lwt1971

Disagree mostly 🙂 ... for starters, to say that "MSFS is still pretty much FSX FM wise" is ummm... well, let's see what the real expert Matt Nischan says: https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/641960-was-fsx-dumbed-down/?do=findComment&comment=5062072 "... the MSFS flight model is light years ahead of the FSX one" ... and before that when he explained in detail: https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/601526-msfs-has-the-most-advanced-flight-model/page/12/?tab=comments#comment-4549236 (setting aside his comparison of MSFS's modern FM to XP's, to say that it is mostly similar to FSX is bordering on extreme naiveté hehe). And it's best to take stock of various well implemented aircraft out there both default and 3rd party to get a feel for what the MSFS FDE is capable of, rather than just the C172, though the C172 is a fairly good example for a default bird.. any quirks that remain in it (if they really do exist) are maybe due to it using CFD while still being held back by a more basic geometry definition, and/or MS/Asobo not fleshing out the C172 FM as deeply as they could. One default aircraft like it alone doesn't obviously and necessarily speak for the MSFS FDE's capabilities in total. I do agree about the aircraft geometry definition being too basic in MSFS and that's one of the things being addressed in MSFS 2024 to allow more detailed geometry and surfaces definition by aircraft devs, something that will be important for CFD to really shine. I'll have to try your specific scenarios above but I can easily say the C172 flies overall more realistically in MSFS than FSX, and apparently even more so now with the ground handling improvements (I'm holding out on the SU15 beta for now).

The "on rails" monicker was not to say that the plane felt like it was flying itself but more about how the aircraft never felt like it was moving realistically thru the atmosphere, with the little bumps and movements due to atmospheric airflow, etc Ya we know about the specific issues in Fenix V1 (and even despite those the Fenix V1 + MSFS combo was far more compelling as an overall experience to me, others on here, and IRL pilots who're also experienced simmers like V-1 Simulations). Given what Fenix has shown as coming in V2 Block 2 I'm seeing a very deep simulation of engines, systems, FM, etc and certainly looks like it is going to push the envelope (and also simulate aspects not ever seen before in other offerings). V-1 as an IRL A320 captain too also seems very encouraged/excited based on the Fenix's recent deep dive video: https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/642219-fenix-a320-v2-block2-features-deep-dive-video/?do=findComment&comment=5065771 and he's experienced with P3D + FSL. Proof of course will be in the pudding so let's wait to see when Block 2 actually releases so we can try it for ourselves, and hear what all the experts say (especially those who're IRL pilots as well as experienced simmers) P3D is saddled with the FSX core and FSX FDE, and no amount of customizing/overriding in aircraft add-ons is going to get over those limitations. And "interaction with weather" in P3D meant needing external weather add-ons, and that still can't get over those FSX core limitations.

If adding the "MSFS" logo means that we're closer to more details and reveals about MSFS 2024, they can add all the logos they want 😂

I also agree most of the MSFS user base will switch over to 2024 quicker rather than later. But that said, we'll be able to keep 2020 running concurrently too. FWIW MS/Asobo plan to keep 2020 supported server-side for a few years after 2024 releases, at least that's what they said last July 🙂 https://www.helisimmer.com/interview/msfs-2024-helicopters-future-msfs-2020 Q: I asked Jorg if they had any idea of how many years we would expect support to continue. Jorg: I do. But I'm not going to tell exactly what year is simply because things change. But the plan is for many years to come. At least a handful. Let's put it that way. That's probably a safe way to say it ... I think the general perception needs to be, in 2020 support continues, right? We want to make this great. When feasible, when there's improvements in 2024, we are thinking about backporting as feasible. We don't know if everything can be, most likely not everything. But we'll try, you know, make it as good as we can. I would think the most feasible way forward for them whenever they release a major version of MSFS is to also support the N-1 version for some period of time (in the order of at least 1-2 years).. since not every add-on is going to be immediately 100% ready for the latest major version of the sim or take advantage of that major version's new features, and of course initial bugs need to be settled out, etc.

Apart from the world/weather rendering there's also the flight modelling, atmospheric airflow modelling, etc that all combine to make MSFS feel way more alive rather than the on-rails experience I remember in P3D (at least for me).

Given their extreme slow pace of development I hope their first release for MSFS is either the Concorde or A330 as I'll definitely jump on those without hesitation 🙂 .. If it's an A32x, which I guess is the most likely, gonna be a very hard sell (even if in NEO form) I believe the last time they mentioned the A330 was in May 2022: https://forums.flightsimlabs.com/topic/31971-may-12-2022-a-news-update/ We're also happy to announce that the A3XX product that we've been teasing for a while now is in fact the Airbus A330. We've been working on this product along side our other development and we expect to give you more news on that later on. Wonder if they've said anything about it since.. Perhaps in the internal forums only available to customers?

The question was: "AMD fluid motion fames have been available in preview drivers for several weeks now and FSR3 is available now in many games. Reports from users are very positive. Can we be assured that this new technology will be made available within MSFS soon, if so, when might it be ready?" Pretty obvious the question was answered 🙂 .. firstly they chose the question from hundreds submitted, secondly they said yes it's in the works and they're working closely with AMD, and thirdly they said no they won't give a timeline. Not giving timelines just because users ask for it does not equate to not answering the question. And as already said, not giving a timeline or the fact it's not yet out speaks nothing about their ability to do it or their relationship with AMD, it just speaks to this item not being as high a priority as other items on their backlog.

Ya not sure how it is.. the community question was asking about FSR and if users can be assured it'll make it into MSFS. Asobo answered that they had a strong relationship with AMD (thereby indicating they can definitely do it), and are working on it, but didn't want to give a timeline. Having the connections with AMD gives them the ability to do it, but that's different from timeline and where they prioritize this versus all else they've done so far and will do. Just because they gave it less priority and haven't released support for it *yet* says nothing about their relationship with AMD, or its strength, etc 🤷‍♂️

As FSL have clearly stated on their last forum announcement post, they are fully focusing on MSFS now, as are a great majority of other devs. By FSL's own words if they ever consider P3D again in the future, it'd be after they bring their product line to MSFS. And given their glacial pace of development we might be lucky to get even their first MSFS bird before end of 2024. Even *if* FSL did some new airbuses for P3D then sure some of the FSL diehards *might* go back to P3D, but if those same FSL aircraft are also available on MSFS, highly unlikely. What's going to get traction for P3D depends entirely on what LM does for P3D post v6. But that's a discussion for another forum.

They probably will have a bit of success with the Concorde, but yes agreed hope for their sake they are prioritizing the A330 and whatever non-A32x aircraft in their catalog for MSFS.

Strength of relationship with AMD is separate and unrelated to where supporting FSR sits in Asobo's list of priorities 😄

See their post below from July 2023 and the parts I bolded. This is a point in time statement, in terms of only focusing on MSFS now and for foreseeable future. https://forums.flightsimlabs.com/topic/32876-04-july-2023-news-update/ Hello everyone, <initial bits about maintenance updates snipped> I would also like to take a minute to discuss our plans to integrate our products into Lockheed Martin's newly released Prepar3D v6 (P3Dv6) simulation platform: As mentioned before, while development of our Concorde title was ongoing, our development and innovation efforts have focused in bringing all new versions of our existing product lineup to Microsoft Flight Simulator (MSFS). MSFS, with its sophisticated graphics, real-world mapping, and an immersive user experience, aligns well with our aim to provide customers once again with highly realistic and engaging flight simulation experiences. We believe that our product range will significantly enhance the capabilities and realism of MSFS, thereby offering added value to our users. While we understand and acknowledge the potential of P3Dv6, at this point in time, our resources and attention are devoted to maximizing the features and compatibility of our products with MSFS. Therefore, given the significant amount of work required to bring full compatibility to our products for P3Dv6, we have decided to revisit the possibility of adapting our lineup for P3Dv6 once we have successfully executed our current focus. It is important to clarify that this does not imply any permanent disassociation from the P3Dv6 platform. Rather, it's a strategic decision to prioritize resources, assuring that we bring forth the best possible product enhancements to our users, one platform at a time. P3Dv6 remains a vital element in our long-term platform strategy, and we look forward to exploring its potential in due course. We appreciate your understanding and patience and promise to keep everyone abreast of our progress. We eagerly anticipate the successful introduction of our product range to MSFS, followed by a careful consideration of any possible P3Dv6 adaptations. As always, thank you for your continuous trust and support!

Fair point 🙂, I'll be honest though.. the only part about MSFS I was unsure about in the beginning was its SDK and capabilities to enable aircraft add-ons to be developed with good or better fidelity, given that all the default aircraft at the time were sub-par and no serious add-on had come out (of course reading/watching over the SDK docs and other material certainly made MSFS seem quite capable, but that was still on paper).. until 2022 rolled in and we first saw the SWS Kodiak, then PMDG DC6, then the PMDG 737, etc and finally all those doubts were put to rest, at least for me.

FWIW, Asobo did talk a bit about about FSR3 in response to a community question from the last Q&A livestream: https://youtu.be/D6yCff8SgXk?t=670 "Yes obviously we have a strong relationship with AMD, can't commit to a date today, but it's something we want to bring into our engine"

Hehe that is a rather naive and wholly nonsensical take in 2023, although perhaps a very fair take in 2020 and even 2021 maybe. Numerous examples obviously to counter this.. from the myriad high fidelity payware aircraft offerings to also what's currently default in the sim, from GA to airliners, and in simulation of flight, systems, avionics, etc. The latest Fenix V2 Block 2 update (below) is just the most recent example of what is possible in MSFS. Also as seen in offerings from PMDG, iniBuilds, A2A, JustFlight, Milviz, SWS, FSReborn, <insert any high fidelity developer here>, etc who're all exclusively/mostly developing for MSFS now. In any case, if MSFS was just a visual simulator, FSL of all devs would surely not have stopped development on P3D and switched completely to MSFS :), which they've been doing for some time now.

The reports for the C172 ground handling seem positive from the official forums on this thread https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/ground-contact-resolution-improvements/630251/ I'm testing out the c172 right now and yes ive noticed a big change taxing using auto rudder I dont have pedals, It no longer feels like im trying to turn a truck around the taxiway, I barely have to move the yoke or brakes to get lined up on the taxiway So I tried this last night. I jumped into the 172 at Alderney 26 (fairly short and narrow) and set up a 20G30 southerly, checked with windsock and sea state all good. I then took off and was able to control it on the runway quite well even with the awful TFRP I have. It seemed great. I am not an expert, but i tested out the 172 (g1000) and it FELT to me a lot more controllable in take off and landing. It wobbled on the ground and it felt better than i remember I flew around Long Island this evening in the XCub & C172. Previous to this beta, I had noticed “slippage” which required a fair amount of corrective rudder to resolve. I landed at & taxied around quite a few airstrips this evening, mostly grass, but also at Gabreski, where I deliberately set up a crosswind for landing. There is, IMO, a significant improvement, both on grass & hard surfaces. Even with the crosswind, I hardly needed to apply any rudder to keep taxiing in a straight line. No sliding at all, so definitely more controllable, as far as I’m concerned. Note: I’m using a Logitech Extreme 3D Pro with the default sensitivity settings. I’d expect the experiences of others to vary based on the controller & settings they are using, but hopefully all will notice at least some improvement.

And of course the title of this thread is left open ended rather than making it clear it's about FSR and any supposed pressure on Asobo to support it 🙂

Well, you are free to call Asobo "pathetic" and I'm free to call that opinion ludicrous ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I don't think anyone (at least me) are questioning or thinking or caring if you hate MSFS.. but it does seem like you're regularly tortured by any and all issues in MSFS? 🙂, or maybe just regressions, and I guess areas of the sim you want more fixes in not getting any yet, Jorg (lol), etc. You might've never known a developer be so "pathetic" when it comes to regressions, but I've also never known a developer building/enhancing/maintaining this complex a cloud-based MMO-like software system with many moving parts, teams, partners, tech stacks, etc. Such complexity naturally increases the chance of regressions when the software is being regularly updated for new functionality/features. And for critical regression there've been ample examples where the user base has risen and shouted enough for MS/Asobo to act quickly (again, this water masks issue is far from critical sorry) I will say this however, and I'm talking from the enterprise software worldview where I work (a blue chip like MS in fact 😉). There definitely is a generational shift towards quality control and bug fixing, especially in the world of continuously delivered software.. back in the day when I started off in the industry in the late 90s I remember going thru a year+ of only testing and fixing bugs with no new function development, and then releasing.. and then not doing another release until 3-4 years afterwards, and so on. These days we release monthly updates even if we know of non-critical bugs/regressions (in most cases we don't know), but as long as it's not mission critical software and only productivity software, bugs in the released software are the norm like it or not. Over time things stabilize, as has MSFS (compared to its initial years). But if and when new functionality is coming in continuously then as always there are opportunities for new bugs/regressions Deal with it or don't use it is the only thing I can say unfortunately. And as to the majority of users not being up in arms as you'd like, well such is the majority opinion isn't it.. oh, and thanks for lecturing us on our "low standards", and how "we" are to blame for not "kicking them up the butt".. I'll just tell you where you can go shove that lecture 😁

With a software system this complex where both fixes and new features are continuously being poured in a few weeks/months apart by a big team, regressions are likely. And it's also quite likely that some regressions/issues might take longer to fix than initially thought. And given that's it's a software system that's cloud driven, it doesn't give you the opportunity to stick to an old version.. so, with this kind of system, if you're averse to regressions, then: a) you can shout, and if a majority start shouting then the software developer will probably get to it faster than not (as has happened with some major regressions MS/Asobo have done). But as always best to shout in the channels where they'll be most heard by the team. or b) you're best served with other sims that don't have a cloud driven setup and/or frequent update cycles In the grand scheme of things, IMO, this particular regression in one half of the Caribbean world update with water masks is not making me shout... but to each their own of course. Also, if the amount of regressions so far during the 3+ years of MSFS is excessive for you, then option b) might be best 🤷‍♂️ 🙂 Once again, personally, I'm quite happy with the pace of development of features and fixes in MSFS, despite the regressions that have come, and also happy with their prioritizing of critical regressions being addressed quickly (the water masks issue is far from critical). As always, YMMV. On a side note, perhaps they need to start doing public betas for world updates too like sim updates? That might help especially since an army of users can cover the vast areas of the world usually being updated.

Some on discord were asking about the "Starting A350 development.." bit on this update and ini clarified that's more from this specific team's perspective, and overall they've been working on the A350 for a while now. ini_001 — Today at 06:31 rather than speculation… we have been working on the A350 for a sometime now…

Welcome to software development and the realization that estimated fix times or timelines are just that... estimated 🙂 and sometimes wildly under/over, usually under. Ya perhaps they didn't have to say "few days" and instead say "it'll come when it's ready", but meh. They can take all the time they want to get it right, I'm not going to lose sleep over this, and I actually love to fly over the Caribbean a lot.. at least the southern half of it has the new and great water masks which I'm enjoying tremendously (i.e. Guadeloupe, St. Lucia, etc)

I'll chalk up the simmers' takes on supposed PMDG 737 ground handling improvements to placebo 🙂, but I still wonder about Dutch's (Milviz) findings below.. ya definitely what Asobo are saying is what should count, but perhaps there's some other change outside of the specific ground handling FM improvements (and parameters) that is contributing to what folks like Dutch are seeing 🤷‍♂️ (and yes, it's quite possible it's placebo in Dutch's case too hehe)

Right that's what I thought they'd initially said too.. but still confusing some folks seeing differences in PMDG 737 ground handling (could be placebo and/or the performance increase 🙂), and then Dutch of Milviz also saw noticeable improvements in his birds without the parameters, so hmm In any case, Matt further clarifed: https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/ground-contact-resolution-improvements/630251/40 "This is true of all parameters in the flight model, unless specifically called our otherwise in the documentation. The sim uses the defaults if the parameter is not present. However, in this case, the default stickiness value of 1 would not be used by any code (although it would still be oaded), since the code would never be transitioning to the new ground model (since the other value is 0.1, i.e. always be using the old model)." And someone on that thread put up this video with their initial impressions: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B10RMCRFvUI See for yourselfs what you think of the friction on the runway. I think Asobo done good, but i think they can up the percentage of nosewheel steering effect, which is attach able to controls setup and selectable as nosewheel steering to a slider or twistgrip any way steerable even without use of rudder but if you use the rudder which effects the nosewheel by default and nosewheel steering enhance the input of nosewheel angle

Well, this is just preliminary info they gave last July about MSFS 2024 and since then have been intentionally mum about it saying they'll start giving details Spring 2024 onwards, so let's see. What it does sound like is they're aiming for better multi-threading and spreading of the workloads (one example being the physics/aerodynamics calculations taken off the main thread). And what they've seen so far is 4x-5x improvements in the physics calculations/processing time (which is going to be useful for the coming increased surfaces capabilities in aircraft geometry, etc which then increases CFD calculations times).

Insane.. and likewise. I'm also going to spend way too much time on the ground trying out engine starts and non-starts with all the simulated failures in all kinds of weather and winds. Too much to try/simulate even before lift-off 😃