'Flying' the big jets on MSFS will always be the closest I'll ever get to doing actually doing it. So try not to laugh at us nerdy PC 'pilots' too much. Perhaps many are like me and will never get the chance to really do it.
If one twists the comment around a little and encompasses the general thrust of the thread, the following observations might be made ..
(a) various levels of simulation all have various levels of "value"
(b) "value" needs to be measured against the technical needs of the user and the desired training (or even entertainment) outcomes sought from the simulation in a cost/benefit style of assessment
(c) at the lower capability end (at a miniscule fraction of the cost of units at the other end of the scale) one finds some procedural value in the maintenance of basic scan patterns and rate and, for instance, I/F letdown procedural skills maintenance
(d) progressively moving up the scale of fidelity (and cost) one finds adequately realistic systems procedural trainers
(e) moving into the higher fidelity (and cost) region one gets progressively closer to the aircraft and can utilise the commercial benefits of ZFT capabilities. (I'm not sure that my Pawnee and Callair endorsements years ago count as ZFT exercises but one could stretch a point, I guess ...)
Do we ever actually get to the "aircraft" in the simulator ? Of course not, although, with enough resources and investment thrown at the model, the approach may have sufficient fidelity to achieve near all reasonable training outcomes
Do we really need to model the aircraft with total fidelity ? Likewise, of course not .. only to the level appropriate and necessary for the training outcomes required. Anything more is into toys for the boys .. even if we all like to get to play with the bigger and shinier gadget in town.
Does that mean that low end simulations are inferior to high end ? Depends on one's point of view .. if the assessment is training outcomes driven it is really a matter of horses for courses .. the optimum through training program will have a range of simulations of different technical validity levels to achieve a desirable mix of cost/benefit.
I could never see the value of "misusing" a FFS on FB for initial ground school basic systems training if a cheap and simple training mockup or CBT package were available to address the same requirement .. a few thousand dollars invested to free up a $20M asset for "serious" training always made good sense to my way of thinking .. and the serious airline driven by the dollar is far more interested in generating the income from selling any excess time
So those who might laugh at nerdy PC pilots miss the point, I suggest .. it all comes back to horses for courses .. whether for Industry training or just entertainment.