I’ve hidden several off-topic posts and issued one member with a warning and a few days off.

I’m reopening the topic. Hopefully it won’t be necessary to close it again.

12 hours ago, Multisim said:

I think you read my comment a bit to literally.

The point was that some people want to live in the past and others are willing to move on and try new things.

There is nothing wrong with living in the past if it makes you happy.

On 8/30/2022 at 12:36 AM, Doug47 said:

That doesn’t look that impressive to me at all. That really proves the point that it’s a artists model based on photographs hence the plastic computer look it has. 
 

But you can never replace a real photo that’s used as a panel. Check edetroits work. He should be employed by all platforms to provide 2D panels. You’ll never go back to a VC 

I've flown with 2D panels and always hated it. The only use I can think of for them is a specific screen for a specific purpose in a home cockpit setup. Otherwise I find them extremely unnatural and counterintuitive. 

For my part, until I get Historical Weather (either through ASOBO or another entity) MSFS is not for me.

I apologise for liking to fly in the past using the correct weather.

20 minutes ago, Juliet Alpha said:

I apologise for liking to fly in the past using the correct weather.

Yep, nothing like giving that really stormy day a repeat just for the experience or fun of it, or that windshear that caused a crash and burn.

Cheers

Speaking about past and present, how is it of a progress that a Microsoft flight simulator, two years after its release, does not allow 3rd party weather add-ons to take control of its weather?  (I mean officially without the need for any hacks). Hasn't the openness to 3PD been a key to success in the past years?  In addition, the ATC in FS2004 (!) worked better than in the current version. And I am not talking about the complicated and inflexible control assignment scheme that has thankfully improved since the release. This shows that sometimes, if some things worked well in the past, it may be worthwhile sticking to them.

 

Yep, or at least using as a base to expand upon.

Isn't it all about the votes ?

so if enough people voted for a purple sky that's what it would end up with ?

Edited August 31, 20223 yr by Rogen

I went back to a 2d panel with the Aerowinx PSX B744 and I'm using P3dv5.3 for my scenery generator.  The quality of the PSX panels is excellent and just takes some getting use to.  The great thing about PSX is it never crashes and the interfaces with P3d work well.  PSX is expensive but well worth the money in my opinion.  🙂

 

Edited August 31, 20223 yr by BlueStar

5 hours ago, Rogen said:

so if enough people voted for a purple sky that's what it would end up with ?

So funny that people think this is what's going on in MSFS. Meanwhile, I'm looking at some very nice progress videos from the WorkingTitle team of their work to add full system functionality and fleshed-out G3000 to the default Cessna Longitude, for free. 

23 minutes ago, Chapstick said:

So funny that people think this is what's going on in MSFS

Nobody is thinking that, not even remotely.

5 hours ago, Afterburner said:

Speaking about past and present, how is it of a progress that a Microsoft flight simulator, two years after its release, does not allow 3rd party weather add-ons to take control of its weather?  (I mean officially without the need for any hacks).

The strong belief in the community is that this is due to their agreement with Meteoblue. The weather is one of their 'crown jewels' with which they will brook no messing. No official statement has ever addressed it other than to repeatedly say that they have no plans to open up weather to 3rd parties. At the same time they haven't acted to cut off REX's solution, which they could easily do I imagine. Some of us remember the days of 'DOS ain't done until Lotus won't run'. 

I think this reflects the fact that FSX and ancestors were always much more open because they were seen as hobbyist products that happened to be located in the games division, whereas MSFS is positioned as primarily a game product that is also used by hobbyist simmers. The priorities are reversed. The Xbox gaming platform (for both Xbox and PC gaming) is a much more closed and restricted environment generally. Everything about how the game is installed and runs, down to things like encrypted add-on files, reflects that different culture.

P3D inherited FSX's openness, which suits LM fine because their true target market is people building training sims who usually need to integrate their own systems. 

It's deeply frustrating to watch this community seemingly spin itself in circles over the same basic hangup, which to me seems to be "But why can't I have X thing from P3D/X-Plane/FSX/FS2004/Flightgear in MSFS."

For those who have used MSFS, they know that the answer to that question in 99% of cases is simple - It's because MSFS doesn't need it or already has a better alternative.

Reading the complaints throughout this thread feels much like someone finally upgrading from their old 2004 beater Honda Civic and wondering where to plug in their cassette to bluetooth adapter they used to use.

"Well you see, it's quite simple. You just tap the bluetooth icon on the dashboard and it connects to your phone just like that!"
"But I don't want that. Why doesn't it support my cassette to bluetooth adapter? I want to use bluetooth."
"Because you don't need to use that old adapater... It's built right into the car!"
"But I paid $20 for this on Amazon back in 2014. Why can't I use it?"

14 minutes ago, fidiyikovo said:

It's deeply frustrating to watch this community seemingly spin itself in circles over the same basic hangup, which to me seems to be "But why can't I have X thing from P3D/X-Plane/FSX/FS2004/Flightgear in MSFS."

For those who have used MSFS, they know that the answer to that question in 99% of cases is simple - It's because MSFS doesn't need it or already has a better alternative.

Wholeheartedly agree, though I'd say the percentage is closer to 95%. There are certainly things regarding home cockpit building that MSFS is simply not capable of serving in its current state.

Back on the fundamental point of this thread though, where is P3D v5.4? I think it's worth saying that if you're expecting major updates to P3D that will significantly improve the default capabilities of the sim, then it's highly unlikely you will get this in 5.4 or v6 or whatever future version of P3D there will be. If you're happy with the fundamental state of the sim, but are looking forward to general bugfixes, minor performance updates, and other quality-of-life improvements, then P3D will continue to make you happy for a few years at least.

Edited August 31, 20223 yr by StAgre

22 minutes ago, fidiyikovo said:

It's because MSFS doesn't need it or already has a better alternative

Really trying not to sound like a broken record here, but there are a few things MSFS can't do (yet), with no alternative, and to some of us, those drawbacks weigh more than it's advantages. This, of course, is in the eye of the beholder, so it makes no sense to criticize or even ridicule that point of view.

Just some info for you regarding MultiSim. He had two accounts which is not permitted on AvSim.

That account has been deactivated but his original remains active. His name in that is NickBo. So if you see any posts by that name it’s one and the same person.