ludekbrno

Really? Can you show us some realistic clouds from FS9? You must only a joking 🙂 I never saw a realistic clouds in FS9, FSX or another today sim, first realistic look clouds saw in alpha sceenshots and vids form MSFS, even though the cirrus clouds may be missing yet.

Isn't a glitch, but standard selection for aplha testing 🙂 Developers allways select only a small amount of every people who sign-up for alpha testing. Selection depends on information provided via survey and hardware they need testing alpha with.

If you're frozen in FS9 time and you like the cardboard clouds, OK I understand, that MSFS clouds are not acceptable for you 🙂. MSFS clouds are much more levels close to reality and MSFS can't display any cardboard, what you like, sorry.

Why again??? MS/Asobo clearly declared, that you may buy one-time MSFS or subscribe to Xbox game pass, if you want acces to more of 100 games include MSFS. But if you want only MSFS, still is possible one-time purchase, like every game in Xbox Game pass. I don't understand, why someone still must speculate about this. MSFS isn't something special and there isn't any reason, why there should be another purchase model, than other games in Xbox game pass... And don't remeber, that MSFS (like other flight simulators) will be not the most favorit game from others AAA titles. Why should MSFS have an exception from standard purchase possibilities?

Unfortunatelly, for whole world in presented quality you must accept, that you will need download very big data. Other way isn't real for distribution.

This update is better than previous, as usually 🙂 Pictures are superb, but I have one comment. I notice on all pictures, that concrete grain looks too coarse on every runways and aprons surface. In real life concrete's surfaces are much finer and smoother.

where did you hear that?

Why? Asobo has much more people and other sources, than 3PD studios. There isn't any reason, why they can't make plane close to "study" level. If they make similar plane, they set a new level of default planes and 3PD must bring some more, if they want our money. I think it's a good bussines 🙂

I think nothing will happen 🙂 Ten or hundred thousand users isn't so big load for servers like Azure. VOD services (youtube, netflix etc.) or maps services (Bing, Google etc.) has a much more users in one time and much bigger data traffic. And you must remember, that only a photogrammetry areas will generate a big data stream, not other areas without photogrammetry.

Ok, so we can looking forward to improve the performance in future 🙂 I think, not so long future.

And what is the problem? 🙂 DX12 is not necessary for release and would be mean an unnecessary delay. MSFS will work good without it and DX12 will come in the future.

Is there any serious problem with DX11? MSFS still looks much better, than P3Dv5 with DX12 and XP11 with Vulcan 🙂 When Asobo start developing MSFS, DX12 didn't exist, so they had to use DX11. But Asobo said, that some time in the future will upgrade to DX12.

Yes, many people forgets visual effect of camera zoom. It usually shows items in a far distance in bigger scale, than items in closer distance. I do not see any problem with tree. It looks fantastic.

You're still wrong, usually beta is not so long. Remember, that in a beta most of the developers will stop working on new functionalities and give focus to solving found issues. There isn't any reason, for cancel still valid releasing date and move it to next year. Autumn or winter this year is much real for release, after this development update and you're unreasonably negative. I still feel your frustrations... 😉

I think beta means, that developers will close list of functionalities what are they want on release and start intensive phase for optimization and solving maximum of found issues before public release. So I think, that it's confirmation release for this year, maybe not so far 🙂 I expect, that date od release can be in autumn.

Ok, I understand 🙂

My post was a political?

What is your source of this opinion? 🙂 And why they should use MS Flight, when MSFS philosophy and functionality is much closer to FSX, than MS Flight?

Maybe they didn't it solve yet, because it's so small insignificant problem and they plan solving those minor issues during beta, after they finishing functionalities list? I think it's more logical explanation, than your shouts "of course, is it not possible MSFS releasing this year" 😉

You are wrong. There is still exist only one valid announcement from E3 2019, when they declares release MSFS on 2020 for PC. And there isn't exist any announcement about any delay. So they still expect release on 2020.

Of course, that MSFS can be released on 2020. There isn't reason why not. Development is in progres for 5 years or more, they are filling alpha with near to all functions, what they promised, so they can start solving known issues and optimization with beta soon. They still have 7 months to finish first public version and next 10 years for adding more functions, what do not have time to add to the release. If I remember correctly, so every previous version of Microsoft Flight simulators was released on promised date (maybe there was some months delay, but allways in the same year, as they promised). They didn't announce any significant delay, so there isn't reason for such pessimism. So maybe you are frustrated, that they still didn't call you to help their team? 😉

"For PC players, we plan to support the community by making all our major releases at launch available with Xbox Game Pass for PC, including Halo Infinite, Wasteland 3, Minecraft Dungeons and of course, Microsoft Flight Simulator". 😉 "XBox Game Pass" is only one of the methods of purchase game for PC. So you do not need Xbox.

I think, there is no any reason why they should lie about this. They declared, that for begining of development MSFS they explored functions and code of FSX and some usable parts of this they used in MSFS. MS Flight has completely different philosophy. It was closed for 3PD add-ons, free to play mode with limited area, not included whole world, there was not support for advancet aircraft (like PMDG) etc. There is no reason, why they should build MSFS on MS Flight, because philosophy and functions of MSFS are much closer to FSX, than to MS Flight. MS Flight was only a big mistake and was not usable for hardcore simming 🙂

MSFS sure doesn't come from MS flight, but from FSX. Maybe some partial ideas, but main philosophy and functions doesn't comes from MS Flight. MS Flight was not a direct sequel to the series Microsoft simulator ...FS98, FS2000, FS2002, FS2004, FSX. Asobo clearly declared, that developers was based on FSX code for start developing the MSFS. No one word about MS Flight.

But it doesn't mean, that Icon A5 must be present in an Alpha build for alpha testers from public! There must be several Aplha builds. One for public testing with very limited content (for example 747 is not present for public alpha testers) and other unlimited builds only for internal testing in developers team. So not everything what we can see in discovery episodes is avaiable for aplpha testers and therefore we can see Icon A5 in discovery episodes or in screenshots from Asobo, but not in aplha testers screenshots.