Long life Falcon BMS
-
Dear colleagues, a few days ago I bought the DCS module of the F-18 the graphics are impressive and the avionics very realistic, but it does not even reach the bottom of the shoes to the engine of the falconBMS campaign. Long live the falcon BMS, with it you can enjoy a lot. If Falcon BMS artists achieve only 10 percent better quality on some terrain graphics, we have Falcon BMS for the long haul. Thank you very much BMS team
I must also say that the missiles in DCS go like the ass. BMS exceeds it in many more aspects even in the multiplayer but here the only thing that is needed is to show drastically the graphic environment and with the possibility of VR. I have my doubts if they can do it and if other things will not be damaged, I know how it was previously programmed and today the story has changed a lot. Luck BMS Team and Long Life.
-
-
I have my doubts if they can do it and if other things will not be damaged
Not questions of “ifs” anymore, just “whens”
-
Hhmmm…
For the Empire to strike back? Or do you think it’s Rebelllion’s time coming? :uham:JFK.
With best regards.
-
Hhmmm…
For the Empire to strike back? Or do you think it’s Rebelllion’s time coming? :uham:JFK.
With best regards.
XD XD XD It is the time of rebellion to release the code and leave it to the community.
-
XD XD XD It is the time of rebellion to release the code and leave it to the community.
LOL… and that will be the end of this sim
-
LOL… and that will be the end of this sim
Yep. If everyone gets their “paws” on the code, everything will break and the community will have bits and pieces of what we have now. NOT something I want to see.
-
LOL… and that will be the end of this sim
Yep, as much as I love opensource way, in this case releasing code quite likely would end up in disaster. Mostly due to Falcon 4 intellectual property owners. BMS still could be considered Falcon4 derivative, so any release of the sources could cause clash with Billionsoft.
No good is gonna ever come out of such situation. -
Other than the fact that lots of people think open sourcing BMS is a bad idea there is the history of Falcon in which “almost” such a thing occurred, minus the licensing. Source code was leaked, modders worked on source code and thus multiple versions of Falcon were born, OpenFalcon, FreeFalcon, etc … The code became fragmented with devs/modders working on different versions for different reason until it all came together into one unifying code base which eventually became Falcon BMS. Open sourcing would be the worst thing “next to stopping development on it” one could do to Falcon BMS. History has shown this already.
-
pretty much gets to the point, indeed we need graphics that matches DCS graphics.
-
pretty much gets to the point, indeed we need graphics that matches DCS graphics.
(At the risk of starting up the age old “but DCS has X” war)
Need? No.
Personally, I don’t want it either. But that’s personal preference. I find DCS just a bit too much graphically. It’s not realistic, though it is pretty, and it’s really hard on the eyes when in the cockpit. I find the same with IL2.
Yeah, ground textures could be prettier in BMS. But that’s not, for me, any sort of an issue. The realism of the sim, the community around it, and the campaign engine are just a few of the reasons why I am a BMS fan.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
LOL… and that will be the end of this sim
In other times it was like that and it was not so bad to Falcon, in fact I take a lot of work from third parties. The only thing I mean is that Falcon never be forgotten for a company that does not want or be interested to continue with this project. When that happens, please :hail: ask that the code is released so that others can take the generational relief.
Meanwhile I am happy with the hands on which it is.
-
Falcon BMS code cannot be open for licence reasons…
Even without that, opening the code to public would mean it would be a mess… No more control over what is being injected and if what is injected is good / true…
-
Even without that, opening the code to public would mean it would be a mess… No more control over what is being injected and if what is injected is good / true…
Agree 100%…
-
We’ve been there with FreeFalcon already. And what a hot mess that was…
-
Yes and no.
DCS graphics would likely tank performance, even though it would look slick.
-
pretty much gets to the point, indeed we need graphics that matches DCS graphics.
If for this, wait 3 or 4 Falcon weeks only, and you’ll see.
I’m in the queue, BTW.
With best regards.
-
Falcon BMS code cannot be open for licence reasons…
Even without that, opening the code to public would mean it would be a mess… No more control over what is being injected and if what is injected is good / true…
Totally according to that you are right :doh:
-
I may take a ride in this thread and ask a question I have hold for a long time…. Just Curiosity NOT a request or suggestion.
Regarding the CODE, How far can the Devs go? What are the limits? I ask that because there are a lot of things in the Wishlist in the “link 16 things you want….” thread and I’ve been wondering how many of that wishes are, in fact, feasible (always regarding the CODE, not the Devs willingness). Some crazy exemples that don’t need to be answered, they are just for illustration:
Can the Devs create a F-18 with Full Callbacks and RL cockpit/avionics, like the F-16, if they wish to (perhaps, all aircraft in a theater? Or, perhaps, make an improvement in the Dynamic Campaign and add more active countries in the war? Make you actually WIN a Campaign when flying for the REDs? Or Create a 256 segments Theater? Create a position on ground where a player can be the FAC and illuminate a target with laser? (I know, I pushed this one :D) What is the limit? Manpower, time and willingness or there are limits within the CODE itself that restrain some developments?
Thanks, again, its just curiosity. I am not a programmer but I like the matter.
Cheers :yo:
-
I may take a ride in this thread and ask a question I have hold for a long time…. Just Curiosity NOT a request or suggestion.
Regarding the CODE, How far can the Devs go? What are the limits? I ask that because there are a lot of things in the Wishlist in the “link 16 things you want….” thread and I’ve been wondering how many of that wishes are, in fact, feasible (always regarding the CODE, not the Devs willingness). Some crazy exemples that don’t need to be answered, they are just for illustration:
Can the Devs create a F-18 with Full Callbacks and RL cockpit/avionics, like the F-16, if they wish to (perhaps, all aircraft in a theater? Or, perhaps, make an improvement in the Dynamic Campaign and add more active countries in the war? Make you actually WIN a Campaign when flying for the REDs? Or Create a 256 segments Theater? Create a position on ground where a player can be the FAC and illuminate a target with laser? (I know, I pushed this one :D) What is the limit? Manpower, time and willingness or there are limits within the CODE itself that restrain some developments?
Thanks, again, its just curiosity. I am not a programmer but I like the matter.
Cheers :yo:
As far as I’ve heard so far, matter of time mainly.