Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 48

Thread: This Update Has Been a Total Disaster!

  1. #31

    Default

    please tell me I'm not the only one who just clicked an update that is 44 Gigs in size???

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ngs1022 View Post
    please tell me I'm not the only one who just clicked an update that is 44 Gigs in size???
    You most certainly are not the first

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    10

    Default

    I'm not sure whether it's a total disaster. I haven't installed SU5 yet. I've decided to spend a few days reading forum posts and gathering a notebook containing settings, tweaks, and precautions taken that work and those that don't before trying it. I might even wait for Hot Fix #2.
    Meanwhile, figuring out how MS could commit the crime, which they call "SU5," against its loyal PC group is not the most perplexing mystery. Most perplexing is understanding how a scarce few posters claim graphics as good as they had before the update. If their experience is genuine, it sort of disproves the prevailing theory that Asobo severely dumbed down the graphics to make MFS "fit into the [X]box," but that theory is the only one that seems to make sense. I hate that the vast majority of PC users are devastated by the results of the upgrade, but it'll be fascinating to see how it plays out over the the rest of this year.
    Last edited by milleron; 08-01-2021 at 11:10 PM.
    Ryzen 5800X, RTX 3080, 32GB RAM (3600),EVGA 850W Gold PSU, Gigabyte X570 Master mb, Noctua NH-U12A, Samsung 1TB 970 EVO+ PCIEe 3, D: drive 1TB PNY PCIe 3, Honeycomb yoke and throttle quadrant, LG 34" ISP 1440 monitor, Internet 230 Mbs over Wi-Fi

  4. #34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by milleron View Post
    I'm not sure whether it's a total disaster. I haven't installed SU5 yet. I've decided to spend a few days reading forum posts and gathering a notebook containing settings, tweaks, and precautions taken that work and those that don't before trying it. I might even wait for Hot Fix #2.
    Meanwhile, figuring out how MS could commit the crime, which they call "SU5," against its loyal PC group is not the most perplexing mystery. Most perplexing is understanding how a scarce few posters claim graphics as good as they had before the update. If their experience is genuine, it sort of disproves the prevailing theory that Asobo severely dumbed down the graphics to make MFS "fit into the [X]box," but that theory is the only one that seems to make sense. I hate that the vast majority of PC users are devastated by the results of the upgrade, but it'll be fascinating to see how it plays out over the the rest of this year.
    Interesting that you have not yet installed SU5, yet describe it as a "crime". You refer to a "scarce few posters who claim graphics as good as they were before the update", implying that this group is a small minority. But it is well known that complainers about new products are invariably over-represented in any sampling because satisfied customers are much less inclined to report their experiences. Then, referring to those of us who are happy with SU5, you say "if their experience is genuine..", implying what -- that we are lying? If not that, then what exactly are you saying?

  5. #35

    Default

    After Update 5 I have no problems. The only thing that aanoyes me is that when you are flying high all the landscapes now look bluish pastel and wasched out. also too bright. Not nice

  6. #36

    Default

    Are you a member of the Asobo dev ops team? I mean really this MSFS platform is a joke. MSFS should have built on FSX. There is no reason for all of these hot fixes at all. Oh it is the Bill Gates way of doing business after all. Release a crappy product and say it is good enough. I paid over $100 for a simulator than runs far worse than it predecessor FSX. It is screwed up! The screwed developers and hopefully in turn screwed themselves! Xplane and Prepar are such a better deal in that they are at least stable! Update after update, I mean let down after let down. Stop defending those who are getting paid a salary to not do their job which is to provide an a least decent product for their customers.

  7. #37

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by maddog80 View Post
    Are you a member of the Asobo dev ops team? I mean really this MSFS platform is a joke. MSFS should have built on FSX. There is no reason for all of these hot fixes at all. Oh it is the Bill Gates way of doing business after all. Release a crappy product and say it is good enough. I paid over $100 for a simulator than runs far worse than it predecessor FSX. It is screwed up! The screwed developers and hopefully in turn screwed themselves! Xplane and Prepar are such a better deal in that they are at least stable! Update after update, I mean let down after let down. Stop defending those who are getting paid a salary to not do their job which is to provide an a least decent product for their customers.
    No, I am not a member of the Asobo team, and I am not defending anybody. As a matter of fact, I had a frustrating two days trying to install the latest update, until it finally did, and I reported my experience on this forum. I happen to be one of those who has found the SU5 update to be a great advance in performance (50-60 FPS pracatically everywhere), on ultra settings, with no detectable loss in graphics quality. At the same time, I am well aware that many are having problems with it, and I regret that. I do think that one's computer specs have a lot to do with this issue. One thing is for certain: rants, raves, and accusations are not going to solve anything. Let's keep this civil and respectful.

    Alienware Aurora R11, 32 GB ram, Intel i7-10700F, GeForce RTX 2080 Super

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cobalt View Post
    Interesting that you have not yet installed SU5, yet describe it as a "crime". You refer to a "scarce few posters who claim graphics as good as they were before the update", implying that this group is a small minority. But it is well known that complainers about new products are invariably over-represented in any sampling because satisfied customers are much less inclined to report their experiences. Then, referring to those of us who are happy with SU5, you say "if their experience is genuine..", implying what -- that we are lying? If not that, then what exactly are you saying?
    Of course, it's true that complainers are over-represented on online forums, but my experience goes back to the days when there was nothing but AOL, Compuserve, and Usenet, and there has never been an outpouring of grief even remotely as severe as what we're seeing with SU5. Essentially no one has decent graphics, and those with literally unplayable sims are legion. I feel it's safe to say that the percentage of users who've suffered significant downgrades is massive. But even if it's not >50%, the horrendous severity of the dismantling described in the threads on flightsimulator.com (numbering in the thousands of posts) thoroughly justifies calling it a crime against PC users.
    I did not impugn the veracity of those who are satisfied. By wondering if their descriptions are genuine, I'm wondering if most of them are users with antiquated hardware who had previous graphics that were so bad that they're thrilled with their increase in FPS and lack the frame of reference to even see the massive degradation in graphics. They seem never to include their specs or include screenshots of their own to justify their opinion, which almost invariably boils down to "I'm good. I like SU5."
    (I believe that you, personally, did include screenshots, which gave me hope, so my suppositions about supporters of SU5 certainly do not include you.)
    Last edited by milleron; 08-03-2021 at 09:09 AM.
    Ryzen 5800X, RTX 3080, 32GB RAM (3600),EVGA 850W Gold PSU, Gigabyte X570 Master mb, Noctua NH-U12A, Samsung 1TB 970 EVO+ PCIEe 3, D: drive 1TB PNY PCIe 3, Honeycomb yoke and throttle quadrant, LG 34" ISP 1440 monitor, Internet 230 Mbs over Wi-Fi

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    East Texas, USA.
    Posts
    1,447

    Default

    I always show my specs and I have posted several sets of screenshots after the latest update. My longest flight was 54 minutes after the update, but no CTDs for me so far! My resolution is a fairly easy 1920X1200 (about 115% of 1080p), but my hardware isn't terribly antiquated!
    I7-9700K, RTX-2070, Asus Strix Z-390-H MB, 32gb G Skill 3000 CL15, Corsair Obsidian 750D case, WD Black 1tb M.2, Crucial CT500MX SSD, Seasonic Prime 750W Titanium PSU

  10. #40

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by milleron View Post
    Of course, it's true that complainers are over-represented on online forums, but my experience goes back to the days when there was nothing but AOL, Compuserve, and Usenet, and there has never been an outpouring of grief even remotely as severe as what we're seeing with SU5. Essentially no one has decent graphics, and those with literally unplayable sims are legion. I feel it's safe to say that the percentage of users who've suffered significant downgrades is massive. But even if it's not >50%, the horrendous severity of the dismantling described in the threads on flightsimulator.com (numbering in the thousands of posts) thoroughly justifies calling it a crime against PC users.
    I did not impugn the veracity of those who are satisfied. By wondering if their descriptions are genuine, I'm wondering if most of them are users with antiquated hardware who had previous graphics that were so bad that they're thrilled with their increase in FPS and lack the frame of reference to even see the massive degradation in graphics. They seem never to include their specs or include screenshots of their own to justify their opinion, which almost invariably boils down to "I'm good. I like SU5."
    (I believe that you, personally, did include screenshots, which gave me hope, so my suppositions about supporters of SU5 certainly do not include you.)
    Thanks for your thoughtful post -- most welcome in the present climate! I do have to disagree with your statement that "essentially no one has decent graphics". Some of us are seeing great graphics since SU5 (I am one of them) and have so reported in this and other forums. In my case, I had great graphics before SU5 and still have them, along with an increase in FPS from around 25-30 to 50-60, and practically everywhere, and with ultra settings. I realize that for many this is hard to believe, but brother, I ain't lyin'! And as I just said, I am not alone. The only explanation I can come up with -- and I am certainly not a computer guru -- is that I have a reasonably good (not top-of-the-line, but pretty good) computer system, which I bought a year ago in preparation for MSFS, and so far it has proven capable of dealing with the demands put on it by the various upgrades including SU5. Maybe my day of reckoning is coming and the next Asobo update will do me in, who knows! Meanwhile, I do sympathize with all those having problems. My suggestions would be: (a) try running MSFS with no addons, and (b) consider upgrading your processor, video card, and/or ram. Good luck to all.

    Alienware Aurora R11, i710070 chip, GeForce RTX2080 video card, 32 MB ram
    Last edited by cobalt; 08-03-2021 at 12:23 PM.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. MSFS 2020 update has been released
    By 2cvNation in forum Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-03-2020, 10:58 AM
  2. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-07-2016, 08:19 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-19-2009, 09:54 PM
  4. Replies: 16
    Last Post: 03-11-2008, 10:22 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •