3 hours ago, March Hare said:

I thought the point about FPS over NYC/Toronto in the PC Gamer review odd. The reviewer says these locations are absolutely unplayable, even crashing, on the lowest possible graphics settings, using a RTX 2080. But I'm sure one of the alpha/beta testers with a GTX 1070 mentioned a drop in FPS over NYC on high settings, but to about 25-30 FPS and certainly still playable. And I'm sure they were playing at 4K on high settings in NYC, even though the GTX 1070 isn't even designed for 4K output (so could have got better performance at a lower resolution). Certainly no mention of it becoming unplayable or crashing. It's weird how an experience using a superior GPU could be so much worse on supposedly the lowest graphics settings.

There’s something off about the PCGamer Review (in progress), and it’s this:

“I can get frame rates approaching 60 at ultra settings with my RTX 2080 Ti, I7 9700K and 16GB RAM, but once the buildings enter the screen I’m often down below 20”

 

Why are they trying to run Ultra settings with 16g of RAM and expect healthy FPS when the autogen stats kicking up?
 

That reviewer needs to double their RAM pronto.

 

 

32 minutes ago, RobotRock said:

There’s something off about the PCGamer Review (in progress), and it’s this:

“I can get frame rates approaching 60 at ultra settings with my RTX 2080 Ti, I7 9700K and 16GB RAM, but once the buildings enter the screen I’m often down below 20”

 

Why are they trying to run Ultra settings with 16g of RAM and expect healthy FPS when the autogen stats kicking up?
 

That reviewer needs to double their RAM pronto.

 

 

This.

Photogrammetry is heavy on RAM usage. That’s his bottleneck in that situation and a reviewer for a major PC gaming site should know the basics of how computers function.

35 minutes ago, RobotRock said:

Why are they trying to run Ultra settings with 16g of RAM and expect healthy FPS when the autogen stats kicking up?

Good catch. There is probably lots of pagefile swapping going on.

I think most people are still not used to the idea of 32GB being the optimal amount for next-generation games. It was briefly listed as the recommended requirement for Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order and everyone freaked out.

4 hours ago, LHookins said:

LOL!  I think you mean augur.  Auger basically means "spun into the ground nose first." 😄   Remember Chuck Yeager's Air Combat?

Gee... I hope it doesn't auger in.

Ha! I do, yes.
 

4 hours ago, March Hare said:

I thought the point about FPS over NYC/Toronto in the PC Gamer review odd. The reviewer says these locations are absolutely unplayable, even crashing, on the lowest possible graphics settings, using a RTX 2080. But I'm sure one of the alpha/beta testers with a GTX 1070 mentioned a drop in FPS over NYC on high settings, but to about 25-30 FPS and certainly still playable. And I'm sure they were playing at 4K on high settings in NYC, even though the GTX 1070 isn't even designed for 4K output (so could have got better performance at a lower resolution). Certainly no mention of it becoming unplayable or crashing. It's weird how an experience using a superior GPU could be so much worse on supposedly the lowest graphics settings.

 

3 hours ago, mazex said:

Well - I do not think that the first one is possible to do any dramatic changes to. It is frankly amazing that we do not get single digit FPS will the detail level in NY. This is next gen stuff and in a year or two I guess it will run just fine there as it seems to scale well with more powerful CPU/GPU combos. But optimizations are sure to come.

2 seperate reviews list FPS issues over NYC. For the new user who doesn't understand that flight sims have always been taxing on hardware, 'reducing settings' and still seeing no significant improvement will make MSFS 'literally unplayable' for them.

This matters because these users (whether we appreciate them or not) represent the healthy market that will drive new tech faster and new products at lower prices than we have become used to.

Anyway, to show how wide the appeal is, here's a review from the UK Defence Journal - a website run by defence professionals, cyber security and international relations graduates, serving and former military personnel, industry specialists as well as everyday military and defence enthusiasts.
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/microsoft-flight-simulator-a-review/

 

Edited August 17, 20205 yr by F737NG

2 hours ago, F737NG said:

Ha! I do, yes.
 

 

2 seperate reviews list FPS issues over NYC. For the new user who doesn't understand that flight sims have always been taxing on hardware, 'reducing settings' and still seeing no significant improvement will make MSFS 'literally unplayable' for them.

This matters because these users (whether we appreciate them or not) represent the healthy market that will drive new tech faster and new products at lower prices than we have become used to.

Anyway, to show how wide the appeal is, here's a review from the UK Defence Journal - a website run by defence professionals, cyber security and international relations graduates, serving and former military personnel, industry specialists as well as everyday military and defence enthusiasts.
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/microsoft-flight-simulator-a-review/

 

That’s a weird article 

Excellent!  Thanks

Cheers

bs

@ChaoticBeauty

Two more to add to the list from me:

- John Ostrower on Medium.com https://medium.com/@jonostrower/microsofts-moonshot-flight-simulator-is-an-amazing-unfinished-trip-to-earth-96ddef6b17a1 - Microsoft's Flight Simulator is an Amazing Unfinished Trip to Earth

- The Guardian.com (website of major UK broadsheet newspaper) Microsoft Flight Simulator review – buckle in and see the world (5 stars) https://www.theguardian.com/games/2020/aug/18/microsoft-flight-simulator-review-asobo

Neil

2 minutes ago, neilydone said:

Two more to add to the list from me:

Thanks for posting! Sadly I am not permitted to edit the main post anymore, I believe you can only do so for 3 hours after a post is made.