Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024 Development Update - Live

[MarcG 3,194]

With all due respect I believe this forum would be better served by moderators who own and understand the product, I'm sorry Ray but this isn't the first time you've popped into threads and inadvertently started something.

I certainly don't believe you deliberately come here to have a "dig" and to start flame wars but it comes across that way in the tone of your postings, perhaps something to bring up in your next moderators discussion, just a thought, no ill harm meant.

[Sethos 4,785]

9 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

You’re imagining things. Read my post from four hours ago…

https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/645790-microsoft-flight-simulator-2024-development-update-live/?do=findComment&comment=5121563

Now tell me what is “dropping pokes or insinuations” in that post? I simply wished users would enjoy a reliable service.

Do you have the same animosity towards those who still prefer XP or is this just a personal dig at me because i prefer the sim of my choice. And I don’t shut down topics others have started unless people are being disrespectful or it’s gone off topic.

I won’t be responding to any more posts in this topic.

No, that's just you doing this for years, as GCBraun also points out. You keep doing this, poking in here to tell us you don't use it, have no intentions of it, and every time anyone engage with you, it's shut down. You've also been notorious for doing this in the Prepar3D section, dropping even worse pokes and if anyone calls it out, you use your mod position to quickly silence any criticism or ANY positive mention of MSFS is silenced at a blazing fast speed. It gets a bit tiresome when we're going on year I don't know at this point. 

And considering I actually prefer X-Plane but also enjoy MSFS, that'd be a no. I respect both of those platforms very much. 

You're a good guy, Ray, I like you and your professionalism in many regards but your relationship to MSFS and defence of P3D around here has lost a lot of nuance over the years, that even seemingly positive comments feel disingenuous. 

I shan't press it any further. Have a good day. 

Edited Thursday at 03:30 PM by Sethos

[Ray Proudfoot 9,163]

Just now, Sethos said:

You're a good guy, Ray, I like you and your professionalism in many regards but your relationship to MSFS and defence of P3D around here has lost a lot of nuance over the years, that even seemingly positive comments feel disingenuous. 

Seems I can’t win then whatever I say. Ho hum. 😟

[virtualstuff 782]

1 hour ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

I did wonder when it might be mentioned me not being a devotee of the sim. 😁 It’s the lack of control I struggle with.

I hope for all your sakes it isn’t a frustrating experience. It is a leap into the dark by Microsoft.

Well I prefer to wait first, instead to speculate of all the things that could possibly go wrong.

Nevertheless your question is a valid one, but we have a great backbone to support this.

I have a positive outlook and find it a blessing for our hobby where we are today Ray...

In 2016 it was pretty dark the future of simming, now we have so many great choices and I embrace all the new comers to this hobby....

But hey, we have still users floating around in FS9 go figure...  

[somiller 699]

Is that what it is...about winning?

[Krakin 6,220]

7 minutes ago, somiller said:

Is that what it is...about winning?

Come now, the constructive criticism is good but let's not pile on lol 😂.

And just so it's clear and there's no confusion, I have not purchased P3D and any interest I may have in it would be purely elementary, my dear Watson.

[Juliett Alfa Romeo 590]

Next year the word not allowed war will be between those who use "2020" and "2024".

[Scottoest 1,632]

4 hours ago, lwt1971 said:

Given that Microsoft owns and runs Azure, one of the largest cloud infrastructures in the world (second only to AWS I believe) this is not a leap into the dark in that sense. They are also well experienced in various other cloud services from Bing to XCloud to various others. So it's more a matter of allocating the right amount of their cloud resources to handle the load of MSFS 2024, which I'm sure they will monitor and adjust as needed (also, any load demands from MSFS are a drop in the bucket compared to loads demanded by their corporate software applications and clients).

That said, as with any software that relies on a server-side, outages and hiccups can occur.. but the benefits of this new way of using technology stacks far outweigh any connection/load issues IMO.

Capacity will never be an issue with Azure.  The only question would be cost.

However, when it comes to cost I suspect Microsoft have deduced that having far more people using your sim and buying add-ons from your embedded marketplace makes them more money than charging a monthly fee for their data-serving costs and having way fewer people using it as a result.

They also probably use MSFS as a valuable and visually flashy marketing point for what Azure is capable of, in selling it to businesses.

[Scottoest 1,632]

3 hours ago, lwt1971 said:

There obviously are higher priorities in the whole MS portfolio, but MSFS is hardly the "lowest" priority I'd say.. given that they are investing so much into MSFS 2024 vs 2020: i.e. doubling the core team size, the numerous partnerships with 3rd parties, contracting out even more to 3rd party devs, etc etc 

The sheer amount of free stuff they've "given away" as part of their continuous updates, the fact that they greenlit a sequel, and the fact that the team working on it has grown at a time in which the gaming industry is struggling with layoffs and stuff, should all give you an idea of how successful MSFS has been for them.

They've given away multiple payware-quality aircraft for free, made by actual payware developers. You're not doing things like that unless you're doing very well.

[Krakin 6,220]

MS owns Azure and all of the infrastructure anyway. Both Phil Spencer and Jorg have spoken about how cost effective it is to use assets that are owned by the company to do what they need to. MSFS is making them a lot of money and I think they're about to make a heck of a lot more with 2024. Servers will have hiccups from time to time but I also don't think they will have a capacity problem. I can only speak for myself but after their recent tweaks to the way their servers are coded, the MSFS updater is now taking all the bandwidth my ISP can throw at it, even in the content manager!

Edited Thursday at 06:53 PM by Krakin

[ca_metal 2,278]

1 hour ago, Juliett Alfa Romeo said:

Next year the word not allowed war will be between those who use "2020" and "2024".

That's what happens when the competition isn't really competition anymore. 😉

[Krakin 6,220]

17 minutes ago, ca_metal said:

That's what happens when the competition isn't really competition anymore. 😉

Yeah at FSExpo, one company had a presentation and another company had one too but people are only talking about one of those presentations right now 👀

Edited Thursday at 07:26 PM by Krakin

[Noel 4,624]

3 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

I simply wished users would enjoy a reliable service.

I've used MSFS now for nearly daily for almost 4y and after 20y of FS/FSX/P3D I can say with absolute certainty this is far and away the most reliable platform in my considerable experience, and that despite its cloud-based architecture.  I've been shut out of the sim twice now, both times for less than 24h and that's with using the sim nearly daily.  

One gets the distinct sense if MS offered a free copy to you and offered to cover your internet fees you'd still stick with P3Tired.  Yep, that's what I call it, or P3Old, or P3Dead.   I'm beyond glad to leave it and Lockheed Martin behind.

[fsiscool 268]

9 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

This is only of academic interest to me but surely if MSFS2024 becomes more server heavy / client light they would need to beef up their end considerably. But by how much if they don’t know how many people will transition to the new version.

Azure cloud computing is extremely elastic and scalable. They scale up and down the capacity by magnitudes of order on the fly within minutes and fully automated. You can be sure that they won't drop the ball on this poster child.

[styckx 1,875]

5 hours ago, MarcG said:

With all due respect I believe this forum would be better served by moderators who own and understand the product, I'm sorry Ray but this isn't the first time you've popped into threads and inadvertently started something.

I certainly don't believe you deliberately come here to have a "dig" and to start flame wars but it comes across that way in the tone of your postings, perhaps something to bring up in your next moderators discussion, just a thought, no ill harm meant.

I may be out of line here. It's with all due respect. 

AvSim was once an incredibly toxic place of "My sim is better than yours".  I stopped posting here for years over the toxicity. The peak of toxicity was when MS Flight came out. It was unbearable here. Tom, god rest his soul didn't do a lot to quell it.  Whether for heath reasons or personal agendas. Who knows. God bless him for without him these words would not be read. Regardless the modding was once out of hand and lopsided, agendas with mods were lopsided. It was literally a "LIVE FSX OR DIE" type atmosphere here. 

In light of that, the "new guard vs the old guard" over the years has become much more civil and finding common middle ground. It's nice. Ray is a good guy, and I'm sure he remembers those extremely toxic times here. He's adapated more than the others who simply decided to up and leave. Give Ray some grace. He's ok.