Thanks for posting this. :) My flight dynamics person is a 737-800/ MAX pilot. He is obsessed with aerodynamics. Needless to say he is going to rigorously test the MAX to see in his opinion how close it is. Currently in MSFS2020 there are some short comings in the FD such as the simulation of slats. I hope they corrected these :)
There's nothing magic about the X Plane flight modeling. They have their approach that clearly works well. It is entirely plausible that Asobo could develop their flight model to be as good or potentially better, and the only way to know is to use it, fly the real thing, and compare. What this interview covered was how Asobo was quantitatively assessing the results of their model compared with data logged from real planes, which is a key part of improving. But you guys didn't really get into the inner workings of the flight model itself. At some point they rolled out some aircraft models with fluid dynamics, but I was never clear on how those differed from everything else. The preview hype for 2024 mentions fluid dynamics, but I'm not clear if that is now how all aircraft are modeled in flight.
Top tip for whoever is flying the Max in the video. Use the trim! It’s stuck on 9 % throughout the video. The out of trim condition is causing the pitching. Real world Boeings do not fly well out of trim.
My only observation from Seb's comments would be that he's speaking in terms of the numbers accuracy aka Pilot's Operating Handbook (POH). This still doesn't tell us if the feel of the flight has improved. When you watch videos of DCS World in action and the F16 does a turn in the air, you can imagine that happening the exact same way in real life, the drift and angles. I don't know if MSFS 2024 has closed the gap on DCS World but saying the flight model is numerically accurate is only half the equation.
Agreed. It was more about performance accuracy. We want to know about the dynamics i.e. how realistic the complex motion is, especially near the edges of the envelope.
really excited for 2024, thank you for all your great videos. I personally am going to sit back and wait for the dust to settle before jumping in. After years, 2020 is finally in a spot where I can just enjoy it. I will be watching for major bugs, compatibility issues and any developer upgrade charges for add-ons into 2024 before jumping over.
Was hoping for more of a X-plane approach for MSFS2024’sz flight model. A flight model should not be adapted for any plane to feel more like the real thing.. it should be calculated with the 3D model’s aerodynamics and using math and physics. If an aircraft is not reacting like it should then there is something wrong with the math/physics of the simulator and that should be improved. I believe this is how Austin operates with X-Plane and there is a reason all flight schools now are using X-Plane.
@@pvdgucht Not all flight schools are using X-Plane since quite a lot of them are using P3D. You know why? Because flight schools are more concerned with system accuracy for their sims, not flight model.
@@tubeloobs Basically validating the point that x-plane has a better flight model then. Also it's a stupid argument overall since many addons in x-plane have just as much systems if not more than most p3d addons.
@@mro9466 How is that validating a better FM? You're making zero sense. P3D has the worst FM of the 3 sims yet it is used in a ton of flight schools. Your copy of X-Plane isn't even the one that is certified by the FAA. It is a separate professional edition that is only certified when paired with the requisite hardware.
@@TheCodifier could be idk 🤷♂️ haha fact is that I fond the aerodynamics of MSFS so much worse than X-Plane and just bad for flight training and realism idk why that is but the planes don’t seem to react like in real life. If realllly hope MSFS2024 will be much better, so that I can finally ditch X-Plane and go for msfs24 for all my types of flying. Because currently for practicing landings or other manouvres I still use X-Plane and for VFR XC flights I use MSFS
My big issue with default aircraft is pitch stability. There shouldn't be a 10 degree change in pitch from a 1 milimeter change in yoke position, but every time I try the default aircraft I find it nearly impossible to control. If I step into a payware aircraft it always flies like I expect. For reference, I started flying in the real world in 2005 and never stopped, so I can compare longitudinal stability between sim and the plane. It's off in MSFS default aircraft for some reason, but perhaps that's now changed.
@WestAirAviation Yep. Porpoising is ridiculous. Obviously wrong. No aircraft is that unstable in pitch. Can't, for the life of me, understand why something so obvious hasn't been fixed.
I have always maintained that a good flight model in sim doesn't always equate to an accurate flight model IRL. There are so many other cues missing, and what he highlighted about weather weight etc. will definitely have an effect on how those numbers translate in sim. I am glad they are moving away from the feedback approach to a more scientific numbers based approach. While there were some things that definitely needed to be addressed, in mfs2020, overall, it was still good enough.
One of my biggest issues with 2020 is the ground handling. The infinite tyre grip that shoots you off the side of the runway when you land with any crab on. Please tell me they’ve at least done something about that.
Can't promise anything other than the ground handling has been completely reworked. Although me personally, I have a binary mapping for brakes which causes a problem in its self, so unless you can apply brakes progressively, you're going to get odd results I guess.
Compliments to Microsoft for setting this up and inviting everyone! It is really great to see the different interests and viewpoints in the videos I am now watching on TH-cam. Laurie. NZ. 😊
I care about the flight model to a point. Things I care about more include the VR experience (vastly superior in MSFS over XP) and accuracy of systems. Working Title's G1000, for example, in MSFS is far more accurate and detailed than the G1000 in XP. And especially when it comes to airliners, no amount of flight model accuracy will prepare one to be able to actually land a 737 IRL anyway, for example, so again I would value the systems fidelity of the PMDG over the superior flight model of the ZIBO.
They might get the numbers performance closer, and hopefully even the feel, but the true test will be how the environmental effects especially wind is affecting that model.
I am hopeful that they get it right concerning the ground friction and the weather vanning when transitioning to or from liftoff and airborne. Thanks for the video.
Hard to know if the pitch instability has improved. The Max in the video I s way out out of trim and the trim is never changed . It’s stuck on 9 degrees (bottom right of the screen)
Did you run it at the lowest resolution? The NY-scene looked absolutely horrendous…just a greyish mass with some autogen popping in and out. And textures being very blurry in the distance. Looks absolutely crap. So I really hope that wasn‘t on medium or high settings 🙏
This is a fair point. The graphics do look like they were on lower settings, yet it still stuttered. I've seen videos of it being beautifully smooth though, so I do wonder what this particular systems settings are. The footage captured from Pimax Crystal Light shows off a pretty smooth performance, so I'm not too worried, they are clearly still optimising the sim.
@@dtrjones Stuttering could be from the screen recording software, not the sim itself. And as one whose Crystal Light is being delivered today (finally - it only took 3 months Lol!) I hope your optimism is right!
i find it in 2020 already more than good enough, except the groundhandling, and that seems to be fixed. i see no value in all this comparing models etc stuff. it is good to have options, i do hope xp will survive.
I agree and prepare3d has legacy ground physics which basically doesn't exist. 24 will be game changer for GA and heli fans. There is so much more to a sim than flying a tube at 30,000ft
This didn't really say much about the flight model itself, just how it's tuned. Sounds like it's still not an actual physics simulation. Could be wrong, but I was hoping for a more technical description of how it actually works.
Good interview. Most people already thought the flight model in MSFS was good enough. Great to see that they are improving it. This means that the flight model debate will become even less relevant now. It is going to come down to which is the better overall package. In other words, it's the collective sum of the flight model, graphics, ease of use (e.g flight planner, no ortho install) and hardware performance. MSFS easily wins. With MSFS 2024, there is something for everyone, hardcore simmers or casual gamers. Xplane is not a bad sim tough, I used it for many years so wishing them the best.
The Helo FM's always felt particularly lacking to me in MSFS, mostly in comparison to DCS. I know a lot of other DCS Helo enjoyers felt the same, so hopefully MSFS2024 handles helos a little better.
I've flown X-Plane and FS2020. I think that the FS2020 flight model is just fine. I believe that pound for pound FS2024 is going to exceed X-plane. For all of the features it contains and for the graphics, all and all for me FS2024 has a better value. I'm pre-ordering The AVIATOR Edition. Word Up! Everyone else, do what you feel is real.
Wake me up when MSFS can even match the realistic environment of p3d and activesky. Because right now it doesn't even compare. No weather radar, no icing that could crash you, no severe t-storms to avoid, etc. A sightseeing machine for VFR flight mainly, not for what I am looking for.
I absolutely agree with you @tonyodoul. For me, MSFS 2020 has been (except the stunning visuals) one of the worst sims from the past years. It‘s so disappointing when you are interested in aviation in depth and have been using XP, P3D for years. I have deinstalled it long time ago. MSFS-lemmings are only interested on modern graphic-effects, that‘s it. They don‘t even realize what is missing that really matters…that‘s why it attracted so many casual-gamers.
It's fine, you're looking for a bad weather sim, but I think you'll find there's a lot more to MSFS than this and going back to P3D and X-Plane for many just isn't a viable option.
Well first of all I would like to congratulate you Kirk to have been one of the first to really get a real sneek into what Jurg and the boys are upto for the next MSFS! Yes I believe they have improoved a lot in many areas, but will it be as with the default airliners that they bring to us (via Asabo) "Comes AS IS" and nothing more until the next Simulator from them comes? No even though I still love to fly the default A320 from them (Quick to prepair and get airborn) but way too many important INO buttons on board :( compare to the approach that F.B.W. or PDMG did with their versions. And don't forget these indepentent Modders they don't get a fat pay check from Microsoft every month. But again I was very pleased to see you beeing there where it was all happening Bless bless & sí jú! :)
If they used a "scientific method" now, I hope the aircrafts can at least behave accurately in crosswind takeoff and landings ! An important reminder: Microsoft was able to make it... in 1998. In 2004 this caractéristic disappeared with FS 2004 for better graphics (not well optimized) but less accuracy. The engine remained the same in P3D as Lockheed took the rights to use the engine then Asobo took the same old engine to build up MSFS2020. A shame. Every other sim are able to do it for decades. It should be a minimum requirement to make a flight sim. I hope this time they made it right. Imagine a car sim with cars unable to drift despite a myriad of revolutionnary fancy features...
Remember the 100's of lift data points in MSFS 2020 which came to nothing? Now they claim they have 90%+ accuracy. What does this mean? It means absolutely nothing. I can tell straight away from the clip of the aircraft shown that there is way too much pitch reaction to only small pitch inputs and that tells me they are as far off as they were before. Airliners have very high pitch stability and at low speeds it takes large movements of the yoke to overcome inertia and inherent pitch stability. This clip shows the opposite. Let's hope the 2024 flight models are going to be tweakable by the user.
stutters, ground tiles popping, fan blades not animated, a myriad of graphical glitches like entire mountains disappearing and weird pilot avatars halfway hanging out of the plane. I'm not buying the hype.
Personally, it doesn’t matter to me anymore. I felt FS2020 was good enough; my only frustration was with how hard it is to trim. I think it’s great that we have input and feedback from professional pilots, but I also think that feedback can really make the community toxic. In my view, Flightsim is best for training procedures and for learning. But maybe that’s why us non-pilots get so caught up in the arguing about what’s better? Because we can’t fly the real thing so we need what we have access to to be the “best” so we don’t feel silly? I dunno. Anyway, I’m trying to see if I can get to do the A320 sim at JetBlue university so I guess I’ll actually have something to compare?
What is very telling about this interview is the very subjective notion about flight models which for all practical purposes is not very good even from real pilots. Worse still, are the ridiculous comments from simmers who have no piloting experiment and who venture to comment on the realism of airliners or other smaller models that they have never flown in real life just because for instance, prefer Xplane or DCS. So all those simulation joe blos who are not pilots and even those who are but not on the specific plane they are commenting on should shut up and appreciate that finally the mathematics will speak for them.
I've only ever flown Cessnas and Pipers as a student pilot (most of my hours are years ago), and I pretty much only spend serious time in a sim to get back in shape for when I can afford regular lessons again. There are things I love about MSFS 2020 (for instance I can learn landmarks at my local field, and I'm now pretty proficient with G1000), but at the same time I was hoping to hear a LOT more about their implementation of CFD in detail (and hopefully its use in default planes across the board, since I'm not a huge fan of needing to turn to payware to have a good experience). Last I heard MSFS 2020 only had a handful of default planes using CFD, and adoption by payware providers was even spottier. As a CS and Math grad (currently in ML) I know a enough about the simulation of physical systems to loosely speak to the pros and cons of the approach X-Plane takes vs. what MSFS seems to be describing... it's obviously ideal to have a physical model that also matches real-world figures. X-Plane takes the approach of having a great holistic physical model that sometimes doesn't perfectly line up with POH figures or pilot experience, but will behave consistently (as an aircraft would) when encountering more complex situations (crosswinds, thermals, rotors, etc.), especially considering the new atmospheric model in X-Plane 12... however the experience of many X-Plane users (experienced pilots) is of asking Austin to make minor changes that would yield better fidelity to their own real-world experience and receiving pushback due to the change sacrificing the elegance/internal consistency (holisticity) of the flight model. A recent example of this is the change in tire inertia which was requested due to GA planes pitching down too fast upon touchdown; ultimately Austin made the requested change, which was validated by another pilot (who last flew the aircraft in question, a Baron, decades ago) entirely by feel, which is still useful, but seems a bit arbitrary (admittedly his work on the F-4 was much more rigorous in this respect). A change like that for instance is a great candidate for the more rigorous "scientific" testing approach the MSFS team seem to be alluding to with respect to using sensors on real aircraft. In principle, a holistic CFD model seems (on paper) to be what you get when you take the best of X-Plane's approach to its ultimate conclusion (i.e. using finite element method so that the whole aircraft body's contribution to the aerodynamic forces involved is considered, at arbitrarily high resolution, not just lifting/control surfaces). However, without the MSFS team giving us more insight into the nature of the CFD model and what parameters it is choosing to "tune" to bring the model's behavior more in line with observed values, it's hard to trust that they can get everything right (especially towards the edge of the flight envelope). I doubt for instance that they have the funds to fly multiple instances of the same model of aircraft under the similar weather, fuel, weight and balance etc. conditions to establish the variance that one can expect to observe when flying a given maneuver, or to do subsequent blind tests of the predictions their CFD model makes. This is the sort of rigor one would want to see to be confident that the physics the model is implementing is sound (alongside a better theoretical explanation of the CFD model itself). All that said, I'm hopeful the competition pushes them both to new levels of excellence. My own two cents, and my opinion, from a C172 landing a few weeks back during a lesson, is that X-Plane 12 and MSFS 2020 still both get ground effect wrong, and this is not something that would have been rectified with force feedback controls or better sensory cues. Approaching the same runway, in the same plane, in the same configuration, crossing the aiming point at 60-65 kts and at 20 feet, and pitching at a consistent rate for flare, gives divergent results in the two sims, neither of which are consistent with real life. Cutting power over the aiming point in X-Plane results in a precipitous drop in speed/increase in descent rate, making it necessary to keep power in and pitch much more gently for a soft touchdown, which is inconsistent with reality. Meanwhile, in MSFS, one may cut the power well before the aiming point, and still expect the plane gently float along well after the point that it would have stalled and slammed into the pavement in reality or in X-Plane. In reality, after the aiming point, one can keep the stall horn at a low hum and gently set oneself down on the pavement without having to keep power in until touchdown AND without having to cut power all the way at 100-300 feet. For me, what this means is that trying to use either sim at this point for any sort of stick-and-rudder pre-flight training (even disregarding the impact of lacking sensory cues) is not just unhelpful, but is potentially negative training. While that's unfortunate, I understand why this sort of fine-grained realism is still so elusive, and it's only more motivation for me get my life together so I can get into the skies more often and on my own terms.
I would like to know (if they will tell you) what did they do different to the base code? i have heard that the 2024 sim has been optimized for multi core CPU / GPU, thus making you to get more performance and smoother experience, obviously like all new titles, the graphics, lighting, textures will have also gone up in standards so the FPS should be similar, if not better than MSFS 2020. (one would hope) there is still some mystery about the backwards compatibility, if it s a brand new code then i can't see it been able to utilize older add on scenery / aircraft etc. so i wonder what is the MSFS 2020 code, and what code is it for MSFS 2024? what did they change? or will we never know?
having a real size 737-800 cockpit powered by XP11, I hope they've made some effort for the 0.0001 % of the community that are cockpits builders like me cause to interface it, or for the multi screens, or talking about networked pc and gauges (PFD, ND, FMC...) XP is the way to go. So sad because I love MSFS graphics. (Doesn't have those pinned rubbish XP trees. )🤣
In many ways, it's the same as MSFS2020. The UI is the same or just recoloured, the buildings are as bright as in MSFS2020, the cars have the same movement system, the flare logic is very much similar, the sky is also brighter, the camera movement is the same, the aircraft icon in the map (and the map itself) is the exact same from 2020.
Finally, something truly interesting in MSFS2024 instead of the fluff. Why does MS invite rookies flightsimmers? What is the point of eye candy if it makes the flight sim a stuttering mess?
None of the 2024 videos I have seen has yet discussed an improved way of setting up your control peripherals. Will there be profiles for popular systems? I have Thrustmaster Hotas A-10C Warthog controls and still don't have a left throttle mapped. But then, I am not a kid who grew up with computers.
Unfortunately I don’t have the answer to this question. Most of us either couldn’t get into the settings of the sim or didn’t have enough time to look at feature.
Haven't flown MFS since Microsoft dumped MFS I keep thinking about getting back into flightsimming. Only one problem if one wants a halfway decent flying experience the cost of a computer, controls, addons, etc has turned this hobby into a rich man's hobby.
It sure does cost quite a bit to get into Flightsiming these days. You need a proper Internet connection, peripherals and a beast of a PC to run these modern day Sims.
No, because this is a simulator about sightseeing vfr above a cute landscape, not a serious IFR flight sim with a proper weather environment. Can't even match p3d with activesky and a top plane for IFR flight.
Much smoother on what kind of PCs? Also the Xbox users will be greatly disappointed if they get the black screens from the start . I hope that will not be the case .
Does it have a fly-by view? NO? Can't even get then basics right. Not interested. Pass Every single flight sim out there has a fly-by view, even $5 ones. Asobo? NO, absent LOL
it flies the same as a 152. There are no defining characteristics to any plane in this sim they all fly the same. Don't let all the switches button and screens scare you. As far as actual putting your hands on the controls and flying it they are really easy.
Looked like excessive pitch instability. I've noticed that in a lot of FS 2020 videos. I hope FS 2024 will include an editor so we can tweak the flight model ourselves
Flying irl into such a weather could make you crash. Do you seriously question why a strong external force (winds changing direction very fast in a stormy turbulent environnement) will apply a force on the rudders and make them react accordingly? Or can you explain what’s physically wrong in your opinion?
That's funny. 2020 was within 80%? So they finally confessed! 2024 is 105% as good? Talk about a nonsense number. He's blowing as much hot air as their new hotair balloons! When a IRL airframe developer picks up this game to design an actual aircraft (as XP12 is being used to develop ALIA), then there's a conversation. 2024 FM will be a hair better than 2020 but it will never fully catch a well-tuned XP model. Can't argue with the physics.
@@tubeloobs And did he show any of those comparisons to data? Did he show any of their 'scientific approach'? No? Didn't think so. Sounds like marketing hype to me! Even his constant throat clearing was telling. Sounded like a question he didn't want to answer! Tell me, have they mentioned anything about improvements to the underlying wing forces? They've shown fuselage pics in the past but no mention of the airfoil forces (which are currently nonexistent) I'm not talking about control surfaces (ailerons, flaps etc) either. I'm wondering about how they set the real airfoil geometry. Clearly the fuselage is improving a little bit but we all know that's not what makes airplanes fly...right?
@memorycl you are so right. It will make the overhyped religious-group on the avsim-forum going nuts again. I even saw some users letting us believe they were test-pilots working with flight dynamics and stating that MSFS‘flightmodel was as good as XP‘s one and that all airliner-pilots stating the opposite were simoly wrong. They are living in their own bubble and even believe that it is „by far the best sim out there“ 😂
Not really. MS dropped flight sims completely after FSX, and there was a 14 year gap before 2020 came along. Which was the first MS flight sim to be developed by somebody that wasn’t either Aces or MS. They started essentially from a blank slate and it was definitely much prettier than it was functional when it first came out.
@@bend1483 I think that's arguing over semantics. Asobo will have started work on this not long after Aces was dissolved. Moreover, it's also not true that this was started from a blank slate. The table based flight models were adopted from FSX for example. But it really doesn't matter. The average consumer has no idea what code was adopted from older versions, nor do they care. It's the marketing that establishes if it belongs to the same franchise or not, and in that sense MSFS2024 absolutely is the latest installment in the MSFS franchise.
@@bend1483yeah there was a gap, that doesn’t make the statement false, they also used more FSX code than people realise, FS2024 nudges a little further away but it’s still not 100% new.
Lots of yoyoing, pitching and rolling your test of this 737 and does not correspond to reality, I travel a lot IRL and I have never seen this. You are a long way from solving your flight model. You could say "am I in an airliner or in a small GA plane, your 737 dances so much.
This individual is entirely out of touch for claiming that the 2020 aircraft are within 80% accuracy. We, the actual pilots at the airlines in Leved D (multimillion-dollar simulators), achieve close to 80% accuracy. It is a completely distorted lie to claim that the MSFS2024 aircraft are between 90 and 97% accurate. Such deceit and lies! They will say anything to sell something. Hopefully, there may be some improvements, but Sebastian Wloch is entirely out of line with his statements.
So when the nose of the aircraft bounces around in an unstable manner because the pilot had the audacity to change pitch angle, that is highly accurate, is it? 🙄 I think not. MS must be having a laugh.
Certainly, their instrumentation does not meet the expected standards. Sales gimmicks, as usual on their part. Why wouldn't they say "as close as possible within the limits of programming" instead of making such nonsensical statements? Big BS, as usual
It looks crap. Look carefully how slowly things load in. Total stutterfest and about 3 FPS while it loads! They tried to mask it, but it can be seen in the video. Hard pass.
Honestly, I don't care at all about aerodynamics or physics, it is enough for me that the simulator runs smoothly and is friendly with medium and low-range PCs and that airplane developers optimize their airplanes better, especially the inibuilds airplanes that consume 50% of my fps
I know this whole thing might be important to y'all, and it's obvious it is advanced stuff. But for a casual like me, I'm just incredibly grateful we get an even better looking sim, with other improvements alongside graphics. I'm so damn hyped
better looking but the weather is not even as realistic as activesky/p3d. I'd rather a more realistic flight environment over pretty ground graphics. This sim is a sightseeing machine first, flight sim second.
Noticing lots of stutters. I've seen this in other streamers videos as well. Visually this looks the same as 2020 with the same amount of stutters or even more. Pretty disappointed in that regards
The settings on the sim we used looks like it was maxed out for the best graphics and I don’t think they were “tuned” at all. I could be wrong though. I think we will still have to tune the sim for each of our machines for the best results. Maxing out the settings in any sim is always gonna produce stutters.
What do you mean it, "looks the same". Maybe in the air (though the cockpit shadows are even there way better with RT), but the fact that they now have fully rendered ground is a huge difference between both sims (technologically speaking at least and for GA Flying also). When it comes to performance, I think we should simply wait until people have played it at home in their systems and with all settings open to change Also, the biggest lag in this video for me seems like looking around which is also present in 2020 unless you turn "view caching" (or whatever it was called) all the way up so that object outside your camera aren't immediately destroyed. Maybe they didn't have that setting set right or maybe it is not implemented yet 🤔
@@Gallygoy even though it's still outdated. It's still better physics wise. Graphic wise, yes it's outdated. Now imagine how it would be if it was completely updated into a new sim with the budget of MSFS. X plane would be top
@@jostmathe still remains to be seen how flight simulator 2024 , will actually behave when flying ,but dont worry ,we will find out for sure ,i personally think its gonna be great. That this time ,it will really be bullseye , i have a feeling.
@@jostmathe Dont talk too soon bro, dont talk too soon. A lot of people (hardcore simmers) that played the simulator are saying thet the physics on this simulator aim to be as good as XP or even superior.
no... xplane's flight model uses the blade theory for its dynamics. msfs2020 does not. mathematically and scientifically, xplane is more accurate. but hey msfs24 is promising a lot so let's see
In some ways that is true, but that is only because of the fluidity of the flight model. When flying IRL and landing there is this fluidity and sense of motion. In XP12 this feels more like what I feel in real world. Now, there are some exceptions as I find most of the Black Square aircraft have a better sense of this. However most of the MSFS aircraft feel strange on landing. They often float too much and the turbulence effects are just strange at times. The input at the controls also can "feel"off. Now, in flight.. I find MSFS most of the time "feels" more like real world. It's strange. It's like you want the 2 sims to morph into 1. ha ha
Sounds like a politician. $200 for trees, grass, animals. Like golf clubs, trying to re-invent themselves every few years to generate a new buying splurge.
@@CosmicComet547 You hit the nail on the head by calling it a game. Another feature. They are forcing you to take pilot lessons before you can do any of the missions. Enjoy your $200 game. XP12 is a Sim. MSFS is a game.
@@davecat1458 dick ride even more, the standard edition is $65 and thats what most people are going to get. $200 isnt the only price, do your research jackass
I really hate to be that guy but as someone who flys in the sim as well as real life. I don’t get why the entire flight physics are so important 95% of simmers use the thrustmaster tca stick, have no clue about aerodynamics nor ever flew a plane in irl. Msfs is a cool good looking game but if you wanna learn how to fly a real plane you need a lot of money to do it in real life
@@mro9466 to a certain degree they do but beyond that it’s not really important unless you are a pilot. I doubt that the average flight simmers knows anything about aerodynamics and the characteristics of an airliner. I m currently in my Atpl theory and let me tell you the entire aviation industry is way more complex then it is represented in the sim.
Thanks for posting this. :) My flight dynamics person is a 737-800/ MAX pilot. He is obsessed with aerodynamics. Needless to say he is going to rigorously test the MAX to see in his opinion how close it is. Currently in MSFS2020 there are some short comings in the FD such as the simulation of slats. I hope they corrected these :)
Great, can’t wait to hear his thoughts on it. Thanks for the feedback.
Asobo have said they added support for every wing and surface type. So spoilerons, slats, etc.
Can’t wait for the 757 guys!
for a default plane it can't be that good
@@ikbenspeedy that is not something you can apply to MS and their sims
There's nothing magic about the X Plane flight modeling. They have their approach that clearly works well. It is entirely plausible that Asobo could develop their flight model to be as good or potentially better, and the only way to know is to use it, fly the real thing, and compare. What this interview covered was how Asobo was quantitatively assessing the results of their model compared with data logged from real planes, which is a key part of improving. But you guys didn't really get into the inner workings of the flight model itself. At some point they rolled out some aircraft models with fluid dynamics, but I was never clear on how those differed from everything else. The preview hype for 2024 mentions fluid dynamics, but I'm not clear if that is now how all aircraft are modeled in flight.
I made a similar remark before seeing your comment. Agree that it didn't tell us anything about how it works.
Top tip for whoever is flying the Max in the video. Use the trim! It’s stuck on 9 % throughout the video. The out of trim condition is causing the pitching. Real world Boeings do not fly well out of trim.
Yea... We know
My only observation from Seb's comments would be that he's speaking in terms of the numbers accuracy aka Pilot's Operating Handbook (POH). This still doesn't tell us if the feel of the flight has improved. When you watch videos of DCS World in action and the F16 does a turn in the air, you can imagine that happening the exact same way in real life, the drift and angles. I don't know if MSFS 2024 has closed the gap on DCS World but saying the flight model is numerically accurate is only half the equation.
Agreed. It was more about performance accuracy. We want to know about the dynamics i.e. how realistic the complex motion is, especially near the edges of the envelope.
really excited for 2024, thank you for all your great videos. I personally am going to sit back and wait for the dust to settle before jumping in. After years, 2020 is finally in a spot where I can just enjoy it. I will be watching for major bugs, compatibility issues and any developer upgrade charges for add-ons into 2024 before jumping over.
Was hoping for more of a X-plane approach for MSFS2024’sz flight model. A flight model should not be adapted for any plane to feel more like the real thing.. it should be calculated with the 3D model’s aerodynamics and using math and physics. If an aircraft is not reacting like it should then there is something wrong with the math/physics of the simulator and that should be improved. I believe this is how Austin operates with X-Plane and there is a reason all flight schools now are using X-Plane.
@@pvdgucht Not all flight schools are using X-Plane since quite a lot of them are using P3D. You know why? Because flight schools are more concerned with system accuracy for their sims, not flight model.
@@tubeloobs Basically validating the point that x-plane has a better flight model then.
Also it's a stupid argument overall since many addons in x-plane have just as much systems if not more than most p3d addons.
@@mro9466 How is that validating a better FM? You're making zero sense. P3D has the worst FM of the 3 sims yet it is used in a ton of flight schools. Your copy of X-Plane isn't even the one that is certified by the FAA. It is a separate professional edition that is only certified when paired with the requisite hardware.
Is what you're describing not CFD? Something that MSFS 2020 have on select planes and 2024 will have across the board?
@@TheCodifier could be idk 🤷♂️ haha fact is that I fond the aerodynamics of MSFS so much worse than X-Plane and just bad for flight training and realism idk why that is but the planes don’t seem to react like in real life. If realllly hope MSFS2024 will be much better, so that I can finally ditch X-Plane and go for msfs24 for all my types of flying. Because currently for practicing landings or other manouvres I still use X-Plane and for VFR XC flights I use MSFS
My big issue with default aircraft is pitch stability. There shouldn't be a 10 degree change in pitch from a 1 milimeter change in yoke position, but every time I try the default aircraft I find it nearly impossible to control. If I step into a payware aircraft it always flies like I expect. For reference, I started flying in the real world in 2005 and never stopped, so I can compare longitudinal stability between sim and the plane. It's off in MSFS default aircraft for some reason, but perhaps that's now changed.
Agreed, default planes fly like the aircrafts are way out of cg limits
@@operatordirt4611 @WestAirAviation
Possibly due to this reason : -
th-cam.com/video/HhpHao3VTVY/w-d-xo.html
@WestAirAviation Yep. Porpoising is ridiculous. Obviously wrong. No aircraft is that unstable in pitch. Can't, for the life of me, understand why something so obvious hasn't been fixed.
I have always maintained that a good flight model in sim doesn't always equate to an accurate flight model IRL. There are so many other cues missing, and what he highlighted about weather weight etc. will definitely have an effect on how those numbers translate in sim. I am glad they are moving away from the feedback approach to a more scientific numbers based approach. While there were some things that definitely needed to be addressed, in mfs2020, overall, it was still good enough.
One of my biggest issues with 2020 is the ground handling. The infinite tyre grip that shoots you off the side of the runway when you land with any crab on. Please tell me they’ve at least done something about that.
obv is fixed in fact now the plane acts diferent depending on what surface you are in
2024 now has the best ground handling and physics I've ever seen
Can't promise anything other than the ground handling has been completely reworked. Although me personally, I have a binary mapping for brakes which causes a problem in its self, so unless you can apply brakes progressively, you're going to get odd results I guess.
Ground handling feels great now
Compliments to Microsoft for setting this up and inviting everyone! It is really great to see the different interests and viewpoints in the videos I am now watching on TH-cam. Laurie. NZ. 😊
I care about the flight model to a point. Things I care about more include the VR experience (vastly superior in MSFS over XP) and accuracy of systems. Working Title's G1000, for example, in MSFS is far more accurate and detailed than the G1000 in XP. And especially when it comes to airliners, no amount of flight model accuracy will prepare one to be able to actually land a 737 IRL anyway, for example, so again I would value the systems fidelity of the PMDG over the superior flight model of the ZIBO.
They might get the numbers performance closer, and hopefully even the feel, but the true test will be how the environmental effects especially wind is affecting that model.
I am hopeful that they get it right concerning the ground friction and the weather vanning when transitioning to or from liftoff and airborne. Thanks for the video.
That was a nice MD11 catch XP - great vlog
Yeah, got a lucky catch when I was going into KMIA for my flight. 😁
If that's anything to go by, looks like pitch instability resulting in porpoising is still there.
I agree. An immersion killer when you hand fly. Plus, the stutterfest on short final. No go for me.
Hard to know if the pitch instability has improved. The Max in the video I s way out out of trim and the trim is never changed . It’s stuck on 9 degrees (bottom right of the screen)
Did you run it at the lowest resolution? The NY-scene looked absolutely horrendous…just a greyish mass with some autogen popping in and out. And textures being very blurry in the distance. Looks absolutely crap. So I really hope that wasn‘t on medium or high settings 🙏
This is a fair point. The graphics do look like they were on lower settings, yet it still stuttered. I've seen videos of it being beautifully smooth though, so I do wonder what this particular systems settings are. The footage captured from Pimax Crystal Light shows off a pretty smooth performance, so I'm not too worried, they are clearly still optimising the sim.
@@dtrjones Stuttering could be from the screen recording software, not the sim itself. And as one whose Crystal Light is being delivered today (finally - it only took 3 months Lol!) I hope your optimism is right!
Love seeing your POV of the event! Great work on these videos!
Thanks man. It was tough to film and soak it all in at the same time 😅
You really can’t quantitatively answer the question about being better than xplane. There are so many factors.
You can. This is just world salad to avoid the subject
The new flight physics sounds great and looking forward to it on my XBox-X! Thanks. Laurie NZ.
Great questions. I thought the flight dynamics felt great and improved in the A10!
Great feedback man, thanks.
I can tell you by this video you leave in the Broward county and it's nice you've being recognized by MSFS.
I hope it just as good as xplane
I’ll compare the two once I get MS24 in my hands.
I Hope too...
It probably won’t be as good, but I’ve heard a lot of TH-camrs say that it’s getting real close, after they got a chance to try it
i find it in 2020 already more than good enough, except the groundhandling, and that seems to be fixed. i see no value in all this comparing models etc stuff. it is good to have options, i do hope xp will survive.
I agree and prepare3d has legacy ground physics which basically doesn't exist. 24 will be game changer for GA and heli fans. There is so much more to a sim than flying a tube at 30,000ft
This didn't really say much about the flight model itself, just how it's tuned. Sounds like it's still not an actual physics simulation. Could be wrong, but I was hoping for a more technical description of how it actually works.
You're definitely wrong
The main test is in the crosswind landings right? if you still have to make opposite inputs then its a fail.
In excited to see how the pc12 and pc24 handle.
Good interview. Most people already thought the flight model in MSFS was good enough. Great to see that they are improving it. This means that the flight model debate will become even less relevant now. It is going to come down to which is the better overall package. In other words, it's the collective sum of the flight model, graphics, ease of use (e.g flight planner, no ortho install) and hardware performance. MSFS easily wins. With MSFS 2024, there is something for everyone, hardcore simmers or casual gamers. Xplane is not a bad sim tough, I used it for many years so wishing them the best.
Great comment, thank you.
The Helo FM's always felt particularly lacking to me in MSFS, mostly in comparison to DCS. I know a lot of other DCS Helo enjoyers felt the same, so hopefully MSFS2024 handles helos a little better.
I've flown X-Plane and FS2020. I think that the FS2020 flight model is just fine. I believe that pound for pound FS2024 is going to exceed X-plane. For all of the features it contains and for the graphics, all and all for me FS2024 has a better value. I'm pre-ordering The AVIATOR Edition. Word Up! Everyone else, do what you feel is real.
Wake me up when MSFS can even match the realistic environment of p3d and activesky. Because right now it doesn't even compare. No weather radar, no icing that could crash you, no severe t-storms to avoid, etc. A sightseeing machine for VFR flight mainly, not for what I am looking for.
Get out of your cave and join the 21st century...
I absolutely agree with you @tonyodoul. For me, MSFS 2020 has been (except the stunning visuals) one of the worst sims from the past years. It‘s so disappointing when you are interested in aviation in depth and have been using XP, P3D for years. I have deinstalled it long time ago. MSFS-lemmings are only interested on modern graphic-effects, that‘s it. They don‘t even realize what is missing that really matters…that‘s why it attracted so many casual-gamers.
It's fine, you're looking for a bad weather sim, but I think you'll find there's a lot more to MSFS than this and going back to P3D and X-Plane for many just isn't a viable option.
@@tonyodoul5679 they've covered all of that except dangerous icing. Haven't heard anyone ask about the icing yet
Well first of all I would like to congratulate you Kirk to have been one of the first to really get a real sneek into what Jurg and the boys are upto for the next MSFS! Yes I believe they have improoved a lot in many areas, but will it be as with the default airliners that they bring to us (via Asabo) "Comes AS IS" and nothing more until the next Simulator from them comes? No even though I still love to fly the default A320 from them (Quick to prepair and get airborn) but way too many important INO buttons on board :( compare to the approach that F.B.W. or PDMG did with their versions. And don't forget these indepentent Modders they don't get a fat pay check from Microsoft every month. But again I was very pleased to see you beeing there where it was all happening
Bless bless & sí jú! :)
Hi XP was anything mentioned about the weather radar?
No working rweather yet. It’s still in the developmental stage as far as I heard.
If they used a "scientific method" now, I hope the aircrafts can at least behave accurately in crosswind takeoff and landings !
An important reminder: Microsoft was able to make it... in 1998. In 2004 this caractéristic disappeared with FS 2004 for better graphics (not well optimized) but less accuracy. The engine remained the same in P3D as Lockheed took the rights to use the engine then Asobo took the same old engine to build up MSFS2020.
A shame.
Every other sim are able to do it for decades. It should be a minimum requirement to make a flight sim.
I hope this time they made it right. Imagine a car sim with cars unable to drift despite a myriad of revolutionnary fancy features...
Remember the 100's of lift data points in MSFS 2020 which came to nothing? Now they claim they have 90%+ accuracy. What does this mean? It means absolutely nothing. I can tell straight away from the clip of the aircraft shown that there is way too much pitch reaction to only small pitch inputs and that tells me they are as far off as they were before. Airliners have very high pitch stability and at low speeds it takes large movements of the yoke to overcome inertia and inherent pitch stability. This clip shows the opposite. Let's hope the 2024 flight models are going to be tweakable by the user.
I noticed the same from the clips shown.
You can't even see the yoke but you know what his inputs were? Stop the insecurity
He was going 276 at 3000 ft lol how is that low speed regime
@@tubeloobs If you cannot see the movements of the yoke on that video, I would recommand you to take a better look.
those stutters
is the recording
@@burgadahz17 i doubt that, i see it in all the vids , lets hope they can optimize a bit more.
Yep, this is just a big dlc as far I'm concerned. 😢
stutters, ground tiles popping, fan blades not animated, a myriad of graphical glitches like entire mountains disappearing and weird pilot avatars halfway hanging out of the plane. I'm not buying the hype.
@@jonnie2bad Okay, are we supposed to care?
FFB hardware is becoming a must have
Personally, it doesn’t matter to me anymore. I felt FS2020 was good enough; my only frustration was with how hard it is to trim.
I think it’s great that we have input and feedback from professional pilots, but I also think that feedback can really make the community toxic. In my view, Flightsim is best for training procedures and for learning. But maybe that’s why us non-pilots get so caught up in the arguing about what’s better? Because we can’t fly the real thing so we need what we have access to to be the “best” so we don’t feel silly? I dunno. Anyway, I’m trying to see if I can get to do the A320 sim at JetBlue university so I guess I’ll actually have something to compare?
will it have a real weather radar and inbuilt shared cockpit?
How's the taxiing and inertia, do airliners still turn like mario kart until you need to turn at sharp angles and they turn like a train?
@@yellosello 2024 has the best ground handling of any sim out there.
Gonna be shit
@@FreightFox keep dreaming
Well I'm hopeful it'll be good lol
@@yellosello based on the footage that has come out, I'd say there's no flight sim with better ground handling than 2024
What is very telling about this interview is the very subjective notion about flight models which for all practical purposes is not very good even from real pilots.
Worse still, are the ridiculous comments from simmers who have no piloting experiment and who venture to comment on the realism of airliners or other smaller models that they have never flown in real life just because for instance, prefer Xplane or DCS.
So all those simulation joe blos who are not pilots and even those who are but not on the specific plane they are commenting on should shut up and appreciate that finally the mathematics will speak for them.
I've only ever flown Cessnas and Pipers as a student pilot (most of my hours are years ago), and I pretty much only spend serious time in a sim to get back in shape for when I can afford regular lessons again. There are things I love about MSFS 2020 (for instance I can learn landmarks at my local field, and I'm now pretty proficient with G1000), but at the same time I was hoping to hear a LOT more about their implementation of CFD in detail (and hopefully its use in default planes across the board, since I'm not a huge fan of needing to turn to payware to have a good experience). Last I heard MSFS 2020 only had a handful of default planes using CFD, and adoption by payware providers was even spottier.
As a CS and Math grad (currently in ML) I know a enough about the simulation of physical systems to loosely speak to the pros and cons of the approach X-Plane takes vs. what MSFS seems to be describing... it's obviously ideal to have a physical model that also matches real-world figures. X-Plane takes the approach of having a great holistic physical model that sometimes doesn't perfectly line up with POH figures or pilot experience, but will behave consistently (as an aircraft would) when encountering more complex situations (crosswinds, thermals, rotors, etc.), especially considering the new atmospheric model in X-Plane 12... however the experience of many X-Plane users (experienced pilots) is of asking Austin to make minor changes that would yield better fidelity to their own real-world experience and receiving pushback due to the change sacrificing the elegance/internal consistency (holisticity) of the flight model. A recent example of this is the change in tire inertia which was requested due to GA planes pitching down too fast upon touchdown; ultimately Austin made the requested change, which was validated by another pilot (who last flew the aircraft in question, a Baron, decades ago) entirely by feel, which is still useful, but seems a bit arbitrary (admittedly his work on the F-4 was much more rigorous in this respect). A change like that for instance is a great candidate for the more rigorous "scientific" testing approach the MSFS team seem to be alluding to with respect to using sensors on real aircraft. In principle, a holistic CFD model seems (on paper) to be what you get when you take the best of X-Plane's approach to its ultimate conclusion (i.e. using finite element method so that the whole aircraft body's contribution to the aerodynamic forces involved is considered, at arbitrarily high resolution, not just lifting/control surfaces). However, without the MSFS team giving us more insight into the nature of the CFD model and what parameters it is choosing to "tune" to bring the model's behavior more in line with observed values, it's hard to trust that they can get everything right (especially towards the edge of the flight envelope). I doubt for instance that they have the funds to fly multiple instances of the same model of aircraft under the similar weather, fuel, weight and balance etc. conditions to establish the variance that one can expect to observe when flying a given maneuver, or to do subsequent blind tests of the predictions their CFD model makes. This is the sort of rigor one would want to see to be confident that the physics the model is implementing is sound (alongside a better theoretical explanation of the CFD model itself). All that said, I'm hopeful the competition pushes them both to new levels of excellence.
My own two cents, and my opinion, from a C172 landing a few weeks back during a lesson, is that X-Plane 12 and MSFS 2020 still both get ground effect wrong, and this is not something that would have been rectified with force feedback controls or better sensory cues. Approaching the same runway, in the same plane, in the same configuration, crossing the aiming point at 60-65 kts and at 20 feet, and pitching at a consistent rate for flare, gives divergent results in the two sims, neither of which are consistent with real life. Cutting power over the aiming point in X-Plane results in a precipitous drop in speed/increase in descent rate, making it necessary to keep power in and pitch much more gently for a soft touchdown, which is inconsistent with reality. Meanwhile, in MSFS, one may cut the power well before the aiming point, and still expect the plane gently float along well after the point that it would have stalled and slammed into the pavement in reality or in X-Plane. In reality, after the aiming point, one can keep the stall horn at a low hum and gently set oneself down on the pavement without having to keep power in until touchdown AND without having to cut power all the way at 100-300 feet. For me, what this means is that trying to use either sim at this point for any sort of stick-and-rudder pre-flight training (even disregarding the impact of lacking sensory cues) is not just unhelpful, but is potentially negative training. While that's unfortunate, I understand why this sort of fine-grained realism is still so elusive, and it's only more motivation for me get my life together so I can get into the skies more often and on my own terms.
I love the content I can't wait I planning to Upgrade my Hardware lol lol. Big up and as always I wasn't invited this has to stop man lol
Won't beat XP lol, never gonna happen
IS the Quest 3 a good fit for this software ?
Would it be possible to have the effect of flying through heavy rain cause jet engine power degradation etc...
will the improved flight model be coming to msfs2020
Cant imagine, otherwise FS24 would be an update to FS20, not a new sim.
no sadly
I would like to know (if they will tell you) what did they do different to the base code? i have heard that the 2024 sim has been optimized for multi core CPU / GPU, thus making you to get more performance and smoother experience, obviously like all new titles, the graphics, lighting, textures will have also gone up in standards so the FPS should be similar, if not better than MSFS 2020. (one would hope) there is still some mystery about the backwards compatibility, if it s a brand new code then i can't see it been able to utilize older add on scenery / aircraft etc. so i wonder what is the MSFS 2020 code, and what code is it for MSFS 2024? what did they change? or will we never know?
Sweet vid XP
Thank you Dougal 😊
wow one of the best answers for the Flight Model Debate this is great!
Yes it is. He went into good details about how they did it.
having a real size 737-800 cockpit powered by XP11, I hope they've made some effort for the 0.0001 % of the community that are cockpits builders like me cause to interface it, or for the multi screens, or talking about networked pc and gauges (PFD, ND, FMC...) XP is the way to go. So sad because I love MSFS graphics. (Doesn't have those pinned rubbish XP trees. )🤣
In many ways, it's the same as MSFS2020. The UI is the same or just recoloured, the buildings are as bright as in MSFS2020, the cars have the same movement system, the flare logic is very much similar, the sky is also brighter, the camera movement is the same, the aircraft icon in the map (and the map itself) is the exact same from 2020.
Wrong
@@burgadahz17 are you blind!?
@@swiss64heavy41 are you?
@@burgadahz17 not me, call the other 2 people that liked my comment blind, because they agree with me
@@swiss64heavy41 *Wow 2 likes.* They will probably be just as blind as you.
Finally, something truly interesting in MSFS2024 instead of the fluff.
Why does MS invite rookies flightsimmers?
What is the point of eye candy if it makes the flight sim a stuttering mess?
Should rooky simmers not be invited into the community? Are you sure you have MSFS set up properly?
None of the 2024 videos I have seen has yet discussed an improved way of setting up your control peripherals. Will there be profiles for popular systems? I have Thrustmaster Hotas A-10C Warthog controls and still don't have a left throttle mapped. But then, I am not a kid who grew up with computers.
Unfortunately I don’t have the answer to this question. Most of us either couldn’t get into the settings of the sim or didn’t have enough time to look at feature.
Haven't flown MFS since Microsoft dumped MFS I keep thinking about getting back into flightsimming. Only one problem if one wants a halfway decent flying experience the cost of a computer, controls, addons, etc has turned this hobby into a rich man's hobby.
It sure does cost quite a bit to get into Flightsiming these days. You need a proper Internet connection, peripherals and a beast of a PC to run these modern day Sims.
yes if you want the allout expereince, no to start, xbox is enough 500 and the price for the game ofcourse.
@@wout123100 the base game is over 100 usd lol.
i do completely care...i hope it really got better...stopped me from playing msfs
Does the weather radar work?
No, because this is a simulator about sightseeing vfr above a cute landscape, not a serious IFR flight sim with a proper weather environment. Can't even match p3d with activesky and a top plane for IFR flight.
Much smoother on what kind of PCs? Also the Xbox users will be greatly disappointed if they get the black screens from the start . I hope that will not be the case .
Is the camera still locked away in a vault somewhere with no key for 3rd party developers?
Good morning
nice
Does it have a fly-by view? NO?
Can't even get then basics right. Not interested. Pass
Every single flight sim out there has a fly-by view, even $5 ones. Asobo? NO, absent LOL
Msfs didn’t come out of nowhere 😂😂😂. It’s been around since 1982!
is that the sim lagging?
Just the recording.
@@XP72official no it isn't I'm seeing it in everyone's videos
Nice bm
Is it just me or does NYC look worse in MSFS2024
I don't have the confidence to fly with a B737 Max!
it flies the same as a 152. There are no defining characteristics to any plane in this sim they all fly the same. Don't let all the switches button and screens scare you. As far as actual putting your hands on the controls and flying it they are really easy.
the guy flying does not have good yoke control/touch
Looked like excessive pitch instability. I've noticed that in a lot of FS 2020 videos.
I hope FS 2024 will include an editor so we can tweak the flight model ourselves
Hi
All default birds will be shit anyway. Payware will only be worth it.
For those saying X-Plane's flight model is better, let me leave this here:
th-cam.com/video/DcvR0U1LOmU/w-d-xo.htmlsi=ES3-ZFOsevab2lu2
that's without a yoke tho..
Flying irl into such a weather could make you crash. Do you seriously question why a strong external force (winds changing direction very fast in a stormy turbulent environnement) will apply a force on the rudders and make them react accordingly? Or can you explain what’s physically wrong in your opinion?
POV: you don't understand what you see
That's funny. 2020 was within 80%? So they finally confessed! 2024 is 105% as good? Talk about a nonsense number. He's blowing as much hot air as their new hotair balloons! When a IRL airframe developer picks up this game to design an actual aircraft (as XP12 is being used to develop ALIA), then there's a conversation. 2024 FM will be a hair better than 2020 but it will never fully catch a well-tuned XP model. Can't argue with the physics.
Oh be quiet and stop glazing LR so much. Seb qualified why he came up with those numbers but you haven't qualified your objections
@@tubeloobs And did he show any of those comparisons to data? Did he show any of their 'scientific approach'? No? Didn't think so. Sounds like marketing hype to me! Even his constant throat clearing was telling. Sounded like a question he didn't want to answer!
Tell me, have they mentioned anything about improvements to the underlying wing forces? They've shown fuselage pics in the past but no mention of the airfoil forces (which are currently nonexistent) I'm not talking about control surfaces (ailerons, flaps etc) either. I'm wondering about how they set the real airfoil geometry. Clearly the fuselage is improving a little bit but we all know that's not what makes airplanes fly...right?
@memorycl you are so right. It will make the overhyped religious-group on the avsim-forum going nuts again. I even saw some users letting us believe they were test-pilots working with flight dynamics and stating that MSFS‘flightmodel was as good as XP‘s one and that all airliner-pilots stating the opposite were simoly wrong. They are living in their own bubble and even believe that it is „by far the best sim out there“ 😂
MSFS' came to the market out of nowhere????
😂
It's literally the longest running game franchise in existence. It's been around forever.
Not really. MS dropped flight sims completely after FSX, and there was a 14 year gap before 2020 came along. Which was the first MS flight sim to be developed by somebody that wasn’t either Aces or MS. They started essentially from a blank slate and it was definitely much prettier than it was functional when it first came out.
@@bend1483
I think that's arguing over semantics.
Asobo will have started work on this not long after Aces was dissolved. Moreover, it's also not true that this was started from a blank slate. The table based flight models were adopted from FSX for example. But it really doesn't matter. The average consumer has no idea what code was adopted from older versions, nor do they care. It's the marketing that establishes if it belongs to the same franchise or not, and in that sense MSFS2024 absolutely is the latest installment in the MSFS franchise.
@@bend1483yeah there was a gap, that doesn’t make the statement false, they also used more FSX code than people realise, FS2024 nudges a little further away but it’s still not 100% new.
Nice interview, I just wish the CEO learnt to talk and breath at the same time
Why the pitch is swinging up and down? No stability I gotta say it’s still not right! What’s wrong with these people ?
Lots of yoyoing, pitching and rolling your test of this 737 and does not correspond to reality, I travel a lot IRL and I have never seen this. You are a long way from solving your flight model. You could say "am I in an airliner or in a small GA plane, your 737 dances so much.
This individual is entirely out of touch for claiming that the 2020 aircraft are within 80% accuracy. We, the actual pilots at the airlines in Leved D (multimillion-dollar simulators), achieve close to 80% accuracy. It is a completely distorted lie to claim that the MSFS2024 aircraft are between 90 and 97% accurate. Such deceit and lies! They will say anything to sell something. Hopefully, there may be some improvements, but Sebastian Wloch is entirely out of line with his statements.
yes, it is a very wild statement, and not going to be true. there will be an improvement tho.
@@wout123100 We hope for an improvment, that's for sure. Time will tell.
I think he meant 80% accuracy to the instrumentation they'd set up for the measurements, not entirely to reality.
So when the nose of the aircraft bounces around in an unstable manner because the pilot had the audacity to change pitch angle, that is highly accurate, is it? 🙄 I think not. MS must be having a laugh.
Certainly, their instrumentation does not meet the expected standards. Sales gimmicks, as usual on their part. Why wouldn't they say "as close as possible within the limits of programming" instead of making such nonsensical statements? Big BS, as usual
It looks crap. Look carefully how slowly things load in. Total stutterfest and about 3 FPS while it loads! They tried to mask it, but it can be seen in the video. Hard pass.
second to be here
Honestly, I don't care at all about aerodynamics or physics, it is enough for me that the simulator runs smoothly and is friendly with medium and low-range PCs and that airplane developers optimize their airplanes better, especially the inibuilds airplanes that consume 50% of my fps
Who goes that far for game??? Well that's right, It's a S I M U L A T O R!!!
First to arrive here🫡
I know this whole thing might be important to y'all, and it's obvious it is advanced stuff. But for a casual like me, I'm just incredibly grateful we get an even better looking sim, with other improvements alongside graphics. I'm so damn hyped
better looking but the weather is not even as realistic as activesky/p3d. I'd rather a more realistic flight environment over pretty ground graphics. This sim is a sightseeing machine first, flight sim second.
Noticing lots of stutters. I've seen this in other streamers videos as well. Visually this looks the same as 2020 with the same amount of stutters or even more. Pretty disappointed in that regards
the game is still in early access, they still have two months to put on the final polish
The settings on the sim we used looks like it was maxed out for the best graphics and I don’t think they were “tuned” at all. I could be wrong though. I think we will still have to tune the sim for each of our machines for the best results. Maxing out the settings in any sim is always gonna produce stutters.
and it’s with no addons… so, you can imagine when plenty addon is installed…
What do you mean it, "looks the same". Maybe in the air (though the cockpit shadows are even there way better with RT), but the fact that they now have fully rendered ground is a huge difference between both sims (technologically speaking at least and for GA Flying also).
When it comes to performance, I think we should simply wait until people have played it at home in their systems and with all settings open to change
Also, the biggest lag in this video for me seems like looking around which is also present in 2020 unless you turn "view caching" (or whatever it was called) all the way up so that object outside your camera aren't immediately destroyed. Maybe they didn't have that setting set right or maybe it is not implemented yet 🤔
@@lenajk2004 2 months and early access? So when it releases we get to be the beta testers? Thanks for clarifying that.
x plane is the king of flight physics in sims. no arguments needed
time will tell ,xplane is outdated compared to the new flight simulator 2024, period.
@@Gallygoy even though it's still outdated. It's still better physics wise. Graphic wise, yes it's outdated. Now imagine how it would be if it was completely updated into a new sim with the budget of MSFS. X plane would be top
@@jostmathe still remains to be seen how flight simulator 2024 , will actually behave when flying ,but dont worry ,we will find out for sure ,i personally think its gonna be great.
That this time ,it will really be bullseye , i have a feeling.
@@Gallygoy hope so too
@@jostmathe Dont talk too soon bro, dont talk too soon. A lot of people (hardcore simmers) that played the simulator are saying thet the physics on this simulator aim to be as good as XP or even superior.
I guess it is no longer a sarcastic, dumb question to ask this...
Will it eventually come to PS5?
When people say xplane flight model is better than MS just really means it’s easier for them to land an aircraft in xplane!!
Nah, it means that the MS Flight model is simply lacking. Like flying on rails
no... xplane's flight model uses the blade theory for its dynamics. msfs2020 does not. mathematically and scientifically, xplane is more accurate. but hey msfs24 is promising a lot so let's see
In some ways that is true, but that is only because of the fluidity of the flight model. When flying IRL and landing there is this fluidity and sense of motion. In XP12 this feels more like what I feel in real world. Now, there are some exceptions as I find most of the Black Square aircraft have a better sense of this. However most of the MSFS aircraft feel strange on landing. They often float too much and the turbulence effects are just strange at times. The input at the controls also can "feel"off. Now, in flight.. I find MSFS most of the time "feels" more like real world. It's strange. It's like you want the 2 sims to morph into 1. ha ha
Disagree 100%. SET up direct crosswind landing in both sims. XP12 requires cross control technique to land properly. MSFS none.
Wow, thats just wrong@@davecat1458
Sounds like a politician. $200 for trees, grass, animals. Like golf clubs, trying to re-invent themselves every few years to generate a new buying splurge.
Nobody forces you to buy the game.
@@CosmicComet547 You hit the nail on the head by calling it a game. Another feature. They are forcing you to take pilot lessons before you can do any of the missions. Enjoy your $200 game. XP12 is a Sim. MSFS is a game.
@@davecat1458 dick ride even more, the standard edition is $65 and thats what most people are going to get. $200 isnt the only price, do your research jackass
@@davecat1458 You sound miserable over a PC "game" which is pathetic, I own XP12 and plan to get this as well and enjoy the best of both worlds.
Play xplane ( a simulator ) and we'll play MSFS ( a simulator ) and stop your complaining.
I really hate to be that guy but as someone who flys in the sim as well as real life. I don’t get why the entire flight physics are so important 95% of simmers use the thrustmaster tca stick, have no clue about aerodynamics nor ever flew a plane in irl. Msfs is a cool good looking game but if you wanna learn how to fly a real plane you need a lot of money to do it in real life
ha yes good point, for me its good enough in fs2020. maybe they want to sound interesting?
Cool story bro.
If you don't understand why flight physics are so important in a flight simulator, maybe you need to reconsider your thought process
@@mro9466 there is a sim that puts most of its focus on flight modelling, its called XP12.
@@mro9466 to a certain degree they do but beyond that it’s not really important unless you are a pilot. I doubt that the average flight simmers knows anything about aerodynamics and the characteristics of an airliner. I m currently in my Atpl theory and let me tell you the entire aviation industry is way more complex then it is represented in the sim.
Looks the same or worse. More french accent Blah blah blah bs.
Who hurt you?
@@tubeloobs Just wait you’ll see.
“Trust me bro, I know” 😂
@@bagwaa9948 i’m no your bro, so run along.
@@SnoDawg *not, broooooo