Abriael

Always nice to receive praise from a peer. 👍

No. I am the interviewer. Really weird comments from someone aside, thank you for the kind words, mate. 🤗

It'll get old soon. 😂

Same here, I'll install and play comfortably tonight after I'm done working and had a nap 😂

or maybe people should just have an ounce of patience. Don't you people have work? 😂

Who? 😂

who? 😂 Maybe you should enjoy your new L, together with "gamermuscles" 😂😂😂😂

I'm not even going to try to install until I'm done with work 😂

Same happened with 2020. I wasn't amazed by the quality of their stuff tho. Not gonna be amazed this time either, but hey, visibility for the hobby is good.

Always glad to be of service 🫡

Nah, most awards actually don't work like that. This doesn't. I don't specifically care about the awards themselves, but this is an event with many million viewers. Cheesy and irritating spectacle aside, MSFS 2024 winning an award would have been great visibility for the hobby (and I do care about that) and it's a pity that it was snubbed.

Today they announced the nominees of The Game Awards, and I noticed that MSFS 2024 was not in there. Initially, I wasn't surprised. Obviously, it's out too late to be considered, right? Nope. Wrong. Apparently, games are eligible as long as they are released before November 22. MSFS 2024 was eligible this year and will not be eligible next year (because next year, it'll be games from November 23 onward). MSFS is a big AAA game, and it's really weird that it has been left out, albeit I know all too well why. First of all, award shows and most outlets weirdly bunch together simulation games and strategy games in the same award. The result is that this year, the "best simulation/strategy game" award category doesn't have a single simulator nominated. They're all strategy games. Funnily, one simulator has been nominated... F1 24... and it's in the sports/racing games category because according to some weirdos, racing simulators are not simulators, but more akin to sports games. Ultimately, the obvious elephant in the room is that the jury is made entirely of generalist gaming journalists and influencers, and they don't really play simulators as much as other genres. They don't generate as much of that controversy that they make their money on. At least not the kind of controversy that generates traffic. Mind you, the strategy category doesn't fare that much better. They slapped into it Kunitsu-Gami: Path of the Goddess which got an 80 on Metacritic (not bad, but not exceptional), which tells me they were scratching the bottom of the barrel, despite the fact that there were plenty of great strategy games this year that they simply did not know of, so they weren't considered. Of course, simulators should have their own category, but I suppose they're too busy announcing three redundant awards for esports and one for "best influencer" to spare some time for our genre. 🤔

no pants.

That's not really what I am looking for. I want the traffic to follow what happens in the real, not to have to generate events manually. That's what real-time dynamic traffic is. 99% is a massive overestimation unless you're telling me that 99% of flights depart perfectly on time, aren't canceled, etcetera, which certainly isn't the case. The whole world isn't Japan. 😂 If a fixed schedule is good for you, great. BATC is a great product for those who are ok with that. It simply breaks the deal for me. I've been doing schedules since FS 2004 (or maybe even 2002? can't remember when I started using Project AI). I'm not going back.

"Live AI planes seems to be a mess in MSFS 2024 !?" Yes. They did.

I don't understand your change. AIG, like BATC uses schedules. It doesn't include any delays or changes that can happen in the real world. The only difference is that someone at AIG compiles the schedules manually (as far as I know), while BATC automatically generates them from a 7-day slice at a certain point in time. Both solutions are fixed but implemented in different ways. But we're going far off topic, so I'll leave it here. I love BATC's implementation of traffic injection and handling (and the fact that it's fully independent allows it to work seamlessly in MSFS2024), but their data source simply doesn't fit my preference. Sad panda.

Unless something changed since the last time I checked, AIG uses schedules. They just update them once in a while. That's still not dynamic.

And it still does not apply in any shape or form to "Live AI Planes" in general.

I know they explained it. Doesn't mean I understand the decision (let alone agree with it). But to each their own. Unfortunately, that ruled out BATC for me and was a big disappointment. Sad panda. I'm not sure I understand the question though. Real-time traffic is by its very nature dynamic. The solution they used is not. It's basically an automatically-generated schedule that does not change regardless of conditions. You literally can't because all aircraft have a bit in their files that tells the sim whether they can be used by AI or not.

That's an extremely weird/inefficient implementation and I have no idea why they may have done it. But I also have no idea why they decided not to go with dynamic real-time traffic, so eh.

That seems to be a very strange implementation, especially considering that it supports aircraft from very different providers (FSLTL, AIG, Just Flight). It'd have to list all the folders for all these providers, which would be extremely inefficient as aircraft wouldn't be recognized if their providers added new ones or changed anything in the folder structure. AI Aircraft in MSFS can be spawned simply by calling the ICAO code of the aircraft + the ICAO code of the airline or the specific registration for special liveries and specific cases. The simulator will look for that combination among the aircraft that have a bit in the files that enables them to be used for AI and spawns whatever matches it. If they did it differently, it's on their side.

Because I've helped out with FSLTL for years doing liveries and testing and I've had endless conversations with the person working on the injector, so I have a decent idea of how it works. For instance, the fact that you can make a text file with a list of parked aircraft per airport if you want to fine-tune it comes from one of my ideas. The injection in the same parking slot is because of the injection process. MSFS itself doesn't "inject" the aircraft. The spawning mechanic is completely different. The way aircraft are controlled depends on their parameters, which are in the files of each aircraft. Issues with sound depend on how the sounds are made, which is also in the files of each aircraft and depends on the package. For instance, Just Flight is done differently from FSLTL. Not a single word of FSLTL's message indicates that default AI traffic won't work as intended.

The problems they describe are all due to the injection process and the parameters of the ai aircraft, which are the parts not controlled by MSFS.

Partly because people can't read beyond headlines (history of my life) and partly because some people WANT excuses to bash MSFS 2024 and validate some sort of fictional "cool kids club" of people who will stick to 2020. So they will disingenuously echo pretty much everything that can be misconstrued to that effect.