Why no cinematic replays in BMS?
-
This feature would be a pure gold for filmmakers.
-
FRAPS? If you have one, Nvidia in-game recording?
External views are the problem. You can’t save an epic sortie/dogfight and then show it off from multiple angles by using fraps. It’s a staple feature in all flying game ans sims - you fly and then you kick back and relieve the experience from outisde views, and multiple camera angles. In BMS this can only be done via multiplayer where somebody else is spectating you.
@I-Hawk:Someone need to seat and code it. It’s doable for sure, but not a walk in the park.
I too think its doable. The devil is in the detail and maybe the problem isn’t as doable as we think, perhaps someone with first hand knowledge of the source code can chime in? Without going into interface integration, the solution seems like: save parameters at the mission start > record player’s ingame input> feed BMS the same mission with the recording providing the input instead of the player.
Is BMS source code open btw? -
You already got answers from a dev and
no code is not open sourceGesendet von meinem SM-G930F mit Tapatalk
-
aI will never react the same there are plenty of different tactics based on randomization of many parameters etc
To me that is just not doable to imagine replaying the same mission
, the only thing doable would be to be able from the acmi to regenerate the same movement with world rendering
That would be pure rendering and not at all running the game code
-
You already got answers from a dev and
no code is not open sourceYou mean Icer or I-Hawk? Shame about the open source Although FreeFalcon must have like 99% similarity with regards to code structure, right?
aI will never react the same there are plenty of different tactics based on randomization of many parameters etc
To me that is just not doable to imagine replaying the same mission
, the only thing doable would be to be able from the acmi to regenerate the same movement with world rendering
That would be pure rendering and not at all running the game code
Randomisation need not be a problem if you seed your random numbers:
import random
random.random()
0.6274896045266434
random.random()
0.771377618674317
random.random()
0.22547456218942896
random.seed(1)
random.random()
0.13436424411240122
random.seed(1)
random.random()
0.13436424411240122
random.seed(1)
random.random()
0.13436424411240122 -
, the only thing doable would be to be able from the acmi to regenerate the same movement with world rendering
That would be pure rendering and not at all running the game code
I think that’s what this suggestion was about in first place, ultimately. We don’t need to run the game code, AI and all that, we just need updated graphics for the old ACMI viewer so we can make cool videos with it.
The entire problem with doing it DCS-style is that it’s failure-prone. BMS already has a replay system, and other than graphics, nothing important seems to be missing from it. Any other solution would be overthinking it for no good reason.
-
BMS already has a replay system, and other than graphics, nothing important seems to be missing from it. Any other solution would be overthinking it for no good reason.
Simple and brilliant . . . I bet $20 someone is already working on that right now haha
-
I think that’s what this suggestion was about in first place, ultimately. We don’t need to run the game code, AI and all that, we just need updated graphics for the old ACMI viewer so we can make cool videos with it.
The entire problem with doing it DCS-style is that it’s failure-prone. BMS already has a replay system, and other than graphics, nothing important seems to be missing from it. Any other solution would be overthinking it for no good reason.
The problem with ACMI is that, poor res graphics aside, it has super-simplified physics, the planes just do not move in a believable way, all the nuances like working suspension, wobbling bombs and wingtips are out of the window. Even if ACMI had the full graphics engine, it’s just not meant for cinematic stuff, its replays would not do Falcon BMS justice.
DCS-style replay approach is failure prone, yes, but it works for graphics as well as physics and it’s implementation is feasible without changes to architecture. Record strings of input, seed random stuff of the AI to make it deterministic, relaunch mission with recorded input instead of live input. What could possibly go wrong? (famous last words:)) I thought about glancing into FreeFalcon, but its source code is broken apparently, plus I’m too busy with my studies
-
:tjacked:
Simple and brilliant . . . I bet $20 someone is already working on that right now haha
@Dega …. Hey … just noticed your signature picture.
Attended a corporate event held at Miramar in 2014 and VMM-161 Greyhawks were our hosts. Got a challenge coin souvenir (proceeds to fund enlisted Marines to attend the Marine Corps Ball).
Semper Fi.
/ThreadJack
-
:tjacked:
@Dega …. Hey … just noticed your signature picture.
Attended a corporate event held at Miramar in 2014 and VMM-161 Greyhawks were our hosts. Got a challenge coin souvenir (proceeds to fund enlisted Marines to attend the Marine Corps Ball).
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49924912157_44e8fd0ed3_o.jpg
Semper Fi./ThreadJack
Very cool!! when I was in, we were still flying CH-46 Sea Knights!
-
The problem with ACMI is that, poor res graphics aside, it has super-simplified physics, the planes just do not move in a believable way, all the nuances like working suspension, wobbling bombs and wingtips are out of the window. Even if ACMI had the full graphics engine, it’s just not meant for cinematic stuff, its replays would not do Falcon BMS justice.
They absolutely do move in a believable way, because they move exactly the same as during the mission. All this wobbling, suspension compression and so on is rendered based on flight data such as altitude, airspeed and G load, which are saved. ACMI does not have physics, simplified or otherwise. It’s a recording, and if a plane was recorded in a given condition, its model can be animated just as if these things were being computed on the fly. In fact, it may have better performance because you can precalculate this motion and not do it in real time. It’s, as they say, a small matter of programming.
-
I’ve recorded two videos- one ACMI and one straight from the game with outside views and similar actions. ACMI is not as bad as I thought it was, but the physics of plane behaviour are still off. It is almost like the the physics rate is cut from 60Hz (no idea about BMS actual physics rate) to 15Hz at most. The plane still nods on braking and still rocks its wings , but inertia seems to be off, the oscillations are fewer etc etc
ACMI
In game/sim