Jump to content

pstrub

Members
  • Content Count

    716
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by pstrub

  1. Nice video! However I don't really like the tagline "pursue your dream of having a game that always crashes"... While I have my own set of issues, overall I enjoy MSFS 2020 a lot, and it seems it's only a small fraction of the userbase that is really affected CTDs.
  2. Care to elaborate? Looks like a good implementation of real-world flying scenarios, especially for the helo missions.
  3. It wasn't iniBuilds' idea to develop just another A320. MS wanted to take the default A320 to the next level and paid iniBuilds to do it for them.
  4. Just to emphasize the point here: The Ini A320 is the NEW DEFAULT A320, and for all practical purposes it replaces the Asobo A320. The old one only remains for compatibility reasons. Other than that, it's similar to how Working Title improved many of the default aircraft, but done by the 3rd party developer Inibuilds. As PC users we already have 2 great alternatives to the Asobo A320, and one of them is free, but for Xbox users it's great to have the default A320 toy replaced by something better. And I suppose some PC users will appreciate a good default A320 too.
  5. Yes, there are various other pilots that produce good youtube content about airliners for flight simmers, I'm not denying that, and of course I know and follow them too. flightdeck2sim's videos are definitely useful, but there's little focus on the MSFS/PMDG side of things in his videos. No problem with that, I just feel that there's other content that's tailored more to my needs. I've been a bit out of the loop concerning airliner simming in the last 6 months, so I might've missed some of the drama (not that I really care). Anyway, I won't avoid a youtuber who I feel provided good teaching videos for my simming needs, just because some people on a flight sim forum call him biased. And I don't care enough to go looking for the drama and possible bias myself...
  6. Maybe he is, maybe he isn't, I don't care. I've learned a lot from him since the PMDG 737 was released.
  7. Not gonna lie, I'm quite shocked at how easily shocked some people are these days. πŸ˜… Ok, rather amused than shocked but that would've been less fun to write πŸ˜‰
  8. That was the whole point of it, wasn't it? To get the functionality people love in their Fenix, BAe, etc, into the PMDG Boeings. And the reason why it took PMDG longer than others was not due to implementing the most amazing EFB ever, it was due to technical difficulties as there was no real way for communicating between the wasm based aircraft and the JavaScript based tablet. PMDG spent a lot of time inventing a workaround that wasn't needed anymore after SU13 was released. Could this have been done any faster? Probably, but as RR said, they didn't have any real JS experience in the team, and probably didn't put the highest priority on it. I sure will be happy to have the EFB, but then again, the 737 is already an enjoyable aircraft without it.
  9. Did you watch the last Dev Q&A? They talked quite a bit about World Updates, availability of data, their efforts to get new data in Brazil... See the transcript here, the video is linked at the top of the page: https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/september-2023-live-developer-stream-transcription/610612#availability-of-data-in-world-updates-27
  10. πŸ˜‚ your post made me re-read the long-ish reply by reuben - and tbh the diction, content and structure reminds me a lot of ChatGPT answers. Not trying to say that this is the case here, but it would explain misunderstanding "the sim" for Sims 4 by EA.
  11. It's both amusing and predictable how people jump to conclusions about something FS2024 related - either assuming the devs want to avoid answering questions about 2024 or even stop answering questions about "old" MSFS2020 at all. They mentioned this in one of the Dev updates in July, just taking a break while everyone is on vacation. "For those living in the Northern Hemisphere, we are now fully in the summer months. For many people, this is a time for vacations, relaxation, and spending time with family and friends. To our community members enjoying the summer, we wish all of you a safe and relaxing break. Many members of the MSFS team are also taking advantage of the summer months to enjoy some holiday time. Accordingly, we will not have a Developer Livestream in July, but we are instead preparing a pre-recorded video featuring updates from some members of the dev team and a few special guests. You can watch this video during our regular Twitch Community Fly-In Friday event next week on July 21. – MSFS Team" https://www.flightsimulator.com/july-13th-2023-development-update/
  12. I agree, they should update the roadmap more frequently, and a monthly cadence seems preferable to me. Just saying the outdated July roadmap isn't shown by accident (as was assumed earlier on in this thread), it's fully intentional.
  13. The roadmap is only updated every 3 months or so, they mentioned this in one of the Dev Q&A live streams. So this is not a mistake, it works just as intended. Take a look at end of October, there's even an item "Dev Roadmap Update Oct/Jan", wouldn't expect a new roadmap before that date.
  14. ahhh thanks! That's where my feeling came from πŸ˜‰
  15. Looking at the videos, it certainly seems like MSFS2024 isn't that far from release - but we had the same impression graphically when MSFS2020 was first announced in June 2019 πŸ˜‚. Admittedly, I'm convinced that the foundation for FS2024 is a lot more solid now than it was for FS2020 at release, but we all know how long it takes to fix the last 20% of issues after things look pretty good already. My impression that it might not release before mid 2024 is mostly based on some details JΓΆrg and Seb said in various videos, plus reading between the lines. I can't point my finger to anything specific, but my feeling is that mid 2024 is the timeframe they were hinting at. But who knows, their vagueness about the release date might be deliberate so they can still surprise us - by releasing earlier than expected (or later πŸ˜†) Anyway, I wasn't entirely joking, but I wasn't really serious either. A 2023 release doesn't look impossible to me, but at this point it's probably more wishful thinking than anything else.
  16. Maybe it's the announcement that MSFS 2024 is coming for Christmas 2023 πŸ˜‚ TBH, based on the remarks they made so far, I have to admit this is pretty far fetched and I suppose we have to wait at least till summer 2024. On the other hand, FS98 was released in 1997, FS2000 in 1999, FS2002 in 2001 and FS2004 in 2003...
  17. I wouldn't trust those comparisons that average results over many titles and don't even include MSFS. Every title performs differently, some favour Nvidia cards, others favour AMD cards, and some profit more from generational improvements than others. What's more, MSFS keeps changing due to the steady stream of sim updates, so benchmark results from a year ago may no longer be applicable to the current version and can be a lot more demanding with a lot of add-ons installed. The only systematic and comprehensive review of current hardware for MSFS (DX12, three typical resolutions, various flight scenarios) is this one: https://www.pcgameshardware.de/Microsoft-Flight-Simulator-Spiel-15259/Specials/Benchmark-2023-CPU-GPU-1411823/ It's in German though, but you can use the Chrome browser's translate feature or copy/paste the link into the Google Translate text field. The translation isn't perfect, but you get a pretty good idea of the test methodology used and the results. The 7000 series AMD cards seem to hold up pretty well, and even the 7900XT beats the 4080 in MSFS at all resolutions, and the margin gets larger at resolutions below 4K. VRAM can become an issue in some locations on Earth, 12GB may not always be enough even without using add-ons.
  18. I was thinking the same, but who knows. The latest Dev Update (June 29th) still has the surprise listed for July, so maybe it's something else.
  19. That's what I wrote, but I've already seen a few comments where people were hoping for 2-4x framerates. While Seb spoke of performance improvements across the board, the 4-5x figures were specifically related to the physics calculations.
  20. It is, absolutely! And as they explained, it enables a lot of new stuff to be included in the flight model. It's just that I can already hear the people crying about "...but they promised us 4-5x performance increase!" when their fps improve by double-digit percentages (which I still consider very good). It's important to have realistic expectations, and this seems particularly hard in flight simming πŸ˜‰
  21. A word of caution: Most of their comments mentioning the huge performance improvements were made in the context of the simulation of the rotor blades and aerodynamics, allowing them to improve the fidelity of the aerodynamical simulation. Unless they mention this very specifically, I would NOT expect the performance improvements to translate into 5x better framerates.
  22. I was born ready. I'm Ron F Swanson.
  23. This is great news! There's a lot to like about the JF Arrow/Warrior, but controlling them feels a bit weird, at least on my controllers, despite trying to adjust my settings specifically for this family of planes. I'm extremely happy to learn you're going to tune their flight models, as this is the main point that keeps me from flying them more often than I do. I won't join the beta test, as I'm not sure how much time I'll be able to dedicate to test-flying the modded aircraft in the coming months, and I don't have any real-world flying experience. Anyway, I'm looking forward to seeing the results of this mod. Thanks you so much for your effort!
  24. The only exaggeration I can see here is the number of digits used in the 99.999999999%. The last sentence in the post you quoted clearly was sarcasm. Lots of the hyperbole I see on here is by users who are dead serious. I don't think anyone would argue that these two planes are free of some major bugs right now. But when Matt says they're aiming for better-than-CJ4 fidelity, we know WT are going to deliver fine aircraft that fly by the numbers and close to real-life checklists. And this level is good enough to make most people quite happy, even the experienced simmers here on AVSIM. Yes, it's nice to have more depth in the systems simulation, but I think we're getting to a point where study-level simmers can have a perfectly enjoyable flight in the 787 or 747 after AAU2 is released. There's always the possibility that the modding community builds upon this new foundation to further improve the level of systems simulation, and for those who look for as-real-as-it-gets representations of the aircraft, 3PDs already have their products lining up - at least for the 747, I'm not sure right now about the 787.
  25. A lot better than the default scenery. At least I can recognize the real airports. Wouldn't pay $10-15 for it, as in high-end add-ons, but it's definitely worth a couple of bucks each. I guess that's what you wanted to show with your shots, and I agree.
Γ—
Γ—
  • Create New...