IMO, most of the issues people complain about stem from the misleading visuals MS used to promote the product. The visuals were so stunning, compared to older titles, that I think this implied to many purchasers that the entire package was something new and revolutionary. In brief - the most revolutionary aspects do NOT involve the aircraft themselves. Is this still a “flight sim?†Well...yes. The basic handling of most of the GA aircraft is not that bad. Is it realistic? No. And it never will be. I’m not addressing the tube liners here. I have never flown one, but I have experience in a fair range of different GA birds from early 20th century taildraggers to a couple of Experimentals I built myself. I suspect a lot of RW pilots might tend to be less critical of simulations because they realize that no matter how sophisticated they are - it’s never going to be the real thing. Without gravity, physics, and a real ocean of air, ANY simulation is going to be a pale replication. Can a title like MSFS give you a sense of real aviation? Absolutely. Could the "flight characteristics of the portrayed models be improved? Absolutely. Cam MS be faulted for selling us a bunch of (as yet) unfulfilled promises? Absolutely. Did they gouge us by overpricing this "faulty" software? I think not. In spite of a few issues I have shared with the rest of you, my premium version of MSFS didn’t cost any more than a couple bags of groceries. And I have had many hours of interesting engagement with it, in spite of the occasional disappointment. Do I have hopes for improvement? Absolutely. I am retired from RW flying now. I use MSFS to allow me to relive my 30 yrs. in real aviation. With a stick, rudder pedals, a throttle quadrant, and Track IR, I am enjoying a pretty decent extension of my RW experiences. A lot of you are seeking something that is never coming. Is it still worthy of your valuable time? Absolutely
