/was.

As ive always said for over 15 years since Captain Sim and Air Simmer started doing to pay to beta, the effect on the standard of the sim in the future will be huge.

Theres theres alot money to be made out of this racket, so long as people / kids are willing to pay for unfinished, unpolished tat and so long as people buy in over hyped junk

The latest KATL release is a perfect example.

Edited July 9Jul 9 by fluffyflops

18 hours ago, SayAgain said:

I think MSFS 2024 will be the end of the road for MS/Asobo involvement.

I agree with you. 2020 was such a huge improvement over anything that came before it was bound to be a huge success. 2024 made further significant improvements.

But what could be improved over 2024 in a future version that would justify the expense? Answers on a postcard. 😉

18 hours ago, SayAgain said:

True Asobo is independently owned … but without MS financial support and infrastructure they would never have completed MSFS as we see it today. So yes, not “owned” but extremely reliant on MS when it comes to MSFS (especially their servers and bandwidth).

Seems to be a basic misunderstanding here.

Asobo Studios didn't wake up one morning and decide to make a flight simulator. Microsoft contracted with Asobo to make another iteration of MSFS for them.

This is a purely Microsoft product.

16 hours ago, turbomax said:

what's wrong with that? the whole MSFS sim world is "fake"

How is photogrammetry fake … it’s based entirely on real world data?

4 hours ago, fluffyflops said:

Some nearly 10 years ago when Rob A said "we should just appect stutters and lag"

Not what I said, but ok … what I’ve always maintained is that if you want consistent frame times, then either buy better hardware and/or reduce your graphics settings … it really is that simple. Ignoring the limits of what can be achieved without knowing (or wanting to know) the technical reasons they can’t be achieved (often referred to as “wishy thinking”) or go the route of AI and be dealt something that is a guess of what you should be experiencing at the cost of visual accuracy. But hey, you FPS hunters won … you got your AI (be sure to donate to the Jensen H. Trillion) to wash those stutters aways (South Pacific reference).

4 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

But what could be improved over 2024 in a future version that would justify the expense?

You’ll need a book for that, not a postcard. :)

Edited July 9Jul 9 by SayAgain

On 7/8/2026 at 11:24 AM, SayAgain said:

not sure how the US could put international company CEOs in jail? Micron maybe, but not the others.

By banning them from selling their products in the US until they make restitution. But as you pointed out, restitution is rarely actually punitive and ends up being more just a cost of doing business.

On 7/8/2026 at 11:24 AM, SayAgain said:

Part of the problem is the end users thirst for ridiculously high FPS

I think that's pretty much the entirety of the problem. After a certain framerate, higher framerates are just bragging rights. It reminds me of the stereo competitions that used to be really popular in the 90s. The really serious guys would show up towing a minivan that was filled with speakers and amplifiers, all tuned to be as loud as possible at one specific frequency. They'd seal the car up and make sure no one got inside it because the volume would melt their eardrums. It would make this stupid-loud sound for about half a second before the amps fried or the speakers blew, and whoever managed to make the loudest noise won.

Totally stupid, definitely no longer about actual audio, and purely for bragging rights. Just like the framerate chase.

1 hour ago, eslader said:

and purely for bragging rights.

nobody has yet a pc CPU/GPU powerful enough to drive the latest VR headsets at max resolution with max. MSFS2024 settings at constant 60 fps. so no bragging in the VR department yet, but hopefully sometime in the future. 😄

2 hours ago, eslader said:

By banning them from selling their products in the US until they make restitution.

Unfortunately "back door" channels remain open and it's how nVidia managed to move GPUs to places they claimed they never moved them even when pictures and videos were provided showing the GPUs at locations they weren't supposed to be. Just need to donate to a campaign fund and you're free from investigation leaving only end users and YouTube content providers (who to be fair do a good job but have virtually ZERO impact on anything). The corruption and consumer manipulation is pretty stagging currently with little or nothing being done about it.

29 minutes ago, turbomax said:

nobody has yet a pc CPU/GPU powerful enough to drive the latest VR headsets at max resolution with max.

Agree, and they never will ... software engineers will not stop producing more realism unless told NOT TO by a project manager (or in the case of MSFS 2024 PM cull cull cull cull ... less is more FPS). Unfortunately the ball of progress has become very expensive not because of the technology but because of the so called "for the investors" while actual profits remain with the executive branch ... and BTW, thanks for your money investors (they're the one's really taking the risk, not the executive branch).

Even next generation GPUs due maybe in 2028 - 2030 (AMD RDNA5 series nVidia 6000 series) have synthetic improvements of 15% (actual not AI based which is claiming 2.4X faster) ... peel away the true rendering capabilities and these next gen GPU for their actual performance.

51 minutes ago, turbomax said:

nobody has yet a pc CPU/GPU powerful enough to drive the latest VR headsets at max resolution with max. MSFS2024 settings at constant 60 fps. so no bragging in the VR department yet, but hopefully sometime in the future. 😄

I get pretty close...

But yeah, my FPS drops into the 50s from time to time, and if I'm doing something like LAX in a thunderstorm might even drop to the high 40s. Which is still pretty freaking awesome.

But I think some historical context is valuable too. Microsoft Flight Simulator has always been released years before the computer that can run it perfectly exists. Even back in the SubLogic days, when it was just a CGA line-art 2d cockpit in a tiny wireframe world with no weather, a grid for the ground, and some triangles on the edges for mountains, the framerate would frequently be a slideshow.

The closest I ever came before now to having enough horsepower to run Flight Sim completely smoothly at full graphics settings was in FS4 on a 486, which isn't too surprising because it was basically FS3 with additions like dynamic scenery (on rails, basically sprites that required almost no computing power), which allowed computer tech to close the gap.

That I can have graphical and physical fidelity at the level of 2024 while running a 16.5 million pixel VR display and it almost never drops framerates to the point where there's even slightly noticeable stuttering is astonishing.

1 hour ago, eslader said:

I get pretty close...

your (and my) Pimax Crystal Light are not the latest, highest resolution VR sets that I was referring to.

2 hours ago, turbomax said:

your (and my) Pimax Crystal Light are not the latest, highest resolution VR sets that I was referring to.

True, but framerate performance if we moved to the Crystal Super would still give us smooth video.

Point being, yes we can have great visuals on high-res equipment.

5 hours ago, SayAgain said:

Agree, and they never will ... software engineers will not stop producing more realism unless told NOT TO by a project manager (or in the case of MSFS 2024 PM cull cull cull cull ... less is more FPS).

To be fair, what's they've done is, I feel, mostly right. I'm able to run most things in most places with OLOD 1000, I'm only really noticing the undercarriage issue, nothing else. If they'd change that, bingo!

On 7/10/2026 at 2:32 PM, kevinfirth said:

mostly right. I'm able to run most things in most places with OLOD 1000

So why are you having to manually do this via usercfg.opt file? Also Terrain LoDFactor is a float and ObjectsLoD LoDFactor is a float so no idea where you are getting 1000 from ... do you really mean LoDFactor = 10.000000?

TLOD = 8.0 and OLOD = 10.0 ... FPS drops from about 40-44 to 20-22 at LHR with Traffic and I will eventually get GPU memory warning.

And the floating AI (it gets funnier with missing front wheel and only the closest rear wheels render ... it's like Pirates of the Caribbean):

Regardless of the values entered, the culling calculation will still not render objects less that specific screen percentage (for ObjectsLoD only) ... terrain will look a little better at altitude, but objects will still get culled.

AIG models use 5 LODs as recommended by the SDK, but they still get culled.

Making the culling adjustable (even if only via userCfg.opt) would be nice (and extremely easy to do), but there are several other significant issues that need to be addressed especially for those of us that use Xplane, the MSFS 2024 flight physics are just not that great ... the inertia is still WAY off and one just doesn't get the feeling of "weight". Changes in speed on approach should have much more of an impact and I honestly can't tell the difference when making an overweight landing vs. just above margin fuel weight landing ... change should be more dramatic.

Then we have the limits of Photogrammetry and low level flight with the slow to render melted building look and rock trees and other anomalies that can be a distraction. Where I get disappointed is the continued focus of FPS rather than a focus of better image quality ... IMHO optimization by culling isn't really optimization, it's just rendering less that should be rendered. I get it, gotta make this work on consoles, honestly I don't think PCs are really something MS care that much about (cost to entry for users is high, even worse now) so why bother to focus on PC user side ... DLSS 4.5 is really on nVidia's path and MS/Asobo don't need to do much to support it.

On a side note Kevin, I'll be in the UK, Porto, Germany Oct 14th to Nov 1 Will you be anywhere near Blackpool, Winchester, and possibly Staffordshire?

Rob.

8 minutes ago, SayAgain said:

On a side note Kevin, I'll be in the UK, Porto, Germany Oct 14th to Nov 1 Will you be anywhere near Blackpool, Winchester, and possibly Staffordshire?

Not far from staffs here yes. My postcode is DY11 5LU

I could potentially get to Blackpool/Fleetwood, Rob. In fact, you are coming to the UK literally three days after the UK Flightsim Show at Aerospace Bristol! Can you change your flight dates? 😉