What's up with those rumors
-
ED devs feedback handling;
-
It was posted this image in DCS topic as I can remember.
Bah this is too small, There is a larger version somewhere in this forum
-
Rumors?
Cheers, :yo:
LSOn my little own, Iām more on this POV, Gentlemenā¦
I expressed my own wishes and expectations about the future of BMS at its time and in the proper topic.
After having done it, Iām leaving all the decisions to the devs., as due. Itās the BMS policy, as I learned, so I will wait patiently.
Also this time the wait will be worth of it, I believe.
Rumors? I positively never care of them.
Just my own little quarter here, but straight and clear.With best regards.
-
Whenever itāll come true or not I hope itāll bring two things: proper sense of scale(to me, even with tremendous efforts from BbMS team F4 world feels small) and provide data for interaction with weather /air mass model.
OTOH I wouldnāt mind it looking more like Aerofly FS2/X-Plane 11
-
proper sense of scale(to me, even with tremendous efforts from BbMS team F4 world feels small)
There is something which I still feel like checking regarding that. Sense of speed still lacks (Even with some more detailsā¦), I donāt know if itās a matter of real world-object proportions issues (Low chances though as if true, it means we were living in a lie all these years). The other option is that FOV is too large, that I know may have a huge effect on scale feeling and also on performance (Smaller FOV --> Higher performance).
-
Yep, sense of speed too. For world scale, maybe BMS terrain lacks proper resolution/dynamics (relative height differences), ground textures being at wrong scale or ground objects are too small I donāt know it just donāt feel right. Just take a look at videos from any other flightsim , be it FlightGear, Prep4r3d, X-Plane, Aerofly FS2, DCS, Il2 (maybe original 1946 lacks a bit sometimes), hell even 7g Hornet sim. Each one got the right feeling of vast area, massive mountains etcā¦
I just watched FS2 and X-Plane 11 videos from Innsbruck airport area. Damn it feels so fineā¦
Here just for tease
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=fs2+x-plane+11+innsbruck+ -
the thing terrifies me: topic with all the bugs, malfunctions wishes and rtfm that will not find place in the official site will end up here ā¦
Well we got answer ready. Does it look like this?
https://u.osu.edu/sabreelab/2014/06/04/bmsb-symbiont-paper-out-in-environmental-entomology/Then itās not BMS bug.
-
Meh. New terrain engine is honestly not really important to me at all. If it happens fine, but I really do not care about it that much as I do not fly BMS to look at the scenery. If I want to fly a milk run to look at pretty scenery Iāll fly my P3D or DCS installs. Even after I do that, I do not worry at all about scenery in BMS, so it therefore is not a big deal to me. Thanks devs for making a sim so good that high end scenery is not important to me!!!
-
Meh. New terrain engine is honestly not really important to me at all. If it happens fine, but I really do not care about it that much as I do not fly BMS to look at the scenery. If I want to fly a milk run to look at pretty scenery Iāll fly my P3D or DCS installs. Even after I do that, I do not worry at all about scenery in BMS, so it therefore is not a big deal to me. Thanks devs for making a sim so good that high end scenery is not important to me!!!
I disagree. A much higher res terrain engine can serve the following goals:
1. More smoother terrain can make more effective the low level flying because the LOS modeling.
2. You can have whatever wonderfully looking helos as long they do not have any terrain coverā¦
3. In case of AG weapon usage you have to consider more carefully how you release weapons because the trajectory of the weapon can cross the terrain before the impact = miss
4. If it will allow more 3D object they also can provide cover for helos or even GUs as the terrain.It is not the point to get more scenery but it also could provide as a side effect. It depends how you look on a HC simā¦
-
Yep, sense of speed too. For world scale, maybe BMS terrain lacks proper resolution/dynamics (relative height differences), ground textures being at wrong scale or ground objects are too small I donāt know it just donāt feel right. Just take a look at videos from any other flightsim , be it FlightGear, Prep4r3d, X-Plane, Aerofly FS2, DCS, Il2 (maybe original 1946 lacks a bit sometimes), hell even 7g Hornet sim. Each one got the right feeling of vast area, massive mountains etcā¦
I just watched FS2 and X-Plane 11 videos from Innsbruck airport area. Damn it feels so fineā¦
Here just for tease
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=fs2+x-plane+11+innsbruck+Yes I understand that Falcon terrain lacks details and so sense of speed will be REALLY limited. But the problem is that Iām already checking a ādifferentā animal, but even there I feel still that something is wrong, somehow.
-
I disagree. A much higher res terrain engine can serve the following goals:
1. More smoother terrain can make more effective the low level flying because the LOS modeling.
2. You can have whatever wonderfully looking helos as long they do not have any terrain coverā¦
3. In case of AG weapon usage you have to consider more carefully how you release weapons because the trajectory of the weapon can cross the terrain before the impact = miss
4. If it will allow more 3D object they also can provide cover for helos or even GUs as the terrain.It is not the point to get more scenery but it also could provide as a side effect. It depends how you look on a HC simā¦
Those points are valid, and I would welcome them, but not so important for me.
-
Iāve heard a few things too, but, nah, itās nothing, nevermind!! :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
C9
-
Yes I understand that Falcon terrain lacks details and so sense of speed will be REALLY limited. But the problem is that Iām already checking a ādifferentā animal, but even there I feel still that something is still wrong, somehow.
Youāre talking about lack of details on ground?
Yes lack details on ground gives pilot somehow limited view about speed his traveling. 1000 km/h doesnāt look fast in cockpit if terrain isnāt modeled well. -
Indeed, if isnātā¦
-
@M79:
Youāre talking about lack of details on ground?
Yes lack details on ground gives pilot somehow limited view about speed his traveling. 1000 km/h doesnāt look fast in cockpit if terrain isnāt modeled well.When I flew my first flights on fighter jet in low level (mmm ā¦ 17 years ago. :???:), what gave me the speed sensation wasnāt the ground details, but the rate of radio contacts traveling through the successive CTRs, the fuel & timing management ā¦ and the low wind drift compared to the single prop TB-30 which I was flying before. This is what I recall. Not the details of the ground.
-
When I flew my first flights on fighter jet in low level, what gave me the speed sensation wasnāt the ground details, but the rate of radio contacts traveling through the successive CTRs, the fuel & timing management ā¦ and the low wind drift compared to the single prop TB-30 which I was flying before. This is what I recall. Not the details of the ground.
I done my first aar after 6 long beers:) You probably donāt did it like me.
Details on ground still give me best offset to how fast Iām flying better if they look better. Maybe itās just feeling on sim and itās hard to describe. -
āSens of speedā given by a wide angle camera in low level flight.
-
Me, Im just disappointed I didnt download those videos when I had the chance.
okay, okay, spill the beans fella, you got me interested!
-
It was posted this image in DCS topic as I can remember.
ah, yes i remember that one!
-
I donāt know if itās a matter of real world-object proportions issues (Low chances though as if true, it means we were living in a lie all these years).
I just did a measurement and I can confirm that Falcon āworld sizeā is fine. I mean that the distance from 1 point to another measured by the F-16 speed in the sim is same as real world distance. So the āproblemā of sense of speed isnāt that.
āSens of speedā given by a wide angle camera in low level flight.
Hell, checking again now Iām even sure if we have a problem at allā¦ 1 thing I can see though, there is a real difference even between 100 and 400 feet AGL, I mean 100 feet feels MUCH faster.
I guess this point of sense of speed will need to get public feedback when the time comes, for me itās hard to judge.