The future of BMS
-
-
Well, I’m a total newb here, but I have been playing around with this sim on and off since it came out. This will be the first BMS install I have done and from what I can see, I can’t wait ! It looks to me like they have done an absolutely amazing job at keeping this Falcon flying. Thank you all. :bowd::clap2::thumb:
-
Well, I’m a total newb here, but I have been playing around with this sim on and off since it came out. This will be the first BMS install I have done and from what I can see, I can’t wait ! It looks to me like they have done an absolutely amazing job at keeping this Falcon flying. Thank you all. :bowd::clap2::thumb:
Welcome back then, after todays troll this is a welcome read, even more so for a first post. Enjoy!
-
Molni you’re looking picture. I’m looking picture.
From a development perspective, everything I said is true. Shaders, heat blur, or 100k poly are only 3 VERY specific, and small pieces to graphics. Better tree generation? Terrain texturing? More detailed models so you can tell what vehicles are what without having to zoom in with TGP? Realistic ground structures? UI enhancements? 2D Map? Moving Map? Higher resolution MFDs? But those are all aesthetic, DX11/12 vs DX9 has orders of magnitude better performance when done correctly. DX12 especially because the queue system is specifically designed for multi-core/multi-proc systems. Imagine if you could remove the graphics processing currently being shared between CPU and GPU to only the GPU, while simultaneously improving the graphics…which eliminates much of the need for limited texture slots in theater, or forcing objectives to be pre-defined to a limited number, or forcing all ground units to be defined in a DB. Because the extra CPU cycles that were dedicated to helping the graphics engine are now free for program use. What about being able to actually see a ground vehicle from above 1500 feet, regardless of the underlying terrain? Would that be better for tactical modeling in an HC sim? Being able to differentiate similar looking buildings on the ground by a visual cue instead of only using pre-planned targets? Accurate low level terrain generation and appearance regardless of altitude? All graphics related.
Yes. But they have 0 impact on IR sensor modeling, bombs does not have random inaccuracy effect by random wind, etc just because of better graphics. Using of the “every” word was an over statement. Or what about weather? It looks amazing comparing to old times but AI simply see through fog and rain and can kill you with IR MANPAD. (Even in DCS is just eye cand the weather as I know.
-
Sigh… yes you are correct. It does not enhance every individual feature of every individual aspect of gameplay. Only every aspect of gameplay. Which is awfully close to what I said before. Does weather enhance the flying portion of gameplay? Do better explosions enhance the combat portion of gameplay? Would better ground effects and smoke trails make a better MANPAD engagement experience? I never said they enhance every feature. Only every aspect of the game, which means the general aspects of the game at large.
-
Hmmm reading all those and new dcs members kinda verifying it… Makes one wonder about why the 1st sqdrn changed from BMS to DCS as their main platform.
Not that it really matters but they seemed to be deeply on the sim thing and one would believe that they would consider all those mentioned factors. They were USA members mostly as it was assumed, so the m2k wouldn’t be a reason, so that leaves us with the f-15 and the newcomer f-18.
Also as long as I recall they must be the one and only that made that transition.
There were and are others that from the start were flying both or they were open to use both if members wanted, but I can’t recall any other BMS dedicated that switched to DCS.Στάλθηκε από το MI 5 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
-
Lets see what will happens in the next few years. IMHO, we can keep them a place warm here. Not impossible to see them back one day.
-
I bet 95% of the haters that claims “graphic sux!!1!!1!” has never touched even a single 3d model tool in their life.
-
I bet 95% of the haters that claims “graphic sux!!1!!1!” has never touched even a single 3d model tool in their life.
+1… but seeing Radium doing those models so fast and so great then you give them ground to stand for. :lol:
-
Hmmm reading all those and new dcs members kinda verifying it… Makes one wonder about why the 1st sqdrn changed from BMS to DCS as their main platform.
Not that it really matters but they seemed to be deeply on the sim thing and one would believe that they would consider all those mentioned factors. They were USA members mostly as it was assumed, so the m2k wouldn’t be a reason, so that leaves us with the f-15 and the newcomer f-18.
Also as long as I recall they must be the one and only that made that transition.
There were and are others that from the start were flying both or they were open to use both if members wanted, but I can’t recall any other BMS dedicated that switched to DCS.Στάλθηκε από το MI 5 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
Both sims have their strengths. Neither are better or worse, just different. Don’t want to get into a debate about it because I won’t convince you nor do I want to. As long as you are enjoying your sim of choice that’s all that matters.
Our reason was after 10 years our group needed a change. Simple as that. It had nothing to do with graphics though lol. And I still think BMS is an amazing sim. That hasn’t changed.
Edit: Can a mod remove admin from my user title? I can’t remove that. Thx
-
+1… but seeing Radium doing those models so fast and so great then you give them ground to stand for. :lol:
It takes pratice , knowledge and time to be at that level.
Some think it’s obvious and easy , I would love see them unwrappin an Hi-poly model for free in their spare time instead of playin Far Cry 5 with an overclocked 1080ti complaining it gets under 100 fps.And we are only talking about 3d models… I won’t even mind adding features to a 20yo code written by others with an obsolete graphic engine , compatibility issue with modern OS/drivers/etc …
Guess what? As for now BMS is at an outstanding level if you consider is f****n FREE.
-
Both sims have their strengths. Neither are better or worse, just different. Don’t want to get into a debate about it because I won’t convince you nor do I want to. As long as you are enjoying your sim of choice that’s all that matters.
Our reason was after 10 years our group needed a change. Simple as that. It had nothing to do with graphics though lol. And I still think BMS is an amazing sim. That hasn’t changed.
Edit: Can a mod remove admin from my user title? I can’t remove that. Thx
Well no reason to convince me.
You answered me.
I was just curious with what criteria the group decided to make the transition. -
Our reason was after 10 years our group needed a change. Simple as that. It had nothing to do with graphics though lol. And I still think BMS is an amazing sim. That hasn’t changed.
You will always have you place here and it will be with pleasure to see back there anytime. I will continue to enjoy your great videos … too bad that the future footages won’t be under BMS because they was a great showcases for BMS content. …
-
It takes pratice , knowledge and time to be at that level.
At this point I want to mention that IMHO Radium’s modelling level
and workflow at all is abnormal , and I often think this lad must be sick.
That said, I hope he’ll never call the doctor.On topic …
IMHO, 3 facts …
(A)
The future of BMS is bright and shiny and nothing you need to worry about,
except you want to contribute (code/data/models/manual, etc.)(B)
This sim will never die!
Some prefer beer, some prefer wine, some both and even more, LOL.
A useless discussion, so I’m getting tired reading DCS vs. Falcon BMS all over.Cheers, :yo:
LS -
At this point I want to mention that IMHO Radium’s modelling level
and workflow at all is abnormal , and I often think this lad must be sick.
That said, I hope he’ll never call the doctor.On topic …
IMHO, 3 facts …
(A)
The future of BMS is bright and shiny and nothing you need to worry about,
except you want to contribute (code/data/models/manual, etc.)(B)
This sim will never die!
Some prefer beer, some prefer wine, some both and even more, LOL.
A useless discussion, so I’m getting tired reading DCS vs. Falcon BMS all over.Cheers, :yo:
LS(D) I love LS
-
You can make as nince buliding models as you wish but as long as the city in Falcon is just some large building and rest is texture. In late '90s this was possible if you wished dyn. campaigns. This is a very old heritage of the big old ancestor.
-
Here’s a noob question which someone might be able to answer.
We are all aware that BMS uses F-16 avionics and bits for every aircraft in some fashion - this is not at all uncommon in flight simulators. General sims to combat sims, from X-Plane to Hornet, share similar constructs. The key is tweaking things to make the systems seem authentic for the individual airframe.
Let me give an example - I loved working the armament control panel of the A-10A in A-10 Attack! - I know a few of you here flew that one. However, a manual ACP is hard to do with the MFD-type controls used in the F-16. If it was possible to separate the individual menus from the aircraft’s computer, and “paste” only the specific functions to the manual ACP in the A-10… you might actually get a fairly realistic set-up.
That to me sounds like a key step in the modularizing the sim from the perspective of basic avionics… do we know how far off that is? I have to assume it’s harder than it sounds, but I also wonder if it’s easier than we think.
…Still thought this was an interesting question from my end - no one will answer?
-
It has been answered many times.
-
I observe, that posts about Falcon future (old, ugly, surpassed) appear before BMS major releases so it is probably part of the Falcon life cycle
-
I observe, that posts about Falcon future (old, ugly, surpassed) appear before BMS major releases
Hmmmm What a coincidence huh?….
I dont think so!