A2A is MIA

[robains]

When I do a google search on "Fenix" I get a headlamp ... one I actually do own for when I'm doing electronics work and fabrication ... super bright for my old eyes.

I think the point I'm bringing, Asobo's priorities are not my priorities (not even close). The XYZ dev group "has done it so therefore everyone else can do it" repeated theme is really not accurate if you actually take the time to dissect feature by feature. What you really end up with is some features users don't care about or just not important over their visual enjoyment. I personally will not use MSFS with an A2A hardware if my GNS 530 and GTN 750 hardware (RealSimGear) isn't working ... without multi-monitor support with detachable views and more SDK improvements that's not going to happen ... hence staying with P3D.

Numerous bugs aside, there are significant issues in MSFS development:

1. WASM (Web Assemblies) is a sandbox where direct access to anything is controlled (might be supported, might not be supported).
2. SDK is missing some key supporting features, trying to work around those missing features (if possible) is both expensive (in developer time) and risky in future proofing where MSFS updates could break a dependency.

This is NOT taking anything away from any developer be it Asobo, A2A, Milviz, PMDG, FSLabs ... this is more about Jorg N's "vision" vs. my "desire". Will the two ever meet? I have no idea, but right now they are still pretty far apart some 2 years later.

I'm sure if A2A wanted to "Cash-in" they could have tossed out an aircraft into MSFS and joined the club, but they have integrity and "good enough" just isn't. Again, I think anyone complaining to A2A or FSLabs etc. would be better served taking those complaints to Asobo or better yet Jorg N. since he seems to be setting project priorities.

Cheers, Rob.

[jeepinforfun]

A real shame MSFS upgrades doesn't meet your 'desire', perhaps making your own simulator will quell all this upset. I mean really sir, give them some time. This is a brand new simulator and they are trying to fix complaints from hundreds if not thousands of people all with their own desires. It all comes down to money and to fix everything all at one time would take an expensive amount of coders. It seems they plug away at the important thing while including other free things to keep the simmers interest enough to flying.

I had a classic car once that I loved but it did have some age problems and things needed to be fixed and even upgraded but my budget only allowed fixes slowly. Despite my desire to have at all done right away I still loved my hobby and drove it often.

Put your tickets in to Asobo and hope they can get to them, fly in P3D in the mean time, that's all you can do. Personally I will keep flying in MSFS, warts and all, and enjoy it just the same.

[robains]

Hi Brett,

Using your own analogy, my old car is working better than my new car for me ... so yes I still love the hobby also, MSFS hasn't really changed anything for me ... I'm not a one platform kinda guy, diversity is good (in more ways than one).

But I think this thread is asking for A2A aircraft in MSFS and some folk may have run out of patience. Not me, I'm happily still flying all my A2A aircraft in P3D with my RealSimGear components fully functional along with all the other hardware/software supporting modules I have connected. I didn't stop using an older platform just because MSFS came out ... I think those folk that dropped older platforms are perhaps the ones missing (by their own actions) A2A.

Cheers, Rob.

[Daube]

I think the key point here not to be able to fly your A2A planes in FSX or P3D. The key point is to be able to fly them "happily".
That means it really depends on what kind of flying you perform. For those who focus on "realistic" flights which are mostly about performing accurate navigation using instruments and such, then FSX and P3D are fine.
But for those of us who only perform such flight on rare occasions, and spend more time just enjoying the aircraft itself in random country exploration flights, etc... FSX and P3D simply don't provide the pleasure they used to.
And it gets even worse for those of us flying in VR.
So, yeah, some of us are getting a bit impatient, and no, FSX and P3D (or XPlane) are simply not an alternative anymore.

[Piper_EEWL]

I think the key point here not to be able to fly your A2A planes in FSX or P3D. The key point is to be able to fly them "happily".
That means it really depends on what kind of flying you perform. For those who focus on "realistic" flights which are mostly about performing accurate navigation using instruments and such, then FSX and P3D are fine.
But for those of us who only perform such flight on rare occasions, and spend more time just enjoying the aircraft itself in random country exploration flights, etc... FSX and P3D simply don't provide the pleasure they used to.
And it gets even worse for those of us flying in VR.
So, yeah, some of us are getting a bit impatient, and no, FSX and P3D (or XPlane) are simply not an alternative anymore.

+1

[ratty]

And so, as I've said all along, it comes down to where ones priority lies: eye-popping scenery or high-fidelity flying experience. I'll wait to use MSFS until I can get both.

[Daube]

And so, as I've said all along, it comes down to where ones priority lies: eye-popping scenery or high-fidelity flying experience. I'll wait to use MSFS until I can get both.

Again there's a possible confusion here, depending on how a "high fidelity flying experience" is defined.
May it be FSX, P3D, Xplane or MSFS, each of them have issues that are problematic for a "high fidelity flying experience".
Many MSFS users are just as interested in realistic flight as FSX, P3D or XPlane users are.

[jsbrewster1]

Sacrilege! Get the pitchforks and torches! You are forever banned from 'grognard' status for even suggesting that MSFS is anything but a toy, while FSX and P3D with their thousand add-ons to make them work are the current perfection of flightsim-ery.

[Piper_EEWL]

Sacrilege! Get the pitchforks and torches! You are forever banned from 'grognard' status for even suggesting that MSFS is anything but a toy, while FSX and P3D with their thousand add-ons to make them work are the current perfection of flightsim-ery.

[gpf]

If you desire "high fidelity", consider flying a real aircraft, or take an introductory lesson at your local airport.

[Paughco]

My Internet comes to my house via DSL (phone line, not high-tech fiberoptic). This means that if I installed MSFS on my machine, I'd get suboptimal scenery. Buildings and such would look more like P3D/ORBX grade buildings rather than the eye-popping scenery we see in the MSFS YouTube videos. I'll be using P3D with my A2A aircraft for the foreseeable future.

Seeya
ATB

[MarcE]

If you desire "high fidelity", consider flying a real aircraft, or take an introductory lesson at your local airport.

While I’d really like to have my personal Spitfire in the garage I think the point of a PC flightsimulator is to do it at home for a little less than 150€/hr (add zeros if required) and with whatever aircraft we want. ^^ many simmers are private or commercial pilots and still like to strive for the most realistic armchair experience possible.

Btw as this is a forum: I am aware that Spitfire and 150€/hr don‘t match up. Although that may be due to the lack of Spitfires in Euro countries

[ratty]

If you desire "high fidelity", consider flying a real aircraft, or take an introductory lesson at your local airport.

Been there, done that, can't any more. A2A is the next best thing.

[Daube]

If you desire "high fidelity", consider flying a real aircraft, or take an introductory lesson at your local airport.

As somebody posted already, you'll have to explain us how to get our hands on a Spitfire, Mustang or B-17 (or anything else, really...) in real world.

[Daube]

My Internet comes to my house via DSL (phone line, not high-tech fiberoptic). This means that if I installed MSFS on my machine, I'd get suboptimal scenery. Buildings and such would look more like P3D/ORBX grade buildings rather than the eye-popping scenery we see in the MSFS YouTube videos. I'll be using P3D with my A2A aircraft for the foreseeable future.

Seeya
ATB

Just for info, you can download the scenery in advance (pre-cache) during the night to enjoy it in next flights
And my brother still has a DSL line at his home, with a max download speed of 12 to 15 Mbit/sec if I remember correctly, and MSFS works flawless.