FS2020 of no use to me

[Shrikharan]

As what we had in FSX,   a 2d cockpit, able to fly with full front view without cockpit blocking and important  flight details such as speed, direction,  and height  displayed on top of the screen, With these  options not abled in FS2020 I simply cannot fly an aircraft.  Flying a real aircraft  in real world is different to fly in computer with the mouse and  keyboard it takes a long time to see around. In real flight we  have a wider field of vision and we can quickly move our neck to see or simply moving the eyes. We cannot do that in computer. before we use the mouse to change the view plane would have crashed, (unless we pause the flight and  doing that the thrill is over). 

 

The FS2020 team must quickly bring an update to enable these defficiencies.  I have now shelved my FS2020 and  gone back to FSX. 

[jgf]

At least we can still run older software if we prefer.  (I have FS2004 in Win7.)

[kingnorris]

5 hours ago, Shrikharan said:

As what we had in FSX,   a 2d cockpit, able to fly with full front view without cockpit blocking and important  flight details such as speed, direction,  and height  displayed on top of the screen, With these  options not abled in FS2020 I simply cannot fly an aircraft.  Flying a real aircraft  in real world is different to fly in computer with the mouse and  keyboard it takes a long time to see around. In real flight we  have a wider field of vision and we can quickly move our neck to see or simply moving the eyes. We cannot do that in computer. before we use the mouse to change the view plane would have crashed, (unless we pause the flight and  doing that the thrill is over). 

 

The FS2020 team must quickly bring an update to enable these defficiencies.  I have now shelved my FS2020 and  gone back to FSX. 

Have you tried using VR?

[budreiser]

My two cents...

Considering how much more realistic 2020 is, sim flying with older versions to me is like going back to sub logic. Or for those who don't remember sub logic, like going back to horse and buggy days. Just my opinion!

[ViperPilot2]

35 minutes ago, jgf said:

At least we can still run older software if we prefer.  (I have FS2004 in Win7.)

 

The same. We make do with what we have. 

[jgf]

49 minutes ago, budreiser said:

My two cents...

Considering how much more realistic 2020 is, sim flying with older versions to me is like going back to sub logic. Or for those who don't remember sub logic, like going back to horse and buggy days. Just my opinion!

 

Lol, a twenty year old Toyota will get you to the grocery store as well, and more economically, as a new Porsche.  Yes MSFS is beautiful, but compare the system requirements, not to mention the requirement of a constant high speed internet connection, and the aggravation of constant "upgrades" (which seem to cause as many problems as they cure, and are not optional).  And from what I've seen, there is no need to learn navigation or systems, MSFS takes you by the hand and points out everything for you.

 

But there is room for everyone, I enjoy FS2004 as much as you enjoy MSFS, we both win.

[PhrogPhlyer]

4 hours ago, jgf said:

But there is room for everyone, I enjoy FS2004 as much as you enjoy MSFS, we both win.

I agree, just as I enjoy reading the threads of all sim versions here on FlightSim.

All sims have so much to offer.

And whichever gets you into the virtual skies is what matters most.

Happy Simming!

[wobbie]

10 hours ago, jgf said:

At least we can still run older software if we prefer.  (I have FS2004 in Win7.)

And it runs super smooth in Windows 11!

[JSkorna]

I can't wait for MSFS 2024 to be released.

[tiger1962]

Never mind FS2024, SU15 would be nice - at this rate it'll release on the same day as City Update 06 and Local Legend 15! (Scheduled for next week, if anything goes to plan with this sim lol)

[chicagorandy]

With my current hardware setup I enjoy a wonderful (for ME) flight sim experience with MSFS2020. The best ever for Microsoft IMHO. I'm a happily retired 75 yr old and have been with MS Flight since day one back in the 80's. I too am anxiously awaiting MSFS2024 and will purchase it without hesitation.

 

I continue to be mildly amused by 1st time posters whose sole purpose seems to be bashing this sim. Kinda like joining a Popeye's Chicken fan forum to rave about hamburgers.  It is to laugh. 

[wobbie]

Interesting that many are saying that they will buy FS2024 without hesitation, sight unseen, not knowing what the minimum specs are..

The search for the Holy Grail continues...

Me? I've tried it. Yes, it is 'realistic' from a Google Earth's point of view.. eye candy et al.. But the cost of hardware to get it going!!

 

Anyway, For me, the immersion factor is so much greater than the realistic factor that FS2020 claims. 

Can I fly my favourite low's 'n slow's, Can I have fun with 'fictitious' planes & scenery? --- Of course not.

A very famous freeware developer & painter (now departed) always said.. 

"Simming is all about Fun, Fact & Fiction!" 

So, as the original poster says.. 'FS2020 is of no use to me!'

For some, yes, but me? 'Nope!'

[Rupert]

On 4/7/2024 at 11:05 AM, Shrikharan said:

As what we had in FSX,   a 2d cockpit, able to fly with full front view without cockpit blocking and important  flight details such as speed, direction,  and height  displayed on top of the screen, With these  options not abled in FS2020 I simply cannot fly an aircraft.  Flying a real aircraft  in real world is different to fly in computer with the mouse and  keyboard it takes a long time to see around. In real flight we  have a wider field of vision and we can quickly move our neck to see or simply moving the eyes. We cannot do that in computer. before we use the mouse to change the view plane would have crashed, (unless we pause the flight and  doing that the thrill is over). 

 

The FS2020 team must quickly bring an update to enable these defficiencies.  I have now shelved my FS2020 and  gone back to FSX. 

Also with the older sims, I prefer P3D, you could scan multiple views all the time just by moving your eyes, as you do in a real aircraft,  Instead of scrolling or changing screens to see what you want to see.  I normally have three screens to look out of the windscreen and sides with and another screen, mounted lower, to scan the instruments.  Like RW flying.

 

Plus, on day one, I already knew how to work all the control functions as they were standard on the older sims. 

[JSkorna]

40 minutes ago, wobbie said:

Interesting that many are saying that they will buy FS2024 without hesitation, sight unseen, not knowing what the minimum specs are..

The search for the Holy Grail continues...

Me? I've tried it. Yes, it is 'realistic' from a Google Earth's point of view.. eye candy et al.. But the cost of hardware to get it going!!

 

It doesn't matter what the minimum specs are because my computer is already probably double the specs. No, the cost was not outrageous.

 

[jgf]

1 hour ago, wobbie said:

Interesting that many are saying that they will buy FS2024 without hesitation, sight unseen, not knowing what the minimum specs are..

 

Obviously, "new" equals "better".  And if that requires diplexed Crays in the basement and an internet connection which would impress the NSA, so be it.

 

Hopefully they are as happy in their world as I am in mine.

[flapman]

2D cockpits have their place, and it's a shame to see them removed from the genre.

[PhrogPhlyer]

3 hours ago, flapman said:

2D cockpits have their place,

For IFR training, where understanding the IFR environment is more important than accuracy of the sim presentation, the 2D panel is a much stronger training tool.

In reality, when in IMC conditions, your world is reduced to the panel in front of you.

And for the IFR student, developing good scan habits and observing the subtle movements and functioning of instrument presentation, again, I feel the 2D panel is superior.

This is not downplaying to wonderful full cockpit presentation of the VC, just one instructor's opinion for a specific need.

Yes, it is a shame that it did not get past the cutting table. 

I feel that this would have allowed MSFS to offer broader training capabilities, especially with its better visual realism when breaking out of the clouds at 200 & 1/4 on the approach.

 

[loki]

6 hours ago, jgf said:

Obviously, "new" equals "better".  And if that requires diplexed Crays in the basement and an internet connection which would impress the NSA, so be it.

 A $500 Xbox and a 50Mbps internet connection can run MSFS2020 quite well. You don't need a Cray super computer to run the sim at reasonable rates or a 1GBps fibre internet connection.

[jgf]

Xbox?  I've not had a console since the days of Atari.  Desktops only for me.

[PhrogPhlyer]

52 minutes ago, loki said:

1GBps fibre internet connection

Well over half of NJ,, one of the most densely populated States, does not have access to fiber internet.

We're lucky to get a reasonable rate for 200 or 300GB speed through a cable provider, with no other option.

Wherever you are, consider yourself lucky to have such economical speeds.

[loki]

1 hour ago, jgf said:

Xbox?  I've not had a console since the days of Atari.  Desktops only for me.

The point is that you don't need to spend a lot to run MSFS 2020. And Xboxes are basically specialized PCs these days too, and not like Nintendos or Ataris of ages past. If you want to run the sim on a desktop PC, you also don't need to spend a lot either.

[loki]

53 minutes ago, PhrogPhlyer said:

Well over half of NJ,, one of the most densely populated States, does not have access to fiber internet.

We're lucky to get a reasonable rate for 200 or 300GB speed through a cable provider, with no other option.

Wherever you are, consider yourself lucky to have such economical speeds.

I think you missed my point. MSFS only needs about a 50Mbps connection to run well, and those 200Mbps or faster options would be more than enough for the sim. My comment about fiber was in response to the claim one needs the fastest internet connection possible.

[jgf]

9 minutes ago, loki said:

don't need to spend a lot

 

Quite relative. 

(There was a time I didn't think a Porsche Turbo and a Lamborghini was spending a lot, now I'm a retired geezer getting a senior discount on a 10meg internet connection.)

[loki]

11 hours ago, jgf said:

 

Quite relative. 

(There was a time I didn't think a Porsche Turbo and a Lamborghini was spending a lot, now I'm a retired geezer getting a senior discount on a 10meg internet connection.)

Sure, everyone has a budget and it is relative. However, to characterize MSFS as requiring a supercomputer costing many thousands of dollars to run well is far from accurate. $1,500 would get you a very decent system for the sim. MSFS has never required the Lamborgini of PCs to get good performance.

 

https://pcpartpicker.com/guide/2PTwrH/enthusiast-intel-gamingstreaming-build

 

Or, as I mentioned above, an Xbox Series X for $500 and a set of Thrustmaster controls would work quite well too for under $1,000.

 

The minimum internet connection speed for the sim is 5mbps, though I wouldn't realistically want to run it on anything below 20mbps. This is certainly one of the biggest limits to the sim, and anyone with a slow connection, or no connection at all, would want to look elsewhere.

[ftldave]

It's not the tech specs that make FS2020 of little use for me. It's the lack of military aircraft and military airbase scenery for FS2020. Compared to the hundreds of fine mil aircraft in FSX and other sims, MSFS is greatly lacking, sorry to say.