How are you finding it?

[expat]

Hi I have had a Microsoft FS ever since the first one came out. I have just got FS20. My thoughts are that the Flight dynamics are not very good, The autopilot is unreliable & does not always work, ie it will put you into a 360 roll. Real weather isn't working properly, not for the UK anyway. There is no replay to see how you landed etc. No tower view. I have used all the others on my system but still prefer FSX. To be honest I am a little disappointed.
I will say however it is very smooth.
Iff anybody on hear can tell me where can I find the files in file explorer.

I am curious to know how so many people think that the flight dynamics are wrong? I have a lowly glider pilots licence, so I cannot comment on the powered aircraft, but there seems to be a lot of none pilots who are making this statement. Has it crossed anyone's mind that FXS was wrong and you are all having to adapt. The whole of the aircraft is modeled to act with the environment and this is not the case in FSX.

https://www.popsci.com/story/technology ... s-realism/

I will agree there are some problems. If I engage Alt Hold fly a bit and then turn it off, it will try to make like a Saturn V to put me back on the chosen altitude. Real weather works for me, but all the rain setting produces is clouds, I have yet to find any rain...
As for the files.....This is why I never install to where a program recommends, always to a folder I have made and named myself, in this case, C:FS2020. Then I don't have that very problem.

Matt

[Daube]

There are indeed a few problems with the flight models.
However, it's difficult to say if the problem comes from the physics engine of the simulator, or if it's simply about the individual parameters and systems of the planes.

For the autopilot strange behavior, it's definitely a kind of "gauge" problem. From what I read, they have already brought some fixes to it in the recent patch.
For the flight model itself, it seems a few planes received some fixes during the various alpha updates, and now *some* of the planes are told to fly reasonably well, while some other planes still fly badly. This includes problems with aircraft balance and stability, reactivity, trim settings, engine power, engine behavior (the turboprop engine are still as wrong as in FSX, unfortunately) and a few other things.

The only good news is that patches will be coming progressively and things might improve.

[Brett_Henderson]

There is something subtle about the aerodynamic modeling, that reaches into realism. I've only extensively flown the C172 and the A36, so I cannot speak for the other default aircraft. The key of course, is properly calibrated Yoke/Pedals. I have a different controls profile, for each aircraft.

Takeoff rolls.. pitching/trimming for Vx/Vy.. translate to the most realistic airspeed/vertical-speed relationship/performance I've ever experienced, in a desktop simulator. Same for manual, pitch/power/trim for level flight.. climbing/descending turns.. and especially approaches; they are creepy realistic.

Ground-effect is a bit exaggerated, but not by much. If you nail target airspeeds, it's not an issue. Carry 10kias too much over the numbers, and you'll float for an eternity..

I'm disappointed in real-time weather (it's not)... AWOS/ASOS rarely tell you what's modeled at the airfield.. and there are plenty of aircraft system bugs.. notably, same old FSX, fuel-flow vs mixture, in piston engines.. but I'll count on the likes of A2A, to fix that stuff.

I'm delighted with it .. enough so, that it drug me back into simming..

[cevans]

There is something subtle about the aerodynamic modeling, that reaches into realism. I've only extensively flown the C172 and the A36, so I cannot speak for the other default aircraft. The key of course, is properly calibrated Yoke/Pedals. I have a different controls profile, for each aircraft.

Takeoff rolls.. pitching/trimming for Vx/Vy.. translate to the most realistic airspeed/vertical-speed relationship/performance I've ever experienced, in a desktop simulator. Same for manual, pitch/power/trim for level flight.. climbing/descending turns.. and especially approaches; they are creepy realistic.

Ground-effect is a bit exaggerated, but not by much. If you nail target airspeeds, it's not an issue. Carry 10kias too much over the numbers, and you'll float for an eternity..

I'm disappointed in real-time weather (it's not)... AWOS/ASOS rarely tell you what's modeled at the airfield.. and there are plenty of aircraft system bugs.. notably, same old FSX, fuel-flow vs mixture, in piston engines.. but I'll count on the likes of A2A, to fix that stuff.

I'm delighted with it .. enough so, that it drug me back into simming..

That all sounds promising!

I must admit my controls are WAYYYYY too sensitive. To the point where the small props are virtually uncontrollable and impossible to land. I need to mess around with calibration -- and whatever else ---

[Doering]

Really impressed with the quality of the scenery. Yes, flight dynamics are not up to par at this point in time. I think the clouds are fantastic. Working on my first FS2020 video highlighting Tenzing Hillary airport!

[expat]

There is something subtle about the aerodynamic modeling, that reaches into realism. I've only extensively flown the C172 and the A36, so I cannot speak for the other default aircraft. The key of course, is properly calibrated Yoke/Pedals. I have a different controls profile, for each aircraft.

Takeoff rolls.. pitching/trimming for Vx/Vy.. translate to the most realistic airspeed/vertical-speed relationship/performance I've ever experienced, in a desktop simulator. Same for manual, pitch/power/trim for level flight.. climbing/descending turns.. and especially approaches; they are creepy realistic.

Ground-effect is a bit exaggerated, but not by much. If you nail target airspeeds, it's not an issue. Carry 10kias too much over the numbers, and you'll float for an eternity..

I'm disappointed in real-time weather (it's not)... AWOS/ASOS rarely tell you what's modeled at the airfield.. and there are plenty of aircraft system bugs.. notably, same old FSX, fuel-flow vs mixture, in piston engines.. but I'll count on the likes of A2A, to fix that stuff.

I'm delighted with it .. enough so, that it drug me back into simming..

That all sounds promising!

I must admit my controls are WAYYYYY too sensitive. To the point where the small props are virtually uncontrollable and impossible to land. I need to mess around with calibration -- and whatever else ---

You can adjust the sensitivity and dead zones in the calibration settings

Matt

[Shane Stachwick]

I think my answer would be "not terrible, but needs work". Specifically, I've noticed the following:

[*] Absurd installation times. A real pain when I had to do a reinstall.
[*] Some weird ATC problems. Sometimes the "1" in a radio frequency will be spelled out as "o-n-e" instead of pronounced as "one". Some AI/live aircraft will be inserted as a "Generic" model. And sometimes the emphasis and pacing of the words in the messages will be all off.
[*] I can't tell if the autopilot in large aircraft is glitched or if I just don't know how to work it, but whatever the case, there should be some kind of instructions for it. Like the Learning Center in FSX.
[*] Automated copilot seems to be drunk. He'll request VFR clearances when I want IFR. He'll also meander off the taxiways, land off-runway, lean the mixture at high altitude, resist pushback, send us into an unrecovered diving spiral when I come off Active Pause, sit at the start of the runway when we're cleared for takeoff, shut off the radio, and (yes!) crash the airplane on approach. He also seems completely perplexed by the 747, being unable to get it off the ground even with plenty of runway (A320neo and 787 he does OK). I don't plan on relying on him to fly the ENTIRE trip, but I also shouldn't have to yank the controls away from him because something has gone wrong.
[*] No rotorcraft or gliders, but plenty of light single and twin pistons. The aircraft select screen looks less like a menu on a flight simulator and more like an advertising space for a few well-connected manufacturers.
[*] Controls are not only completely overhauled from FSX, meaning that I'll have to learn all new key commands for almost everything, but some of them are mapped to keys that don't exist on my keyboard. Where the heck is Scroll Lock? Beats the heck out of me.
[*] Zooming in on the map in the flight setup screen doesn't load terrain in any higher detail. I should at least be able to make out some features instead of having everything be either a flat gray expanse or a blur of earthy color.
[*] Only 1 livery per installed aircraft. Seriously, even if they can't bring out real-life liveries, they could at least cook up some fake ones like the ones they made for earlier MSFS editions. Anyone want to fly for Airwave?

Otherwise it's pretty impressive. Everybody comments on the look of the scenery and I think that's the thing that's most striking. But there's also these:

[*] Cockpits are detailed enough that 2D panels aren't necessary.
[*] ATC took my callsign based on my Microsoft account screen name without a hiccup. Regarding other traffic, it also seems to be taking real-world airline callsigns that correspond to traffic appropriate to the region I'm flying in. Very cool.
[*] Performance is decent most of the time, even on my machine that just inches over the minimum requirements. I remember FSX was pretty much unplayable on the PC I was using in 2006, which was the latest and greatest at the time (and to think it shipped with Windows XP!).
[*] Great assistive messages and tools for new pilots. Or those struggling to adapt to a new sim (like me).
[*] Illustrations of aircraft range in flight setup screen, even taking into account current fuel loading. Great for figuring out what's in range or what aircraft I'll need for a desired route. I just wish there was a mode for showing international boundaries on the map though.

[Shane Stachwick]

...lean the mixture at high altitude, resist pushback...

Enrich the mixture at altitude. The thing that you're NOT supposed to, he does.

[Shane Stachwick]

So, 2 months and several updates later, I'm amending my evaluation, and unfortunately it's not for the better. Numerous bugs have been introduced by the updates, including the AI copilot suddenly becoming completely useless, the repeated failure to cycle between cockpit and exterior views (I've double- and triple-checked the keyboard assignment and I'm definitely using the correct one, and the button works well enough in other contexts I'm using it), the program unpinning itself from my taskbar, and certainly more that I have yet to discover. Sad to say that the title went from "promising and fun" to "frustrating garbage" in such a short timeframe.

I'll probably check back in every few weeks when new game updates become available, but I don't expect a truly worthy version anytime soon. Quite a shame since I put quite a bit of cash into a new computer, the premium deluxe package, and a couple of the payware aircraft in order to get what I consider the full experience. And to think there was once a time when I was excited to have a new Flight Simulator....

[Daube]

The saddest thing is probably that despite all of these bugs and problems, MSFS still offers the most enjoyable experience of all sims
MSFS flight models still need a few (I insist on *a few*) tweaks to be right.
But it already offers quite a decent level of flight realism for some planes (even more if you consider the ones that have been modded by the community), and the flying environment is the best you'll get from any sim.

[cevans]

So, 2 months and several updates later, I'm amending my evaluation, and unfortunately it's not for the better. Numerous bugs have been introduced by the updates, including the AI copilot suddenly becoming completely useless, the repeated failure to cycle between cockpit and exterior views (I've double- and triple-checked the keyboard assignment and I'm definitely using the correct one, and the button works well enough in other contexts I'm using it), the program unpinning itself from my taskbar, and certainly more that I have yet to discover. Sad to say that the title went from "promising and fun" to "frustrating garbage" in such a short timeframe.

I'll probably check back in every few weeks when new game updates become available, but I don't expect a truly worthy version anytime soon. Quite a shame since I put quite a bit of cash into a new computer, the premium deluxe package, and a couple of the payware aircraft in order to get what I consider the full experience. And to think there was once a time when I was excited to have a new Flight Simulator....

It's a similar experience for me.
I find there seems to be little follow on from the MSFS series I've been using for the past 15 years. The 'community' from what I've seen elsewhere are probably not even aware that 'MSFS' has been evolving for decades and the whole attitudes etc seem very different than previous releases. To the point where I would be inclined to call this 'Asobo Flight Simulator' and at this stage more a game than a sim.

Take out the Bing maps scenery and the payware default aircraft and you have something that does not match P3D v5.
If you took P3D v5 and had realistic scenery and all the existing huge back catalogue of amazing aircraft etc and you would have something Asobo could not compete with.

However it's early days. I do not like the way the emphasis seems to be on payware aircraft for MSFS2020. I'm a freeware guy and always will be. But things could change and a development of some aircraft creation tools like we have for the MSFS series up to P3D and things can get good. Aspect of Google earth scenery in P3d? Not sure for various reasons. (Asobo Scenery creation from GE seems to be very easy with every tom dick and harry doing it.)
We will see.

And has been said the load times are seriously off putting let alone the 'mandatory' updates which are basically 'forget it, you ain't flying for now until you download this 20GB file ' Sorry I don't have all day.

For now I will stick with P3D and check it every now and then or if I feel like some stunt flying through a city centre. Good potential though.

[iamthefatstig]

Hi all. I'm not a fan. I found the inflight menu's simplistic and annoying. Also, I couldn't fathom out how to change the camera to a genuine pan around instead of a snapshot, return to center style. I did quite enjoy the place markers along my routes, and there was nothing wrong with the scenery. I recognized all my local landmarks for example. I also thought the ATC service was vastly improved.

However, in its current state, it appears a little too simplistic for my liking at the moment. I also had a Steam refund initially declined as they had logged several hours of gameplay. In reality, I only played for about an hour before deciding it wasn't for me. The rest of the logged time was the stupid install files, that even with a pretty good connection, seemed to take an age!

I'll let it mature a little before I consider running it as well as I have FSX. It does however show some great potential.

[Sinkrate]

The only good thing I have to say about it is that at least the “world” is a more realistic size compared to FSX. Hardly surprising as FSX came on just two discs!

My main criticisms are:
Compulsory upgrades involving huge downloads.
Scenery levels are still crazy despite the latest “levels” upgrade. Take a trip down the Grand Canyon – it’s pants! They just can’t do water at all!
So far, I haven’t found a single cathedral in any British city except London.
Plenty of railways but has anyone ever seen a train?
Random crashes, especially when in slew mode.

I could go on, (and on and on and on) but all I’ll say is that the game was grossly over-hyped and that is why I find it so disappointing. If it had been advertised as a half baked, feeble attempt at an X-Plane rip off and priced accordingly, I would have no complaints!

[Shane Stachwick]

I think the thing that has caused me the most persistent frustration is keyboard compatibility. So many of the most basic functions depend on the keyboard having a certain layout and all the secondary functions set up just so. If the end user has to think about those things and mess around with the setup just to get moving, that’s a sure sign that there was very little if any effort put into compatibility testing on different hardware. Did they seriously think that nobody was going to be running this on a laptop like I do? C’mon, now.

[expat]

I think the thing that has caused me the most persistent frustration is keyboard compatibility.

Sorry, not following what you mean....What do you mean by compatibility with a keyboard. You can program any key to any function you want?

Matt