TASCHMANN

And this sim that you've seen...is it in the room with us now?

To me the difference has always been akin to a Harley Davidson versus a brand new Hotwheels. Quality and reliability (X-plane) or MSFS with its pretty but hollow brightly colored plastic wheels. (It's a simple test. If you don't have rudder control, you don't really have something that an honest person can call a flight simulator). Asobo jumped right to the frosting without baking the cake... a hard thing to fix after the fact.

Yeah, I'd rather have rudder control.

By 2026, 2024 should be working as well as 2020. Progress? Only In "Asobo world"

No, these guys have lost all credibility. The community is waking up to the fact that there are alternative simulators without the endless insanity. And yes there will always be those who are content with 65% of a loaf, but most of us just want software that doesn't waste so much of our time. MS/Asobo has been trying to do something they simply don't know how to do.

I wonder about the extent to which MSFS of either year's vintage is being coded by AI. This would explain a lot that has been, up to now, inexplicable. Code writing code. As stated above if you just want a high quality, reliable sim its X-plane 12.2. It's coded by people who actually answer questions intelligibly and seem to have a modicum of respect for their customers.

Excellent advice for us in so, so many cases, as it has been from August 2020. It should be the mantra of the MSFS simmer.

The CTD happened this way: Immediately after I clicked the final "FLY" box to begin the flight, [ Cessna Bird Dog out of KGON] I would be on the runway in an extreme close up of the back of the pilot's seat with no controls working and "esc" having no effect...locked. CPU activity was furious (and hot!) while I waited a couple of minutes...as long as I dared. Yes, I had recently updated the bird dog and the usual Windows Ten updates.

Thanks for the reply. Nope, no new mods, drivers or apps.

CTD just started for first time today. They just can't seem to keep either one of these products running well for very long (based on what I'm reading from the people who "fell" for 2024.) I stayed with 2020 because I like stability ...so much for that. Anyway, I'd appreciate any ideas about the CTD. [empty Community Folder, i7-9700, 3080ti]

Jorg's always got a reason why their stuff doesn't work, but the point is ...their stuff doesn't work.

Just like he said in 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024. Anybody who takes anything he says seriously has definitely not been paying attention. MS makes a product and manages to destroy not only the product itself but its predecessor as well. This guy has no shame. Most people wouldn't want to show their face. I never fell for 2024 so was really miffed when my 2020 installation began crashing.

AAO is that rare thing: a solid product [the best choice IMHO] with almost instantaneous support. There is a forum here which gets nearly constant attention from the developer. Programming is as simple or as complex as you choose and very reliable. I have a complex rig with seven peripherals and Lorby's AAO has never let me down.

Ditto. This developer is a model for the industry to follow: 1.Make a good product 2. Support it fully and promptly.

I agree that 2020 is somewhat more reliable.. But there are still those who advise us not to expect too much from either sim regarding: the default ATC, the default traffic, the default weather or the default planes. Why spend so much time and effort creating and developing half-baked elements that need to be replaced at the very beginning? Apart from that they say it's a great sim. Just use after-market replacements for all those elements and "eventually" "they're sure" "it will be" a great sim. What is it exactly we were supposed to be waiting for during that year-long period of hype? This was all too tiresome the first time around with 2020, including the vague yet equivocal promises regarding compatibility with other products. I see no reason to start that process yet again for another product that will never be finished if MS's long history is any indication.

Fair question. Just one example: a crosswind causes the nose of an aircraft into it...invariably. Never away from it.

We seem to have drifted into a discussion of the merits of default aircraft which is not really the point I was suggesting. It is this: Why hasn't it been possible for anyone to develop a Cessna 172 model that flies and lands accurately in MSFS? and why should we hop on this merry-go-round of updates, upgrades, new hardware purchases and new learning curves if the basics haven't been attended to yet? I consider these legitimate and serious questions...I just don't see too many answers.

The message I seem to be getting is: "Why are you expecting accuracy from an Asobo 172?" Because it's been in development for over 5 years, it's a relatively uncomplicated and ubiquitous plane that everyone is familiar with and Asobo still is not expected to get it right? BTW the 172 in X-plane 11 and 12 with the REM will do the crosswind perfectly and consistently. Why is there no way to do this in MSFS 202x with any addon.

So an accurate crosswind simulation in a 172 is too much to expect? Isn't it one of the most common challenges that is known to many pilots in the real world?

As a result of the ever increasing complexity and attempted complexity in flight simulation generally, I have a simple test of whether a program can accurately be called a flight simulator: 1. I set up a flight with a 10 knot crosswind landing in a Cessna 172 and see how well the program simulates the control compensations (that many simmers are familiar with) that are necessary land safely in real life. 2. If it doesn't come close, (as is the case with both MSFS 2020 and 2024) then, in my view, it is something ...but it is not a flight simulator and no amount of tweaking will make it one. If you concentrate on relatively inconsequential features [e.g. Are my sheep herding up correctly? Does that water reflect accurately?] and neglect the basics of flight you will continue to have a program with planes and geographic features but its quality as a flight simulator will be determined by how well it simulates a simple flight. Right?

No, but I'd love to hear some specifics from actual users.

I get it. It's just like 2020. November 19 wasn't really "release date"; it was just the beginning of "Beta Testing Year." The idea is you just keep doing releases like these until people stop actually expecting a working sim--then everyone is "grateful" for what they have instead of expecting what they paid for...a working sim. Like many others, I won't be coming along this time. I just see a lot of frustration like we had with 2020 but no one seems able to explain what the real advantages are to be gained from going through the considerable time and trouble for just another sim that lacks the basic features that FSX had in 2006. Not again...never again.

Title is a bit misleading. The "opportunity" to pay in advance for an untested and unreviewed product is available "now." The product is not. This is a distinction that matters to some.

Do you know what a hassle it is to clear cookies and then have to log in manually on every site where we are registered? Can't you fix it without this major inconvenience to users? This fourteen minute delay along with the search delay timer "feature" is really making some of us wonder if Avsim is actually worth the hassle any more.

Great questions. Another way to ask it: Will FS2024 have all the features that FSX had in 2007?