Fiorentoni

That's what the assistance settings are for: Make it an option if you really want. But don't dumb down the sim for everyone.

The difference is in the wording: 1st party developers are not working WITH Asobo, they are working FOR Asobo.

Well I hate my ISP, but I can't switch to another one, because the others are even worse. Sometimes there's no valid alternative, e.g. if you want a 777 in this case (or just any study level long hauler for that matter)

The devs don't communicate with the community, which is bad. Then again they like usually stay silent for 4 weeks and then release an update with 300+ fixes, so I wouldn't worry too much. I'd rather have those that put their head down and go to work instead of those that prefer to tell us every single thing they've experienced in their past week (including Diarrhea).

I thought scenery devs would be able to adjust this accordingly, but if even iniBuilds on a fresh 2024 scenery can't do it, I don't know who can.

1) Weather and sim-time being connected by force 2) The sim-time variable being all screwed up, showing computer live time on 3rd party aircraft instead of the in-sim time

MSFS2024 has more aggressive LODs, meaning more things will load in later. I think that's what you are seeing.

Ooh, enhanced textures *and* enhanced sounds? That would pretty much make the Maddog perfect. Literally. I might start flying it again after that.

No. Is it that hard to understand? 1) If you're biased towards A, then review B, and find "B is great", then it's very likely that B is actually good. 2) If you're biased towards A, then review A, and find "A is great", then it doesn't necessarily mean A is actually good because it's only a confirmation of a bias.

Oh it's *that* Katie? I'm sorry, I didn't know that. In that case I have no point indeed.

Well the quote already shows a massive bias towards FSL, so not sure, how useful that is. I‘d really like someone like V1Simulations or A330Driver, because they‘ve been massively praising the Fenix, so their opinion would certainly not be biased towards FSL from the start. That said I don‘t really need anyone to say that the FSL systems are good - I know that already. And I know their limitations in MSFS (no WX radar). And the Fenix is also very good systems wise - a slightly better flare won‘t make me buy the FSL. I‘d rather like comments about visuals and performance and sounds, because that‘s where FSL has to compete against the Fenix (which is spectacular in visuals and sounds and by now respectable in terms of performance).

That's two different things. Frame generation is independent of anti aliasing. I run FG with TAA

They have clearly shifted server resources over from 2020 to 2024. That's the only thing that can explain all those loading issue with 2020 that came out of nowhere last week or so. There can be no debate about that. However I don't think they've done it to make 2024 look *better*, but to make 2024 *work* at all. Clearly MS has no interest in paying for more server capacity, so the only alternativ is reshifting the capacity they have between 2020 and 2024.

Do you still get those messages? I get them right now flying in MSFS 2024. I thought all server issues were solved... Ground textures seem very bad

Time for @Mir // Flightbeam to step up and fill the gap!