what, I only changed my monitor resolution and after rebooting and restarting MSFS 2024 beta I am getting an update to 1.9.16.0, Should do that more often 😄

https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/release-notes-su7-beta-1-9-16-0-october-2-2026/777809

RELEASE NOTES Sim Update 7 Beta - 1.9.16.0

If you are playing on PC, outdated packages in your community folder may have an unexpected impact on the title’s performance and behavior.

If you suffer from stability issues or long loading times, move your community package(s) to another folder before relaunching the title.

NOTE: Due to a build packaging issue with the 1.9.16.0 PS5 build, this flighting update will only be available to beta participants on Xbox, Windows PC, and Steam. We will plan to update PS5 next week.

Stability & Performance

Fixed HOTAS & Echo controller icon display in menus

General Bug Fixes

Fixed infinite loading of aircraft when navigation graph is empty or contains errors that result in an empty graph (was affecting both the flight load and the aircraft selection)

Aircraft

North American Aviation P-51 Mustang

Fixed several gears animations on Bunny and Strega variations

Activities

National Championship Air Races

Fixed true to life reward screen on STOL solo mode

Removed leaderboard score registering in STOL practice

Fixed reward screen when disqualified in STOL

Fixed reward screen on Roswell solo mode

Fixed starting position with Biplanes on Roswell

Fixed engine off after back on track in solo mode

Added wear and tear system in solo mode

DevMode

Added a third HUD shader variant which simulates a properly collimated HUD system which projects a flat image with no distortions away from the center.

Biome Editor

Properly unselect biome after undoing its creation. This avoids crashing when trying to edit the still selected removed biome.

SDK

Documentation

Update to engine.cfg [PROPELLER] to clearly mark required parameters to prevent *.air file errors

---

"Biome Editor

• Properly unselect biome after undoing its creation. This avoids crashing when trying to edit the still selected removed biome."

finally, have been waiting for this since fsx. still don't know what it does, but probably better than crashing.😄

Edited Saturday at 03:05 AM2 days by turbomax

As I said when the first beta was released: "Overall a pretty 'meh' update."

Still no fixes to past regressions, still no bugs fixed that have been reported for months/years, there's just no substance to these patch notes.

Seems like they're using SU7 mainly as a release platform for the Air Races, which is fine but tell us that.

I can't help but feel there's something deeper going on, MS boardroom and lay off changes affecting them? Downsized staff at Asobo perhaps? Bitten off more than they can chew with the PS platform? Or simply they're working on the next incarnation MSFS 2028.....!?

Easy to speculate of course, but when the only reliance on solid communication is via a Q&A where they don't answer questions sufficiently enough and a pointless weekly blog that provides absolutely nothing...then people are gonna speculate which is what is currently going on!

Nothing to see here. At every update, I look for a sign that they have reversed things like the terrible LOD changes since SU4 (probably never going to happen) and corrected simple regressions like the POI overexposed night lighting issue (again) - Is it really that hard when they know how to do it as they corrected it once before?

I have barely flown since SU4, and it is getting to the stage where I have almost given up now. Looking back, I probably spent too much time on it and invested in it too much. I can see I allocated too much importance to it.

I have found there are other more useful and satisfying things that hold my attention now rather than this, and I have saved hundreds a month by not buying addons, and it shows on my credit card balance, so not all bad. Thanks Asobo!

Edited Saturday at 09:34 AM1 day by bobcat999

54 minutes ago, MarcG said:

I can't help but feel there's something deeper going on

The financial struggles of the XBox game division seem to be devastating.

The new head Xbox comes from the AI department, and there is a certain irony in the fact that she now has to clean up the mess she was a part of creating. The completely out-of-control AI industry is currently leaving not just Xbox, but the entire consumer electronics industry, struggling. The PC market is collapsing because the prices of memory and graphics cards mean that, sooner rather than later, only a few people will want - or even be able - to afford new hardware. NVidia and AMD have for the most part written off their gaming segments to insignificance. The unimaginative hike in Xbox Game Pass subscription prices smacks more of desperation than creativity.

I fear that the major AI players - including Microsoft - have no choice but to make all their business segments shoulder the burden of the spiraling costs associated with hyperscaling. Compared to the massive amounts of data AI consumes, streaming MSFS content is peanuts and barely registers; however, I have a feeling that the whole franchise is under pressure.

The fact that there is no prospect of improvement in core areas like weather, ATC, and autogen - and that the focus is instead on retaining the existing console user base with more content - suggests to me that they are hunkering down for now, hoping to somehow weather the storm. The more the AI situation is escalating (could it even?), the more the situation might turn into FSX territory.

There was an AAU update the other day, and virtually no one is talking about it, because imho it is also not very deep and might therefore be perceived as a mandatory exercise . Two years ago there would have been a separate thread with a lot of discussion, but these days?

I fear we are witnessing the negative impacts of AI, the start of a computer and gaming market shakeout, after which we might be lucky if the MSFS franchise, or the gaming market in general, still exists. In whatever form that may be.

There didn't seem to be anything in the AAU apart from '24 updates for a few Local Legend/Famous Flyer aircraft.

2 hours ago, MarcG said:

Seems like they're using SU7 mainly as a release platform for the Air Races, which is fine but tell us that

Didn't you know? Tut, tut...

@ Jorge:

"Air racing is in MSFS's dna"

I didn't know this either and apparently neither did anyone else but...🤷‍♂️

Unfortunately, SU7 is shaping up to be a nothing burger for most PC pilots. Quite what the console guys will make of it when racing of any sort requires high frames combined with smooth delivery is yet to be seen.

Edited Saturday at 11:24 AM1 day by DD_Arthur

Wonder if the ini 340 now loads? Have to check...

Yes, noticed a drop in LOD in the latest updates, the AA and shimmering seem to be worse.

I do not approach this with a doom-and-gloom attitude, I do enjoy 2024 the way I use it. That said, I do not anticipate, nor do I think it is reasonable to expect, any further breakthrough development. I think the way the sim is now is pretty much how it will remain. I certainly expect no more advances in things like weather or LOD levels and any performance gains I reason could only be achieved by further drops in visual fidelity. Whether it is technical limitations, earlier architectural decisions that have determined what can be done, financial pressures to ensure ongoing growth across platforms and/or to limit further development costs, or they have just run out of motivation to improve further I cannot say. But there are hard realities in this world and while I can dream and envision better things it does not mean I can have them. I personally have come to accept what is there -- could it be better, sure; has it had regressions to expand across consoles in order to remain financially and corporately viable, almost certainly. So I just kind of accept the situation as it is because no amount of drawing attention to the issues is going to get them addressed.

And if I step back and look this year at the fewer development streams, the absence of photogrammetry updates (apparently to focus on color correction), the toned down announcements about how many staff and companies are working on the project, and the responses from the team to many questions, that basically said, "no we have not plans to address ATC, we have no immediate plans to improve weather" etc., I think my conclusion is at present sound. The kind of enthusiasm and engagement has definitely faded, likely under the harsh realities of organizational capacity, financial realities and corporate expectations.

Also, I noted a week or so ago there was an in-game invitation to complete a survey about 2024, the structure of which made me think they are indeed thinking about the next version, whether 2027 or 2028 or 2029 or whatever it may be. So maybe they are just moving on now to focus on the next iteration. 2024 was announced in June 2023, and had clearly been under development for quite some time at that point, so likely it was green-lit in early 2022, so this would be time frame they would be considering whether they commit to another version and what that would be

But all this said, for me, this is entertainment and if I go down the road of trying to make it some super-realistic, important and serious simulation the joy starts to blead out of my hobby, so I stopped doing that quite some time ago. Taking some time to think about a flight, plan it out, and carry it out even in the limitations of the sim, is something I just enjoy, that relaxes me and gives my mind something to think about besides the pressures of work, and often helps refocus and be productive.

Edited Saturday at 12:33 PM1 day by Cognita

A well thought out post @Cognita 🙂

Although you do bring up a subject that I'm baffled with when it comes to others; Acceptance of Regressions.

In what other business would anyone accept a reduction in quality from what they initially bought? You certainly wouldn't accept a car manufacturer to downgrade your BHP after an MOT, or a television company to lower your TV to SD from HD, or your coffee machine to only create half an espresso.

So why is it acceptable, by many, that when it comes to any software they accept degradations? As clearly defined within the relatively short lifespan of MSFS 2024.

The more "we" accept regressions the worse it becomes as the developer gets away with it, that's something I think we should still shout about. Starting with "where the hell is the fix for 512x512 textures that broke in July 2025?" - that's a major visual regression still not fixed, if it was a bug to begin with.

Edited Saturday at 12:52 PM1 day by MarcG

8 minutes ago, MarcG said:

A well thought out post @Cognita 🙂

Although you do bring up a subject that I'm baffled with when it comes to others; Acceptance of Regressions.

In what other business would anyone accept a reduction in quality from what they initially bought? You certainly wouldn't accept a car manufacturer to downgrade your BHP after an MOT, or a television company to lower your TV to SD from HD, or your coffee machine to only create half an espresso.

So why is it acceptable, by many, that when it comes to any software they accept degradations? As clearly defined within the relatively short lifespan of MSFS 2024.

The more "we" accept regressions the worse it becomes as the developer gets away with it, that's something I think we should still shout about. Starting with "where the hell is the fix for 512x512 textures that broke in July 2025?" - that's a major visual regression still not fixed, if it was a bug to begin with.

Well, what else is there to do besides continuously reporting these bugs, issues and regressions? Boycott MSFS?

Here we go with the baseless conspiracy theories 🙄

25 minutes ago, outermarker said:

Well, what else is there to do besides continuously reporting these bugs, issues and regressions? Boycott MSFS?

Exactly, what is there left to do? Boycotting won't achieve anything, reporting bugs and issues doesn't seem to achieve much. It's a question for society in general towards gaming software, not just this franchise, if they don't listen...then accept it when we shouldn't have too?

Let's face it it's a topic that will drag on and on for years!

49 minutes ago, MarcG said:

Although you do bring up a subject that I'm baffled with when it comes to others; Acceptance of Regressions.

Well, maybe I am mistaken, but I tend to assume that on the balance of probabilities Asobo did not make a plan that said " let's introduce this sim with a high quality of visual fidelity and then after a year or so we will regress it and make it worse so we can sit back and watch everyone get upset and complain." What seems much more probable to me is that they built the sim capable of a certain level of fidelity, whether ground textures, LOD distances, etc., but as they rolled it out on X-Box, and more likely when they began testing on PlayStation in advance of its release, those consoles could not handle it and because it is server dependent it was not possible to allow pc's or stronger systems to have higher settings; it had to be that way for everyone. And likely any change would require the investment of development resources that could not be financially justified in their corporate environment. Given that their continued operations are tied to expanding the title across consoles, drawing more people and maintaining certain levels of engagement, they opted to downgrade the sim. Under those circumstances -- which I admit I am assuming, but they seem reasonable -- I agree with their decision and have no problem accepting it. In the end, it is still far, far, far better than the P3D world I was using in 2019.

Edited Saturday at 01:53 PM1 day by Cognita

1 hour ago, Cognita said:

Well, maybe I am mistaken, but I tend to assume that on the balance of probabilities Asobo did not make a plan that said " let's introduce this sim with a high quality of visual fidelity and then after a year or so we will regress it and make it worse so we can sit back and watch everyone get upset and complain." What seems much more probable to me is that they built the sim capable of a certain level of fidelity, whether ground textures, LOD distances, etc., but as they rolled it out on X-Box, and more likely when they began testing on PlayStation in advance of its release, those consoles could not handle it and because it is server dependent it was not possible to allow pc's or stronger systems to have higher settings; it had to be that way for everyone. And likely any change would require the investment of development resources that could not be financially justified in their corporate environment. Given that their continued operations are tied to expanding the title across consoles, drawing more people and maintaining certain levels of engagement, they opted to downgrade the sim. Under those circumstances -- which I admit I am assuming, but they seem reasonable -- I agree with their decision and have no problem accepting it. In the end, it is still far, far, far better than the P3D world I was using in 2019.

Their lack of acceptance in their own degradations is the concerning thing here though, sure they may not of planned for those but to totally ignore the subjects on the official forum for 6 years and pretend everythings fine just find smacks of a complete misunderstanding as to what they've done. The irony is the visuals were better but they've hacked away at it so much that they've gone too far down the rabbit hole with no hope of getting out, yet you say "In the end, it is still far, far, far better than the P3D world I was using in 2019." which furthers my point about accepting poor standards. This isn't about what you may of had in other games, this is about what we did have that Asobo have made worse in this game, the only past I care about is the better one we had - when's that coming back!?