sdirand

There are probably more people using P3D that the survey reveals but it might also be the case for all the others sim. I would say that people answering the survey are more dedicated simmers than casual simmers so a lot of xbox/Ps5 players never heard about navigraph. So for sure MSFS24 would be even higher. Another kind of survey would be to check the IVAO netwaork statistics. Currently there are 415 pilots online, split into: 6 x Microsoft FS9 9 x Microsoft FSX 7 x P3D4 2 x P3D5 17 x XP11 40 x XP12 334 x MSFS/MSFS24 As there are no P3D6 category, I have no idea where those players are catagorized. But P3D players in this real time display represents exactly 2%. Surprinsingly, there are more FS9/FSX users compared to P3D. VATSIM would offer a better representation because there are more pilots compared to IVAO but I don't know if you can check the sim usage on VATSIM.

I often read critics about GSX but I would like to point out that I bought this tool maybe 3 years ago. And during those past three years, I received constant updates and new functions, absolutely for FREE. I never paid any upgrade. And those upgrades were not just for correcting bugs. That GSX 3.9.4 has nothing in common compared to what I bought 3 years ago. It has way more capabilities. Probably my best $ spent in this hobby. It makes our flights so much immersive. Many thanks to Umberto and his team.

I think the trick with msfs24 is to tune it for what your system can chew. We all would like to crank the sliders full right to have the best graphics, etc and even if my fps were not that word not allowed, it often led to problems. Since I reviewed my expectations, considering my system is quite old, I think I found the best compromise. Yes the graphics are not the best compared to some screenshots but I don't have any CTD anymore. Usual WASM crashed from time to time with some aircrafts but sadly we all have to deal with that currently.

I don't think it is a problem with quality, Flightbeam and Flytampa are still on top. It's a problem about how fast you can produce those sceneries. Msfs20/24 are also very popular simulators so it also attracted a lot of newcomers devs. Even if you are a solo dev, it is difficult to make it a living when you can release a new scenery every two years. Yes, the market is bigger compared to FSX/P3D era but in the past, sceneries from FSDT/FT/FB were way better than the rest and there were few others devs to compete with. Now, there are way more devs, powerhouses like Inibuilds an Mk-Studios and the difference in term of quality is not that big as it was a few years before. and that's why, Inibuilds or Mk-Studios sceneries probably are enough good for a large majority of users. The market is bigger but is more diluted too. And as I said, in the past, big names like FT, FB, FSDT were respected. They had their list of airports, like a private garden and others devs were respecting it. Now you can work two years on a scenery, even announce it way before it release but another dev can overtake you anytime. FlyTampa need to update their EHAM to msfs24, it takes months and months and we clearly don't even know if they are working on it or not as their communication is always close to nil. People won't wait forever, the market for a new EHAM is here and tomorrow if Inibuilds release it, FT is screwed.

Maybe also because the bar has been raised and by a big margin. Back in the FSX or P3D days, and even when msfs was launched as the first sceneries were just P3D ports, sceneries were much simplier. So it took way less time to develop them. Now, sceneries have a lot of details, people expect not only interiors, but interiors with huge détails, animated people, etc. The textures also vastly improved. Just compare the size of a P3D scenery on you SSd and the space required by a recent msfs24 releease. There are no comparaisons. It means it requires a lot of development time. And this is also the reason why powerhouse of the past like FlyTampa, UK2000, or even Flightbeam are having a hard time to keep the pace. Solo developers are fading because they need months if not years to develop a scenery with the risks to be overtaken by huge studios like Mk-Studios or Inibuilds. In fact, most add-ons right now are developpped by those huge studios, especially megahubs. There are still room for solo devs but mostly with regional airports.

Nothing new. It's the same with almost any games those days. Comparing msfs or msfs24 to Microsoft Flight Simulator 2000 has no sense. We are talking about a 26 years old game! Time has changes, games are bigger and bigger and streaming is becoming the norm, we have to deal with it. Also most games now have an online lobby or are 100% online. When the editor close the online servers or close the streaming bandswitch, we are screwed! Maybe, it will be the case one day with the msfs saga. Right now, the game is popular, Microsft / Asobo are making a lot of $$$, so there will probably be a msfs28 or msfs30 one day. But yes, msfs20 will probably be unusuable one day. That's why I always said that the brighest idea Microsoft / Asobo had was the marketplace. As stated by the navigraph survey, a lot of players are buying on the marketplace and it brings a constant flow of fresh cash to Microsoft / Asobo, so they have the revenue to update the franchise and keep interrest to develop for it. This is what Flight Simulator and P3D were lacking. Once you bough the sim, Microsoft had no revenues anymore and after a while, they realized it was not worth it to continue the development.

PESIM and Aerosoft are working on it. So we should go from nothing to 2 versions in the future. Aerosoft version will be made by Jo Erlend so it might be great quality. PESIM also have nice sceneries and being French, they will have access to way more datas concerning LFPG so their redition should be more accurate.

In term of megahub, I would love to see them tackle KORD, WSSS, LTFM, CYVR. That are the biggest need right now. And why not EHAM, as FlyTampa is not in a hurry to update their scenery for msfs24. LFPG is taken care by PESIM and Aerosoft and I think LEMD default airport is not that bad. Of course, spannish simmers probably woud love a better rendition.

Come on, it is just a high detail update. It would be nice to have it, of course, but it doesn't prevent us to fly the 737-800 anyway. I still haven't bought the 737-700 upgrade. Will probably buy it with my next paycheck. But it's ok, I can live without the 737-700 for now and with the actual 737-800 and 737-900ER, even without the HD update.

To avoid some confusion, The 737-700 upgrade from msfs to msfs24 won't be free. There will be a 40% discount, just like it was for the others variants. But once, you paid the upgrade to have your PMDG 737 variant into msfs24, yes the High detail upgrade will be free for all variants.

Impressive! Despite all the critics, some of them surely deserved, I still enjoy my PMDG aircrafts very much. Always fun to enter the flighdeck of thoses 737 or 777. Can't wait! And also glad that full power will finally be applied of the different 747.

I don't think the Inibuilds A330 is that bad. It mainly lack an autosave function like they have in the A340 & A350 and also a reliable fuel usage when you use time accelération. It wouldn't be a huge update to add those features but sadly it's up to Asobo/Microsoft to ask for it.

This is a niche aircraft compared to the usual A32X/737 but it seems very nicely modeled. And the price is a nice surprise. Will definitely buy it before the end of the year.

I won't compare as I don't own the A346. But I was hesitating longuely between the two. Let's say that the 25% discount on the A343 was the decising factor. Quite happy with the A343 so far and mostly for the same reasons as yours.

Yes sorry my mistake. Made a flight tonight with the ATR72 in msfs24 and no problem to stop the propellers after the flight.