Arwen

I've found that a lot of the missions have bugs. I just did 3 First Flight missions in the 172: the first on penalized me because I didn't have landing lights on for a night flight (it was a sunny afternoon); the next on placed my 172 on a rooftop helicopter pad, and the last one has me take off and land on a closed runway (with a big X). Not impressed! If these are AI created, then the algorithm needs a LOT of work.

You have to understand that the "influencers" were shown a limited version of the sim, where not everything was available, and they were not installing the sim, as it was up and running for them. So maybe what they saw did really impress them. My guess is that the biggest problems that users are having is the direct result of the server issues (which is indeed the single most negative issue). Because of the server issue, not everything is getting installed correctly. Give things a few more days, as starting the sim again may fix the bad installs. For example, yesterday I had just 4 aircraft and now I have all of them (I think, I haven't actually counted them). Overall, MSFS 2024 has been running great for me and I'm having a blast with it. Yes, there are a LOT of issues that need to be fixed, but that happens with a new release of every single sim I have ever used (and with most games, and with just about any complex program).

The issue with controls settings not sticking/binding is perhaps mostly due to the confusing way that making changes to the default profiles was done. This is really confusing, and I'm not great at wording things right, but I'll try my best: 1.) When you change a setting (keyboard or controller), you have to save the change to a new profile (something like "my new aircraft settings profile"). If you don't do anymore than just saving it under the default new profile name, you will likely have negative results next time you load the sim, as it will appear that it didn't stick. What happens is that if loads up the default profiles again (for keyboard, mouse, and any controllers). This drove me nuts until I figured out what was happening. This gets confusing, so bare with me: 2.) Since the bindings apparently didn't stick, I repeated step 1 again, thinking that I had fixed it again. But this time, my new changes don't even work, as it is stuck on the default setting. What happens is that there are now 2 (or 3) "my new aircraft settings profiles", all with the same name, which seems to make the sim revert to the default settings. This worked for me: Delete all the "my new aircraft settings profiles" (in both areas: General Controls and Airplanes Controls) Rename this to something else after you save it (I used just "Airplanes". Do this in both areas again. Now make this new profile Default, and if you want to use these changes for all aircraft, click on that as well.

There was snow on the ground and bare trees in my area of northern NH. And I changed the date to mid October and had foliage.

I was able to take of twice, but haven't stayed flying lone enough to land yet. Besides the big crash to desktop. I had a couple of crashes to main menu, which ended both flights.

I have the same problem, with the Premium Deluxe Edition. The upgrade packs are all labeled as NA (not available?) Perhaps they will work later this week, when the server issues are fixed

MS Store, only because that's how I bought MSFS 2020. I do have fiber optics internet, with great speeds and I'm sure that really helped. Plus I started setup right at 11:00.

I was lucky and it only took about 1.5 hours to install and get flying. I was able to make two short GA flights with the Cessna, but have spent most of the afternoon just getting my HOTAS configured in the sim, and adjusting the graphics. Both flights were great as far as performance (I've only flying in my region so far, which is pretty rural). The graphics, lighting, traffic, and clouds are all BIG improvements. I live in New Hampshire's White Mountains and my one gripe so far are that they have trees was too high up the mountains. Timberline is about 4200 feet here, yet the sim has trees placed 1000 feet higher than that. I know it's a little thing, but my local mountains look a bit off without those bare summits, which is too bad, as they look so much better in every other way. The sim crashed when I was messing around with the flight planner, and now I can't log in again (too many users). They NEED to fix this fast, or this release is going to get off to a really bad bunch of reviews. I have the Premium Deluxe Edition, yet I only have access to 4 aircraft in free flight. I haven't tried any other mode yet.

Off Topic Part: Bethesda is one of my favorite developers. My first RPG was Morrowind, which was the inspiration for creating a gaming website and forum. Bethesda sent me a large box of free Morrowind gear in appreciation of my contributions to the community (and as a get well gift while I was recovering from a very difficult operation). This included the boxed Collector's Edition and a copy of BloodMoon DLC (which was signed by all of the programming team). I had never done any modding before, but I wanted to make the game better, so I taught myself enough to get stated. Google "Arwen's Realism Tweaks" and you should find plenty about my Fallout Moods. Now back to the topic of this thread: I've been very impressed with the improvements that BeyondATC has accomplished so far. It still has some issues, but it works way better than the default ATC. I'm hoping that Microsoft will integrate it (or something like it) into MSFS, or perhaps they are working on their on improvements. Even if we're still stuck with the not-so-good default ATC for a while, I'm still really looking forward to MSFS 2024. I fly mainly small GA (and helicopters) and many of the improvements will be most appreciated to those of us flying low and slow.

Again. I provided accepted definitions for both simulators and for games, which are not the same thing at all. Yet you insist that any "Home" flight simulator is a game, yet your entire agreement seems to be based on nothing more than your bias opinion. Does a "Home" flight simulator become a "Real" flight simulator if it is moved into a classroom, where it is used to aid flight instruction? If so, then how it is used does indeed define what it is. Here are the definitions again (worded slightly differently and expanded a bit for clarity): GAME: An activity providing entertainment or amusement (fun); a pastime: party games; word games (play), with rules, a goal, winning, competition, etc.. SIMULATION: Representation of the operation or features of one process or system through the use of another: computer simulation of an in-flight emergency. Simulations are not, in and of themselves, games, as they need all the additional gaming elements in order to meet the definition of what a game is. As I explained in my first reply, MSFS is only a portion of what makes up a flight simulator . . . it is the software part of the simulator (and often not the only software part). So MSFS is a computer program, period. How one uses it does indeed define what it is to the user, but it is still a computer program. For example: A sheet of plywood doesn't stop being a piece of plywood, but it can become part of a roof or it can became part of a wall, depending on how it is used. BTW: I am NOT "afraid to admit" that I'm a gamer. I created one of the first Girl Game RPG websites and ran an international gaming forum for many years. I also created some of the most popular MODS for Fallout 3 and Fallout NV. My first experience with flight sims was watching my older brother run Flight Simulator 4.0. I also own X-Plane (since version 9) and most of the DCS helicopters. I do know the difference between the two and use them very differently. My games allow me to enter fantasy worlds, where my fight sims allow me to experience simulated aircraft flight on a simulated Earth (its digital twin). You are free to think of MSFS as a game, as that seems to be important to you. And it really doesn't matter to me. But please stop insisting that I should follow your made up definition of what it is.

I used the only applicable definition of the noun for each term, you never even provided any definition for Simulator, but just used your own bias to force all simulators into a type of video game. MSFS (and other flight sims) are software that we install on our devices (in my case a computer) to simulate flying an aircraft. Also my HOTAS and pedals are additional hardware that are part of my flight sim. A flight simulator is not just the software, but also the hardware used in the sim. Is the software that is installed in a commercial flight sim a "game"? What separates a "Home Flight Simulator" from any other simulator? Both "enables the operator to reproduce or represent" flying an aircraft. As I stated in my previous reply, "I think it really depends on how you use a flight sim." If you use it as a game, then it is a game for you. But if someone uses it as a simulator, then it is a simulator for them.

No simulators are real, but they do simulate real conditions. A simulator is not a game, at least not according to the dictionary definitions: simulator [noun] : one that simulates especially : a device that enables the operator to reproduce or represent under test conditions phenomena likely to occur in actual performance game [noun]: an activity that you do to have fun, often one that has rules and that you can win or lose Having said all that, I think it really depends on how you use a flight sim. Like any other tool, you can misuse it [like treating it like a game], but you can also use it as a learning/practice simulator for flight.

Hey jconn. How have you been? I recently bought a camper van, so been doing a lot of camping/biking trips lately. Just got back from Acadia NP in Maine. Really looking forward to MSFS 2024, which should really enhance my low level GA flying. Just not seeing any additional GA Aircraft in the Aviator edition that I would use.

What we need are virtual sunglasses as an option, just like what we do in real life on a bright sunny day.

I'll pre-purchase MSFS 2024 and I'll likely order the Premium Deluxe Edition, which is the edition of MSFS 2020 that I bought. I considered the Aviator edition, but I just don't see that it is worth an additional $60.

I added two more 16GB of RAM to my computer's memory slots and I have also noticed an improvement in smoothness, not just in MSFS, but in several of my other more demanding games. But the biggest improvement is that my computer is now "happier". This is not something that I have any hard documentation for, but I noticed right off that my computer is now running much quieter . . . as in the cooling fans are no longer revving up all the time. My computer just seems to not be working as hard as it was. And this is certainly a good thing.

Thanks for explaining that! I just ordered 2 more 16GB RAM sticks. Since I had 2 slots open, it was not too expensive and I figured that RAM was my bottleneck. My monitor is 2K (2560x1440 w/G-Sync). My Nvidia RTX 3080 only has 10GB VRAM, but I have really great bandwidth (800+ MPS). So I should be able to run MSFS 2024 at high settings without too much problem.

What we need is a separate list of specs for running MSFS 2024 at the three most popular resolutions. I would think this would be a major factor, Would we really benefit from more than 32GB RAM if we're on a HD monitor? How much would the specs change for running at 2K? What hardware is needed to run at 4K? Does increasing from 32 to 64 GB actually makes any difference if your VRAM is less than 12GB, or if your Bandwidth is less than 100 MPS?

I've only been using BeyondATC for a couple of days and I'm very happy with my purchase. I have run into a few issues when using the ATC, but most of those were my own fault, for not doing things correctly. Yes, there are a number of procedures that still need a lot of work, but even at this stage it is miles ahead of the default ATC. I spent time on Discord before deciding to give BeyondATC a try, and was initially concerned with the amount of complaints that were being posted there. But it soon became clear that most of those complaints were due to pilot error. Too many people just install addon programs and try to use them without putting in any real effort to learn how to use the program correctly.

Yes, there is . . . some. Not nearly enough, but I've seen a few other aircraft in flight, and the ATC has notified me of most of them.

I've been following the news/info about DTG flight school and sim for months now and there is one thing that I haven't seen or heard anything about. Are female pilots/avatars modeled in this sim? I'm concerned because all I have seen are male pilots/students in all the videos and screenshots.

I finally had some time this evening to try this route again, I updated P2ATC to 2.0.0.12. My IFR flight plan was KLEB --> CON (the VOR close to KCON) --> KCON. My cruising altitude was 3000 feet. Everything was going very smoothly until I passed CON, and then Boston Center directed me to descend and maintain 1900 feet. The problem was that it just kept repeating this over and over again, even after I turned my radio off. Everything else was great. I'll refly the route as soon as I can.

I'm the Emerging Technologies Librarian at my local library.

Hey Dave, I'm the one who should be thanking you. I love how far v.2.0 beta has progressed. I'll give it another go as soon as I can, and use your suggestions if I run into into vectoring issues.

The first part of the flight went well, For the first time, KLEB Tower instructed me to fly runway heading until 1800 feet (1000 feet above airport elevation), and then turn left for my heading (which was (CON VOR), After I was about 10 miles away from KLEB, I was instructed to contact Departure, This is where the problems began. I manually dialed in my assigned frequency and reported my current altitude. But I was instructed to contact center, on the frequency I was currently using. Apparently the same frequency is assigned to multiple ACT controllers, and there is no way to manually dial in the assigned frequency and end up at the correct one. (I was finally able to contact the correct controller, by selecting it off P2ATC's frequentcy list; which is not ideal when I am trying to fly my aircraft). Once I got close to KCOM, I asked for radar vectors for a visual approach of RW33, That seemed to be working correctly until I found myself 10 miles south of the airport and still being direct to head south. Eventually I requested permission to land with a visual approach, which was approved, But then I kept being instructed to head south, away from the airport. This even continued after I had canceled IFR.