Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024 launches to "Overwhelmingly Negative" Steam ratings due to congested cloud servers

Daniel Sims

Posts: 1,876   +49
Staff
Facepalm: Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024 relies heavily on cloud servers to avoid its predecessor's massive download requirements. Unfortunately, this left the game vulnerable to overloaded servers upon launch, forcing many customers to wait hours to play the title they paid $59.99 for.

The latest entry in Microsoft's long-running flight simulation series immediately encountered serious problems upon release. Although Asobo and Xbox Game Studios have made some early headway in resolving the issues, fans have harshly criticized the game for buggy content and load times lasting hours.

High player counts overloaded the cloud servers that stream Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024's life-sized digital twin of Earth, forcing Asobo to implement a temporary queue system. As a result, frustrated Steam users dragged the game's rating down to "Overwhelmingly Negative" on day one. The developer has since increased server capacity, but some players might still encounter problems.

Asobo CEO and co-founder Jorg Neumann recently told IGN that the company underestimated the hype surrounding Flight Simulator 2024. The company tested the servers for up to 200,000 concurrent players without issue, but congestion on launch day crashed the game's systems and forced them to reset. Neumann blames those crashes for the missing content that some players reported.

Ironically, Flight Simulator 2024 streams most of its terrain, objects, and textures to shorten start times and minimize download requirements. The previous entry, released in 2020, demands at least 200GB of storage space, often delivers updates weighing dozens of gigabytes, and features DLC that can approach the terabyte mark.

In contrast, shifting the burden to the cloud shrank Flight Simulator 2024's client storage footprint to 50GB and allowed Asobo to release large updates without correspondingly huge downloads. However, the game requires high internet bandwidth, and data usage in early tests approached 81 GB per hour.

Neumann blamed those numbers on an unoptimized build set to maximum visual quality. He suggested that, as most players fly at higher altitudes and tweak the graphics options, the average user might stream 5GB per hour.

Moreover, the CEO recently explained how Flight Simulator 2024 generates assets using machine learning and AI. To make the planet-sized game look prettier on the ground than its predecessor, Asobo repeatedly trained an algorithm to assign colors and textures to various pre-defined terrain types.

When asked about GenAI's potential threat to jobs, Neumann said that the amount of human attention the technology required actually doubled the developer's headcount. Including support studios, nearly 1,000 people worked on Flight Simulator 2024.

Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024 is now available on Steam, the Microsoft Game Store, Xbox Series consoles, and Game Pass.

Permalink to story:

 
I guess this is also probs because its day one on Game Pass, meaning a lot more people could play it than actually bought it - I wonder if they didn't anticipate as high a player count as they should have. I'm looking forward to playing it if I ever get the time.
Speaking of AI generated content, there are some hard to pin down unspoken rules about when its generally accepted, and generating the entire planet at this scale seems like a fairly reasonable use case, and like he says it's doubled their headcount because it still all needs tweaking and they're constantly adding handmade content for famous areas.
 
I guess this is also probs because its day one on Game Pass, meaning a lot more people could play it than actually bought it - I wonder if they didn't anticipate as high a player count as they should have. I'm looking forward to playing it if I ever get the time.
Speaking of AI generated content, there are some hard to pin down unspoken rules about when its generally accepted, and generating the entire planet at this scale seems like a fairly reasonable use case, and like he says it's doubled their headcount because it still all needs tweaking and they're constantly adding handmade content for famous areas.
M$ is, themselves, a hyperscaler. This shouldn't have been an issue for them. They absolutely have the resources
 
M$ is, themselves, a hyperscaler. This shouldn't have been an issue for them. They absolutely have the resources
Exactly, peak irony that Microsoft, big owner of Azure and its cloud monstrosity as a hyperscaler, couldn't plan properly for increased demand for their game that works using data stored in their cloud, what a great testament to any of the business cloud customers
 
Yes, but it's usually simpler and cheaper to let the dust settle in a couple of days instead of firing up 50 times more nodes that'll be pointless very quickly.
On the contrary, I would expect it to be simpler and cheaper in the long run to over-provision on day one, and then downscale as the hype subsides and your concurrent user mark stabilizes. It's more expensive from an infrastructure side, but a lot cheaper on the reputation and marketing side, which is what is going to count in the longer term. Many of those negative reviews won't be changed back to positive when this is all sorted, which is something that could have been avoided.
 
Back