KiloWatt

The Rijeka to Santorini one is probably a good start. I would certainly start with one which use an aircraft with a glass cockpit, since this will give you a GPS guide along with the written instructions. This is important as a backup, because you'll need to get used to how Asobo phrases the instructions. Maybe it's a second language thing, or maybe a french thing, but they use very flowery language at the expense of accuracy and conciseness. I found that I usually needed to wade through a word soup to get to the essence of the instructions. I wound up distilling their instruction and creating waypoints on google maps on a tablet, which I could cross with what I was seeing out of the window. That's all currently moot anyway, because the bush trips are slightly broken since SU5: The GPS backup is not currently working (except on the first leg, where the magenta line is still present), so there is no magenta line on the glass cockpit. I heard from others that you can still progress if you land at the correct airport, and you can obviously still follow the instructions to get there. But keep this in mind.

Yeah that's probably a good option. I know very little about VR and have never used it (my geriatric GPU would crap itself if I tried), but there are some VR disciples on this forum that can help out with that.

That's a nice system! Ok, so I'm not much of a monitor guy, but this is what I could figure out: Screen size: The screen you're looking at buying is a little taller (15.5" vs 14.6"), but much wider (35.4" vs 24.5"). This isn't obvious if you're only looking at one number (38" vs 27"), since the aspect ratio makes a big difference. Resolution: However, the 38" actually has a somewhat lower resolution (3840 x 1600 vs. 3840 x 2160). This is important, because it would seem that LG achieved a wider aspect ratio, by downgrading the vertical resolution - which isn't great. The implication is that the image won't look as crisp, probably noticeably. This is even moreso, since the vertical resolution is spread out over a taller screen. So fewer pixels per inch, if you will. This also means that your GPU would have an easier time driving this monitor, since it has fewer pixels overall to process. Refresh Rate: The 38" has a much higher refresh rate (144 Hz vs 60 Hz). I.e., on the 38" the image gets redrawn 144 times per second, while 60 times per second on your existing monitor. This may or may not be important to you. For flight simming, I'd say this is less important, but that's just me. But with all of that said, I'm not going to tell you what to do with your money. I don't like the fact that the 38" would result in an overall resolution downgrade and there's a good chance that you'll notice it. On the other hand you have a pretty good GPU and single generation upgrades aren't always worth it; so I don't like that option either. GPU prices are currently pretty abysmal anyway. Any chance you could save the money and buy RTX4000 or RX7000? They're not that far off and could present a much better value upgrade. Or maybe spend the money elsewhere? How about a nice flight yoke and/or rudder pedals and/or throttle quadrant?

I think we might need a more complete picture to give you informed opinions. What monitor do you currently have? If it's not going to be a big improvement, it may not be worthwhile upgrading. Also, since your other option seems to be upgrading the GPU, are you particularly unhappy with the sim's performance currently? Also, what CPU and how much RAM do you have? If an upgrade results in, say, a CPU bottleneck, then it's no use either.

Hi Rich. Perhaps someone on this forum can help you with x-box related issues. Otherwise, you could try the official forums. I think I've read somewhere that peripheral support for the X-box isn't yet at the level of the PC, and not all PC peripherals work yet. So I don't think it's a given that Track-IR is supported. Did you happen to check if Track-IR is supported on X-Box?

If I may, I would recommend going the $1 trail first. The current attitude of the community towards the sim is, shall we say, ambivalent. So satsifaction is far from garuanteed (although I happen to be quite satisfied myself). Anyway, I hope the sim is good to you, should you decide to jump in.

Just to add a bit more context. It's included to raise awareness of something (don't remember what - guess their attempt didn't work me, ha). But no, it's not flyable at the moment. However it wouldn't suprise me if, in the future, a third party modder frankensteins it into the air with scraps of FSX code or something. Stranger things have happened...

Looks like I was mistaken. See response 158 of this thread: https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/what-to-expect-on-18th-august/440532/161 In summary, they're planning a community fly-in to visit Asobo Studio in Bordeaux for tomorrow (20 August), and a week of anniversary streams from 6 to 10 September. Nothing big, but understandable if they'd prefer to instead concentrate on fixing the sim.

Fair enough, if that's the case. I'm sure we'd all appreciate that.

I'm sure we all know that today is the one year anniversary of the release. However, I was expecting some announcement or video (presumably somewhat self-congratulatory) or something. I haven't seen anything though... Am I missing something? I'm 99% sure they said that they'd do someting to celebrate.

Oh ok. Thanks Mr. Terry. For a while there I thought I was missing something. Curiously, the folder of v0.4.0 (the working one) contains more files than 0.4.1. I wonder if that's the problem... I also checked when downloading from various sources, including WT themselves. Seems uncharacteristically negligent, though...

Ok, thanks Tim. I frequently use the additional pages (especially engine) during startup. So they're quite important to me. Gun to my head, if I had to choose between them and the zoom function, I'd take the additional MFD pages and use the VFR map (sh*tty though it is). Anyone else have any luck?

Hi everyone. To those that currently use the lagacy Working Title G1000 (i.e., not the nxi), which version are you currently using? Strangely, I found that v0.4.0 works well, but that it contains the known bug where the range knob doesn't work. On the other hand, V0.4.1 (the latest) gives me black screens... So, which version are you all using? Presumably v0.4.1 works for all of you? Also, before anyone suggests I use the nxi, I'm not quite ready to. I frequently use the DA40NG mod, which relies on the legacy version for enhanced engine pages. The creator of that mod has stated that he will not incorporate the nxi until it's more stable - so for me, it's a non-starter. Thanks everyone!

Whoa, hold on. I actually completely agree with you, but I think you misunderstood my post. Only the first paragraph in my post dealt with marketing (which is subject of this thread). In the paragraph you quoted, I was commenting on MS/Asobo management decisions, not marketing (I can see how this wasn't clear, though). In any event, what I meant to say, was that I suspect MS had the ultimate say in when the sim was released, since I find it hard to believe that the developer would willingly release software that was quite buggy and lacked many of features which FSX had. But, like I stated, it's just my opinion. To be clear, I don't mean to say this was due to pressure from marketing, but the management of MS and Asobo.

I agree with your sentiment and frustration completely. However, you could argue that the marketing depertment did a stellar job. After all, the job of a marketing department is to get as many people as possible to buy the product. Conversely, the way you describe what should have been done would have led to much delayed sales or even preveneted sales altogether - which is the opposite of what marketing should do. I also don't think (but I've no evidence for this), that Asobo had much say in when the sim would have been released. Most likely, Microsoft had a sword over their head and they had to release the sim according to a tight schedule. So continually delaying until it's polished was unlikely to be an option. Nevertheless, don't take my response as arguing with you. They should have waited. I read somewhere that the alpha testers were quite dismayed in 2020 to learn how brief the beta test was going to be, since it wasn't close be being ready (that's obvious now).

I don't do VR myself (my system would utterly brown itself if I ever tried), but I would say it's certainty a great start. If you can find it at a reasonable price, I'd be comfortable making the jump. Now, as with any system, it could be improved. For example, when you have some spare cash in the future, I think the CPU and ram can be upgraded. But again, if it's at a good price, I'd be very tempted.

Thanks Dave. Interesting. I'm now going on about 32 hours and it's at 78%. For those located in eastern north america and are currently using the sim, is data streaming also affected in-game?

Hi everyone. For various reasons, I'm now reinstalling the game. Although my internet speed is 120 Mbps, the game is consistently downloading at only about 7 Mbps. So after about 27-ish hours, it's now sitting at about 65%. It's ok, I guess, since I've a bunch of over stuff I need to attend to, but it does seem excessively slow... Is anyone else in eastern North America seeing the same download speeds? I'm of course assuming we'd be on the same server.

Good question... I've flown over VORs in FSX, back in the day and they were visible. No idea about FS2020, however...

I'll give it a try anyway and see what happens. My PC is dedicated to MSFS and I literally do nothing else on it, since my employer gave me a laptop. So I'm happy to to leave it running for a while, even if it drains all the system resources. Like I said earlier, and others also noted, whether the sim is stable enough to keep going for a few days is another matter entirely...

Hi all, I'm a bit trepadatious to update, given the recent circus with SU 5 and subsequent hotfix. I'm now considering leaving the sim open and just not closing to update. That way, I may be able to temporarily skip the update for a while. The caveat being that the sim needs to be stable enough not to CTD on me, thereby forcing me to restart it. I've not been able to use the sim for the last month, since my CPU is in for RMA, so I'm still technically on SU4. But my CPU is scheduled to arrive today. So hopefully I can install it, SU5 and hotfix 1, and not have to deal with hotfix 2 (yet). IF it's stable enough... I'm wondering if this would work...

Basically yes. Go to your settings page (top right), and click edit signature on the panel on the left.

Ah, copy that. Thanks. I sent my CPU back for an RMA just before the update hit, so I've been on the sidelines for the latest update. When my replacement arrives in a few days, I think I'll just remove the sumbitch and any trace it left behind. Then do a 100% vanilla install and see how it goes. No mods, no marketplace. Hell, I'll even skip the word updates...

To confirm, because you didn't explicitly say so, do you mean installed from the in-game marketplace? I ask, because very soon I may need to go through this process myself.

Yes, I also had FS95 (who can forget their "As real as it gets" mantra), those were the days. But it's a fair question and I'm not sure (I don't think anyone other than an active MSFS developer can give you a precise answer). However, we know that the sim is much more complex than it's predecessors. I would speculate that in order to achieve the headline features (which necessitates the said complexity), the way that the sim interface to the add-ons had to change and this is what we ended up with. Not to extinguish any further discussion, but ultimately I think this is a moot point at the moment. It seems like most people are lucky to get 5 minutes into the sim without it crashing. I would focus on just getting the sumbitch running reliably before I'd even think of touching an add-on.