Some suggestions for improvements for the next versions -4.5 ?
-
@gusva said in Some suggestions for improvements for the next versions -4.5 ?:
@mav-jp I will concentrate the two answers here
It’s good to know that there is already a tool that does this GFS data import, I didn’t know it was already implemented. The Item (Season) that is in the graphics configuration could be in the Weather part of the BMS following the local date time, it’s another idea that also came up.
If all these data effects are already implemented, I haven’t seen them, forgive me. I hope the graphical improvements of the weather effects get more mature with the next versions.
Thanls
Yes go and see here
https://forum.falcon-bms.com/topic/8267/f4wx-real-weather-converter/420
As far as seasons are concerned , yes this is already implemented in weather with automatic date and so on but it’s for next versions
-
- Is it possible to develop BMS with DirectX 12?
- Another question will have the use of these features of these new boards such as RTX?
- In the cloud development will the cumulus shadow be included like the image below?
-
BMS 4.35 is already magnificent and Thanks to all BMS Dev!
I suggest a small improvement, that is to make sure that the option “Setup, Controller” can ensure to write a valid .key file (keystroke file) which conforms to the needs of the simulator.The main difficulty for those who do not have a good command of computers is to modify the configuration of their HOTAS so that it is functional.
Currently, the SAVE or APPLY option generates or induces some errors in the keystroke file!
I sincerely believe that forcing users to write directly to this file via a text editor rather than relying on the original module included in the simulator is a bad direction which undermines the user experience and should be corrected in a way priority.This is my personal opinion, but I know that here I have to constantly troubleshoot users who may lose interest with a semi-functional module. Already playing in a .key file requires good technical knowledge. I really hope this annoyance will be corrected in a near future.
-
@gusva
Well BMS 4…35 is first release ported to DX11 not even really using much of its features, no point to move to nex-gen apis like DX12/Vulkan.
It was discussed many times, you see, MSFS 2020 first release was DX11. DX12 port is here for just a week or two.
It’ll take years before DX11 won’t be enough for BMS.
As for raytracing and other stuff, well it’s my personal opinion, but too small gain in visuals for huge perf hit, not worth it at the moment.
Pretty water reflactions are not so important in combat flightsims and clouds shading can be done quite efficiently in different ways. -
@xeno or consider your answer to Saifer here as well.
My question about using the most of the new features of this RTX line cards, for example, goes against this lighting feature that “blinds” the screen by the excess light when the sun is at your back.
Thanks for the clarification on DX11, good to know how the script for features like DX12 / Vulkan is doing.
About the shadings I have a slightly different opinion from yours, these are details that added up greatly improve the combat experience, yes the shadings require resources from the video cards, but currently we have cards with more than twice the resources of those that were top-of-the-line in the graphical version of the BMS in its latest version. Just as lighting on panels degrades visibility, shadows on buildings, trees or clouds are very important.
The Idea is rather to make a Braimstorm so that we can have a wish list that in the near future can be implemented or discussed.
In fact, we have a lot to thank these heroes who develop and we’ve already reached a very high level in the BMS.
This post is not a critique it is a wish that always takes this great project to one level.
-
@gusva
I believe none of the features we’re talking strictly requires raytracing.
Yes RT lights and shadows would be of highest fidelity, but both can be done using other techniques with quite plausible results for much less perf hit, which for even todays strongest GPUs is still a problem. -
@101-spyder said in Some suggestions for improvements for the next versions -4.5 ?:
BMS 4.35 is already magnificent and Thanks to all BMS Dev!
I suggest a small improvement, that is to make sure that the option “Setup, Controller” can ensure to write a valid .key file (keystroke file) which conforms to the needs of the simulator.The main difficulty for those who do not have a good command of computers is to modify the configuration of their HOTAS so that it is functional.
Currently, the SAVE or APPLY option generates or induces some errors in the keystroke file!
I sincerely believe that forcing users to write directly to this file via a text editor rather than relying on the original module included in the simulator is a bad direction which undermines the user experience and should be corrected in a way priority.This is my personal opinion, but I know that here I have to constantly troubleshoot users who may lose interest with a semi-functional module. Already playing in a .key file requires good technical knowledge. I really hope this annoyance will be corrected in a near future.
Hello pilot use Falcon BMS Alternative Launcher (Easy Setup, Keep Joystick Assignments) and all your problems will be solved, wonderful tool created by the hand of the master @chihirobelmo
-
Good to know that there is a good alignment of the development team with this feature.
Raytracing would be of use with what effect on BMS? -
16 years ago, when I was coding with FF team, people were pushing for Dx9 (at the time, we were at Dx7). It was a similar reaction to what we see here, ppl thought that simply upgrading the API would make all magic happen.
By then, the lead coder told me: we barely use Dx7 features. It is useless to go DX9 now. We better use the full power of DX7 and only then worry about upgrading.
This guy was wise, one of the best coders I have seen in action. Even today, after 16 years, I still remember his advices. In fact, I learned a lot from him.
The main point, again, is: going DX12 will do no magic. To really have ray tracing and other features, we must fully rewrite graphics engine. This is a HUGE task, believe. BMS team barely finished the move to Dx11 (and took us a lot of effort to fix the issues caused by that, as you saw in U2).
So, don’t expect this move anytime soon. OTOH, you can expect great things from Dx11 engine currently in place.
-
@seifer I agree with the development leader, DX11 is quite new and it’s worth exploring as much as possible before moving to DX12. I know the big difference from DX12 is higher FPS, but it’s worth saturating the BMS of these features requested above to then migrate to a more mature DX12/Vulkan.
-
Thank to the Devs for all the fine work to date. Here’s a couple suggestions that might be a nice project for somebody.
-
The A-10 Warthog Cockpit
Would love to see more work go into the cockpit for this jet, especially if it were possible to simulate the twin throttle for those of us who own TM Warthog HOTAS, that would be amazing. A decent ramp start sequence would be a welcome addition. -
AV-8B Harrier Cockpit
If it were possible to have the nozzles mapped to the friction control slider on the TM Warthog HOTAS that would be a great asset and make it more realistic. The glitches that seem to bounce the Harrier around on deck (or tarmac) sound like the flaps are making adjustments constantly. -
The F-14 Tom Cat Cockpit
This would become a very popular flight model if more work was put into the cockpit controls. At the moment they are pretty much non existent.
I would rather see more work on this than worrying about weather or terrain graphics, but this my opinion and in no way a criticism of the great work the devs do for the BMS community.
Fantastic job chaps! Please keep up the great work!.
Kavelenko.
-
-
@gusva said in Some suggestions for improvements for the next versions -4.5 ?:
@xeno or consider your answer to Saifer here as well.
My question about using the most of the new features of this RTX line cards, for example, goes against this lighting feature that “blinds” the screen by the excess light when the sun is at your back.
Thanks for the clarification on DX11, good to know how the script for features like DX12 / Vulkan is doing.
About the shadings I have a slightly different opinion from yours, these are details that added up greatly improve the combat experience, yes the shadings require resources from the video cards, but currently we have cards with more than twice the resources of those that were top-of-the-line in the graphical version of the BMS in its latest version. Just as lighting on panels degrades visibility, shadows on buildings, trees or clouds are very important.
The Idea is rather to make a Braimstorm so that we can have a wish list that in the near future can be implemented or discussed.
In fact, we have a lot to thank these heroes who develop and we’ve already reached a very high level in the BMS.
This post is not a critique it is a wish that always takes this great project to one level.
Hi, FYI feature-wise DX12 is almost exactly same as DX11. The main advantage of DX12/Vulkan over DX11 is that they allow parallel access to the DirectX context, means you can generate more draw calls from many threads. However… and that is a VERY important point for this discussion: If your GPU is already breathing hard and utilized ~100% capacity, then common sense makes me believe it won’t gain much from launching more draw calls from other threads. I think DX12/Vulkan would be much more effective for an app that doesn’t utilize the GPU 100% all the time. I can tell you that with “future” BMS stuff that isn’t the situation, GPU is 100% utilized ALL THE TIME with DX11. I think that the gain from DX12/Vulkan in this case will be minimal.
That said, of course DX12/Vulkan have some nice features above DX11 - For example if there is 1 thing I’ll REALLY like to have is to be able to mix different texture resolutions in a single texture-array, unfortunately that isn’t possible with DX11. Also maybe Tiled-resources could be of use if we had that (Available with DX11.3 but we can’t go there as it forces Win10 and for now we are against that).
Talks about ray tracing are nice, but some of those implementations are really sophisticated and not easy to achieve and yet will cost a lot in terms of performance. A flight sim is always more demanding compared to FPS games, and having ray-tracing running everywhere will be too much of a performance hit, even for very strong GPUs. We in BMS when developing stuff think about both beauty/quality but also about keeping sane performance, because a combat flight sim cannot be used if performance is marginal all the time.
Nice pic there with the cumulus shadows. I believe however that there are more urgent features to implement and achieve before going for such “niche” stuff. BTW I don’t think it would be such a big deal to generate such shadow map and use it on everything, will see, but there are bigger concerns with higher priority, maybe sometime later
-
Would the possibility of having a re-arming feature in any of the alternative or main operating bases too far fetch?
-
@lmr-74 Sorry but that will never happen for the simple reason that it takes time to reload an aircraft and the best would be to refrag a flight…
We are not DCS…
-
@lmr-74 Re-arming is actually not an easy process, it needs winches to lift 1 ton bombs, it needs several people for a long time to put 2 pairs of Mk84 plus two tanks cost can take more than an hour or two. In addition to making several checklists for aircraft delivery, rearmament and readiness for the next flight.
Anything like that doesn’t make sense in the BMS, it’s not a race car pitstop.
-
@kavelenko I don’t see this as a priority, since the BMS is an F-16 simulator, it has all the systems geared towards that end. Each such aircraft would need to implement each system on each aircraft.
I’m putting some desirable points to be improved on the F-16 alone.
-
Thanks for the explanation, I didn’t have this knowledge about DX11 and DX12 features, I agree with the folks above that they should focus on fully implementing DX11.
The question about shadows I will disagree with you a bit and yes I should put it as an additional feature with the option to be disabled for those who do not have a proper GPU. Details are important for every BMS enhancement.
About Raytracing, RTX boards are here to stay and soon they should enter the Roadmap
-
-
@gusva said in Some suggestions for improvements for the next versions -4.5 ?:
I can see that you are part of the high level team at the BMS. A suggestion that I had put a while ago is in the lower topic, is there a way to improve the ecm panel without bumping into the classifield and not getting so arcade?
It’s actually happening
-
Hello everyone, continuing with the ideas for future versions of the simulator, something that I would like you to add is the possibility of communicating and using ground troops such as the JTAC and the like.