Why the Falcon 4 Engine needs help!
-
I just want to fly the 16 in VR…. please? Pretty please?? Lol
-
LOL… The thing is that many people don’t understand that Falcon is actually an F-16 simulator, yes we do have some more planes available but still remains MAINLY an F-16 sim and thats why most of the systems are from F-16. People here, and im talking for the devs, took a 95-96% realistic sim and got it to 101% with improved graphics,mechanics,shaders, and more and more, but it still remains an F-16 Sim , a sim that even some real fighter pilots using around the world for training or for fun. Doesn’t this say something? To my perspective it would be wiser to fix bugs,add other options,enhance certain mechanics,move to a newer DX engine and then not import new fighters that no-one actually knows anything about them but try to make better models for the existing ones. I prefer more Eye-candy than see a new f-35 for example or whatever new aircraft exists out there. Community here is based on each individual that is active in this forum and contributed with the smallest thing or idea NOT to make a “fake” fm or system for a new fighter but to enhance the quality and what BMS has to offer us now…
This, I’m often too scared to reply with a comment saying “it’s an F-16 sim!!” because I don’t want to upset those that like to fly the Bug etc, but at the end of the day, it IS an F-16 sim. It would be cool if the team had all the resources to do what they’re doing AND make the other jets as realistic as the Viper currently is, but in reality they don’t. If you want to fly many planes, modelled averagely to good, go fly DCS. If you want a sim that models the F-16 VERY accurately, then stick to the king, BMS.
-
Hehe Me trully think that DJ is talking way too much trying to be informative (based on its own individual comprehension of the direction we are visibly taking inside the team) and should remains tight lips like many other devs, considering that BMS has no communication’s policies and no official voice. (Furthermore, I take the risks to have the legs broken by my own team mates lol).
So I guess that Red Dog got a good point here (I am not talking about the fact that thrust vectoring has nothings to deal with radar or avionics so to say) : Rather than giving from time to time few words about what is not to be expected since we can’t advertise on what is to be expected in the future because it is against BMS traditional common practice, I “should” better say nothing at all. At … all. Dam! He is so right after all! I mean … When people don’t like to be told what they don’t want to hear, the best is certainly to let them dream. Then after, good surprise, or less good surprise, after all, who really cares? It is free. There are no customers here.
Have a Falcon day gents.
Legs? So we have a leg breaker AND a neck breaker on the dev team?
-
Is there an actual roadmap of thing you devs are making or want to make for the next release?
I think you guys should stop answers to thread like this and create a single thread where you put all the WIP work and a “DEVS wishlist”.
This could even help you ease your work, i.e. you want a new detailed Osan air base, people can see it in your wishlist and can work to make it true and donate it.The message should be “You want something new on BMS? Good , work for it!”
-
Is there an actual roadmap of thing you devs are making or want to make for the next release?
I think you guys should stop answers to thread like this and create a single thread where you put all the WIP work and a “DEVS wishlist”.
Oh no, no. BMS is TOP SECRET SQUIRREL STUFF!!! No can do!!!
C9
-
Hehe Me trully think that DJ is talking way too much trying to be informative (based on its own individual comprehension of the direction we are visibly taking inside the team) and should remains tight lips like many other devs, considering that BMS has no communication’s policies and no official voice. (Furthermore, I take the risks to have the legs broken by my own team mates lol).
So I guess that Red Dog got a good point here (I am not talking about the fact that thrust vectoring has nothings to deal with radar or avionics so to say) : Rather than giving from time to time few words about what is not to be expected since we can’t advertise on what is to be expected in the future because it is against BMS traditional common practice, I “should” better say nothing at all. At … all. Dam! He is so right after all! I mean … When people don’t like to be told what they don’t want to hear, the best is certainly to let them dream. Then after, good surprise, or less good surprise, after all, who really cares? It is free. There are no customers here.
Have a Falcon day gents.
Amen mate.
As a moderator i must enforce the forum rules, and one of this rule is that BMS dev doesn’t talk or show pictures about ongoing development, and indeed my moderator feeling is that too many dev talk way too much in here.
It is tolerated somehow, but the added traffic we see lately is starting to get confusing because of lack of common strategy and this is exactly what i wanted to bring with my striking remark before it gets out of handI thank you for your understanding and i hope your usual friends will undertand as well
-
@Red:
Amen mate.
As a moderator i must enforce the forum rules, and one of this rule is that BMS dev doesn’t talk or show pictures about ongoing developmentI don’t see anything in the forum rules that states that??? Please direct!!
C9
-
None of your concern mate, unless you’re a dev
-
The strategy of BMS is very clear though
The strategy is to not have a strategy
People are free to work on what they like provided that this is done with quality and fidelity
-
What’s the next…!
That is not always a good question. Some could mean, that what we have isn’t good enough no longer…, maybe even boring. But that is for sure not an issue from the mod!
But also can this question raise an incentive. But, and IMO, only, if it comes here and there, and rare.
As I began with BMS, I jumped into a cold water, and it pleased me (only two: head tracking, clickable cockpit), what I can do with the mod…, only flying at that time!
To me, there is still not such a question, “What comes next?”.
As long as the devs are developing, there is coming new, or better, that is for sure.That is to me still that cold water, that I love, even when I still would have questions (to the devs).
So, dear devs, hurry up! The next release is in three, four weeks! I’m curious…
Ah, and “This old engine…”:
If you have a truck engine, it is a truck engine. If you have a racing engine, it is a racing engine. If you have a F-16 engine, it is a F-16 engine. A.s.o…For sure has this engine its limits. But, this engine needs no help! There are still times, where I “wonder” how stable the sim (still) is.
All it needs, is to know how to handle this engine, and/or to have the ability to implement (e.g. source code).
All the “rest” is love, time, power…My (single) 2c, and with best regards
Earlybite -
The strategy of BMS is very clear though
The strategy is to not have a strategy
People are free to work on what they like provided that this is done with quality and fidelity
We love when NO plans comes together
-
I just want to fly the 16 in VR…. please? Pretty please?? Lol
That would need DirectX 11 first so not gonna happen anytime soon.
-
Wait… the biggest problem with bms is that it doesn’t have an F-35? lmfao
Can we just stick to improving 80’s/90’s f-16 and campaign.
There are plenty of things left to do. Can the SAM operators behave more intelligently like in Allied Force? Can Buk and SA-10 shoot down HARMs and glide bombs? Why don’t people ask for these kinds of features…Intelligent and devious SAM operators sounds like a great idea!
-
@Cloud:
Oh no, no. BMS is TOP SECRET SQUIRREL STUFF!!! No can do!!!
C9
once you cross the squirrels and OPSEC labels you a Doolittle, it’s all over.
CHIRP CHIRP
-
Its a down hill slide, :boxing:
All I want is a 2560x1440 UI, and my two front teeth . so I can again :second:
-
Its a down hill slide, :boxing:
All I want is a 2560x1440 UI, and my two front teeth . so I can again :second:
that could be a “Oi santa claus you ****” moment for xmas
-
@Switch:
That would need DirectX 11 first so not gonna happen anytime soon.
But, If i take a trackir, The i take a vr and i use the cable of my screen? Shouldn’t be that kindoff a VR?