Jump to content

abrams_tank

Members
  • Content Count

    656
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

917 Excellent

About abrams_tank

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    none
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Wow, such an awesome tool and it's free! I just tried the replay and it makes MSFS so much better! I can't wait until Asobo makes a proper replay. But until then, this replay app is awesome and it's free. It does everything you expect a replay tool to do!
  2. Even without an upvote system, it won't be too hard for Asobo to figure out which bugs are show stoppers and are causing the most problems. The most discussed forum topics are usually a sign of something that is bothering the player base. Just a quick look through the forum by Asobo and they can instantly figure out what are the most outstanding issues during the beta test. I think it will be very easy for Asobo to separate the wheat from the chaff. Almost every other major game that is played online has a beta test of some sort and they are all able to figure out what needs to be fixed during the beta. I'm not sure why tweekz thinks it can't be done but it's not rocket science when every other game company out there is able to have successful beta tests - it should be the same for Asobo.
  3. No, I think the most voted topics will be the bugs that affect the upcoming patch. My guess is, bugs like the livery multiplayer bug would have been upvoted to the top from the last patch. Bugs like the weird terrain spikes from one of the patches several months ago would have also been upvoted to the top. Because those are the bugs that would impact the players the most if the patch is released. Stuff like aerodynamics is not as urgent and it's not a show stopping bug so most beta testers would be intelligent enough to not vote bugs that aren't show stoppers. The bugs that would get voted to the top would be show stopping bugs.
  4. To be honest, they could have a forum to report beta testing bugs. And then assign a vote counter to it, just like they do with the bugs now where you can vote on it. The top most voted beta testing bugs are the ones that they need to immediately look at. Of course they can't resolve all bugs before a patch but at least with a voting system like that, they know what the most pressing beta testing bug issues are.
  5. We need to keep pushing Asobo though, don't let them off the hook. Why do I say this? Asobo implied they would add beta testing last fall. They did do beta testing with the Virtual Reality (VR) patch. But after the VR patch, they then seemed to scrap beta testing for a few patches in Q1 of this year. The community grew upset with the bugs in the Q1 patches of this year, and we asked Asobo why didn't they do beta testing for those patches. Asobo finally relented and did the 300 person beta test for last patch. I was utterly confused as to why Asobo kind of stopped beta testing after the VR patch. The morale of the story is, we need to keep this pressure on Asobo. Don't let them off the hook. And keep pressing for an "opt in" beta test for the entire player base. Otherwise, I fear Asobo may slip back to their past habits and then decide beta testing isn't needed.
  6. Actually, what we want is an "opt in" beta testing feature, that allows the entire player base to opt in to beta testing or not. A beta testing branch was planned for update #9 last year titled "Add a Beta Version Player Can Enable Before Releasing a Patch" in the feedback snapshot below: "Add a beta version a player can enable" clearly implies an "opt in" option for every player in MSFS. I give Asobo credit for having a beta testing team and for this patch, expanding the beta testing team to beyond 300 testers. That is an improvement for sure. But it's not the "holy grail" of an "opt in" beta testing feature for the entire player base. I guess we will see if the beta testers catch enough bugs for this upcoming patch.
  7. I assume this is a trial run for their beta testing and they are continually refining their beta testing process. However, I think they need more than 300 beta testers. My guess is, the 300 beta testers in the last patch didn’t make much noise about the livery multiplayer bug, even if a few of them reported the bug, Or perhaps they didn’t catch the bug at all. In any case, more beta testers and a wider net of beta testers will help to catch bugs for patches. An “opt in” beta test feature allowing any player to opt in the beta test is the optimal solution. Edit: It seems like Jane responded in the MSFS forums and the 300 testers are in addition to a pre-selected group of testers. That's good news because it means there will be more than 300 testers. That's headed in the right direction. An "opt in" beta test is still better though but at least the beta testing group this time is an improvement over last time.
  8. So I think two weeks ago, there was screenshots in another thread of a possible release of the FBW A320 in the MSFS marketplace. And I think someone in that screenshots thread mentioned the FBW A320 could be released in the MSFS marketplace (as a free add on of course) within one week. So the FBW A320 wasn't released last week in the marketplace. I take it that it's not ready yet, because of either technical issues or legal issues? Anyone know any more information about the FBW A320 release for the MSFS marketplace?
  9. I wouldn’t be surprised if this is the case because MSFS can generate real time terrain and landmarks that match the real world with the streaming of satellite/photogrammetry data. And it covers the entire world. This is something that MSFS can do over P3D and X-Plane and perhaps it’s something the DoD values.
  10. That isn’t a problem though. DoD can have a separate server installed in their own premises (ie. inside the Pentagon) where the data is streamed to their own internal MSFS clients. Microsoft can set this up for them if they get the contract. There are no security issues here if Microsoft installs an internal server for DoD. It’s walled off from the rest of the world.
  11. The video posted by ThrottleUp alters the Camera.cfg file. Does anybody know if the Camera.cfg file is overwritten when a new patch is downloaded? Because it would suck if we do all the work to setup the wing view, but then a new patch erases all our work and we have to do it again, for every patch.
  12. Increasing the sim rate is unstable. It has crashed for me too before when I speed up the sim rate in the past. Just don't speed up the sim rate and it's generally more stable.
  13. Such a silly viewpoint and conclusion. Microsft/Asobo are not responsible for policing the add on market of another website that Microsoft/Asobo have no ownership or control over. Such a product probably wouldn't make it into the MSFS marketplace because Microsoft/Asobo do control the MSFS marketplace. What gets sold outside the MSFS marketplace though, Microsoft/Asobo can't really control that (provided we want to continue to have the flexibility to add any add on into our community folders).
  14. Honestly, $5 USD per month for the existing satellite/photogrammetry streaming that MSFS provides is a reasonable price. Or maybe they can have a package where you stream so many GBs of data for the players that don't fly MSFS as frequently. Of course, I hope they continue to give the satellite/photogrammetry streaming for free in MSFS because that would save us more money. Free is good so I'm not complaining. Hopefully, Microsoft/Asobo make enough money from the MSFS marketplace that they can continue to give us free satellite/photogrammetry streaming for the next 5 years at least.
  15. It doesn't matter if they compress the data or not though. What matters is the competing simulators don't have such a satellite streaming service, where the satellite data is also treated (ie. treated by Black Shark). If P3D or X-Plane had such a service and it required a monthly fee, some people would pay for it. Some people in this thread have already said they would pay $5 USD or $10 USD per month. So there will probably be players of P3D and X-Plane who would pay $5 to $10 USD per month for a comparable service.
×
×
  • Create New...