Thanks for that -- just out of curiousity, what is "instrument currency training"? My Dad was an instrument rated pilot (among others) and trained on the original MS Flight Simulator. It was obviously missing far more than probably any of the flight simulators released after 2000.
Also curious -- what is meant by your third bullet point? Where is the physics most obviously screwy? As a non-pilot, I was blown away by how the plane felt. Obviously, I don't have the sense for what the plane is actually doing like my pilot father would have, but while playing, it was the dynamics of how the plane moved that really impressed me.
I use simulator (X Plane) to shoot approaches every few days or so. In real life, you don’t really get to go down to minimums every flight. Simulator helps me to stay proficient.
In normal flight, the models are easy. However, in more unusual flying modes (eg stalls, spins, etc) its very hard to model a specific aircraft behavior vs a generic one. I have experience flying several models and a stall in Citabria (tiny aerobatic high wing) is very different than a stall in much bigger Bonanza. X Plane gets some (not all) of it right while MSFS doesn’t even trying it seems.
Also curious -- what is meant by your third bullet point? Where is the physics most obviously screwy? As a non-pilot, I was blown away by how the plane felt. Obviously, I don't have the sense for what the plane is actually doing like my pilot father would have, but while playing, it was the dynamics of how the plane moved that really impressed me.