PlumCrazy

Similarly, I find when I shutdown MSFS on my PC (and after I shut down my PC altogether), the GPU and CPU temperatures seem to go down. Shocking, right?!

I see plenty of aircraft contrails in FS2024. Is this issue specific to BATC?

I want it because my beloved FFX Citation X has issues in SU4 beta that cannot be corrected until the full SU4 release.

I skipped through portions of the video, so forgive me if it was answered. Does anyone know if you can turn off the annoying yellow ribbon markers guiding you through the course? Obviously, they may be helpful when just starting out and learning a course, but if they can't be disabled, I will not bother running the Red Bull Air Races even one time.

Isn't that why we have countless graphics settings though? - so people with higher end systems can have a more graphically detailed sim while those with lower end systems can adjust to gain performance. I don't think my 9800X3D, 5080, 64GB system is going to be brought to its knees because a few AI aircraft's landing gear are rendered... It's unfortunate when design decisions result in regressions to the sim, regardless of the hardware on which it is played. I guess this is what Asobo refers to as "optimization"...

If they have to fix each AI model individually, wouldn't it make more sense to just fix the sim itself to work with the way all models were created previously. I didn't have disappearing landing gear in MSFS2020. Now using the same models, the landing gear only displays when very close to the AI aircraft. This doesn't hit me as a problem that needs fixed in the models. This smacks me in the face as a MSFS2024 regression that should be fixed.

I can't think of a single reason to keep flying MSFS 2020 with 2024 available - assuming you have decent hardware specs. 2024 certainly has had its growing pains, but it is at a very usable state now. SU4 (which should go live any day) brings some substantial improvements to the sim as well (many of us running MSFS2024 are using the beta SU4 branch of the sim already).

Performance seems good for me in the latest beta. I fly in VR (Reverb G2, 9800X3D, 5080). I'd be fine if this latest build was the official SU4 release. One regression I have noticed in the past 2 beta updates: AI aircraft sounds now cut in suddenly when the aircraft becomes within maybe 1/2 mile of you and cut out suddenly when the aircraft flies/drives out of that range. Previously you could hear AI aircraft from much farther away, and the engine sound would not cut in/out so drastically. This is noticeable for me only when I am standing outside my aircraft, so not a huge issue (as I tend to be in the cockpit 99% of the time 😉 )

I have no clue about this "streamer" you are talking about. If you were active on the official forums, you would have seen hundreds of complaints about this particular issue within an hour or so of the beta release. It is well over a thousand now. Pretty sure these people weren't there because of a video streamer LOL.

If a company releases code that works on their in-house systems, yet doesn't work for 100% of the users who use it in the real world, their test methodology deserves criticism and should be fixed. If you consider this particular bug to be insignificant enough to not hold back the beta, I simply will agree to disagree (and the huge number of complaints and bug reports seem to support my feelings). I fly in VR and would absolutely revert to SU3 without the user community "fix" for this bug that is now available. The bug text is plenty annoying in 2D, but it is pretty much game breaking in VR. This bug would prevent anyone flying in VR from participating in the SU4 beta. That is a significant bug by my definition.

If the change was merged after "whatever set of test they run before releasing..." then it supports the theory no testing was done in the released code in-house. You seem to think that is fine. I will continue to say that is sloppy software development practice (yes, even for released beta builds). If the released code was tested, yet in-house "testers" didn't notice this bug, I am at a loss for words. As a VR user of the sim (I guess I should say game at this point), if the bug was noted in-house and deemed not significant, then I am at an equal loss for words. We shall agree to disagree...

How can this particular bug happen when checked? It's not like the bug is present under a certain specific scenario or for users with specific hardware or settings enabled. This bug is present for every single person who enters a flight - in a flight simulator. Either the specific beta build was run/tested by zero people in-house before release or it was noted and deemed not significant enough to stop the release. Neither scenario is a good look for Asobo...

Did you really just imply this bug would only be noticed in-house if they did a full set of comprehensive regression testing? We all expect a certain amount of instability and/or bugs in a beta release. I wouldn't expect a bug that hits 100% of the user base in the face the instant they start a flight to even make it into an alpha build. I have to assume the development team did their beta compile and sent the new release on its way without even running the new build once in-house.

We all understand it's a beta. Bugs are to be expected. But I 100% disagree with you if you think bugs that effect EVERYONE and are obvious the second EVERYONE starts a flight (so would be impossible to miss with even rudimentary in-house testing) should be expected - even in a beta.

I have been having quite a few issues with flightsim.to not responding to mouse clicks lately. I usually just refresh the web page and retry until it works...