Mod: Using MSFS as rendering engine for Falcon BMS - and enable VR
-
Hello
NOTE: THIS IS AN OPTIONAL MOD, FALCON WOULD STILL WORK STANDALONE
A short intro:
We have developed the DCS for MSFS Mod, which allows pilots to fly MSFS aircraft with DCS flight physics.
See it in action on youtube. Download it here. Github here
Falcon BMS
FalconBMS is a great simulator, but facing an uphill battle regarding graphics. The more other sims advance graphics, the harder it will become to attract new players to BMS. Here is another way forward that may play to BMS’s strenghts while bypassing its weakness.
Since most of the work was alredy done in making MSFS accept external flight data, it would be fairly easy to adapt Falcon to render in MSFS. So my question is, would there be sufficient interest to bring FalconBMS to MSFS ?Stage 1
Intially, it would link only the flight model. This can be done fairly quick in 1-2 days. All that has to be done from code side is exporting the Falcon aircraft telemetry and flight surface positions over a socket connection, this is 2-3 pages of code not more. See how this is done for DCS. We are not experienced with Falcon modding so support from the BMS team is needed.Stage 2
Stage 2 would involve importing the 3D exterior model and cockpit for the F-16 to MSFS. This would allow to fly the FalconBMS aircraft in MSFS VR.Stage 3
Stage 3 would invlove importing enemy aircraft, missiles 3D models and effects to MSFS, so that missiles can be rendered in MSFS for aerial PvE combat.Stage 4
Stage 4 would involve importing ground targets to MSFS and linking the world locations. This would allow entire BMS campaigns to be played inside MSFS graphics. -
Interesting ideas and looking forward to VR.
What stage would the AI and campaign engine be available in MSFS? These are some of the most important ingredients in the BMS “special sauce”.
-
Cross posting from my reddit reply here, wasn’t going to “call my shot” here so much but here it is:
"4.37 is supposed to bring a new terrain system that is supposed to change the game for BMS and also VR, the later possibly sooner. But that is probably a year out at least realistically.4.36 is going to be out soon, probably before spring according to @Seifer, one of the BMS coders.
It is mostly “under the hood” upgrades with fog being the only new graphical feature. I’m calling my shot here, reading the tea leaves on the BMS boards, I bet the big new feature for it is other than F-16 avonics. But that’s just my guess."As someone pointed out over on Reddit, I don’t know how you could do the dynamic campaign. It is a very specialized thing within itself.
-
Here’s my first thought. And I will preface this by saying “There are probably many factors that have not occurred to me. This is probably a simplistic and somewhat naive reaction” With that said…
If it were really possible to have all of these things from BMS:
Flight model
3D cockpit
Avionics
Weapons Systems
Comms / ATCAnd have the world outside the cockpit be a smooth, high-fps implementation of the MSFS world. (With weapons effects like airplanes exploding and bombs exploding looking “authentic” to the MSFS world)
And have the BMS dynamic campaign still function,
And have multiplayer work as it currently does,
Then this would basically be the greatest home flight-simulator system that has ever existed. (Or, with maybe just a little bit of license, I might add “would ever be likely to exist”.)
A MSFS world outside the cockpit, while everything else is BMS, would be the perfect description of my ultimate dream.
But… I can see there could be a lot of “buts”.
I am curious to see what the new BMS terrain system looks like. Maybe this will come with 4.37. And I know some of the devs have been working very hard on it.
I wonder if all the "And"s I listed above are really possible. This is where I am probably most likely letting my “dreaming mind” run away with me, and maybe it’s not possible to meet all those conditions. My dream may be very unrealistic, I don’t know.
But my first reaction is that this would be a beautiful, wonderful thing to be able to use. I will be curious to see how it works out.
-
@bms-for-msfs
I think every would love to see real world scenery at a global level in BMS - why wouldn’t you. However, and I must preface this by saying I have never seen the BMS code, I think the 4-ohase plan above is probably a little naive. Trying to put BMS into MSFS is not simply taking aircraft models and locations, there are complex system models, campaign dynamics, etc. Not to mention having to ensure some base level of common terrain so that everyone is at least seeing the same objects, making sure they are interactive (can they be destroyed or is it all just eye candy), etc.Maybe I’m misinterpreting the approach, but I think bringing better scenery into BMS is “easier” than bringing BMS into a new scenery engine.
Nonetheless, I think the BMS Dev team knows best on how to proceed and if they feel this approach has merit, I’m sure someone will be in touch. There is no doubt in my mind that if a full globe of photorealistic scenery could happen, without compromising the fidelity of the BMS system and engine, everyone would love it.
-
BMS would have to iron out the legal issues between Tommo and Micrsoft. I do not see this ever happening. But carry on dreaming…
-
That’s a no from me. I’m much more interested in seeing where BMS goes with their own implementation of new scenery and VR. Hopefully with much better performance than you can get with MSFS
-
Full disclosure… I have no idea what I’m talking about.
As cool as that sounds it would probably turn out to be a nightmare to implement. Just look at the struggles PMDG are having/had with the lack of an SDK for getting their third party aircraft into MSFS. And they’re one of the big guns in the FS market.
Also, wouldn’t you be making BMS completly dependent upon the MSFS platform and the whims of MS/ASOBO who’s only priority is their own product?
I’ve only recently got introduced to BMS, but one thing is obvious - It’s because of a core group of passionate, unpaid devs that we have at least one uniquely hi-fidelty combat simulator. By the time you’d covered the sim in axle grease and crow barred it into the tempermental platform which is MSFS… well, I dread to think what you’d end up with.
-
@wallop BMS will always work standalone. This is an optional modification.
-
@bms-for-msfs In that case, subject to what has been said above, it sounds to me like its worth investigating.
-
@bms-for-msfs said in Mod: Using MSFS as rendering engine for Falcon BMS - and enable VR:
@wallop BMS will always work standalone. This is an optional modification.
Ah right, didn’t realise that.
I can see why it would appeal to some folks, especially the VR flyers. But for me as there’s no actual combat mechanic within MSFS it would just be a cockpit simulator and the novelty of flying Machloop type stuff around the globe would wear off pretty quickly.Wish you well with the project, I’m sure it would be well received by many in the MSFS community.
-
I fully agree here, it would be a very bad idea to hook up BMS with any commercial entity. I’d rather wait patiently for the next BMS iteration (be it graphics, avionics, new terrain or whatever) that’s a labour of love by a handful of very passionate people than throw my lot in with MSFS and the like.
There’s a place in the world for both products, I’m sure. Also, it’d probably be hell trying to get to work MSFS on Linux in WINE or similar
All the best, Uwe
-
This will never work
-
Strong Door-to-door salesman with the latest chromed vacuum-cleaner with space-age anti-static wheels and self-charging Vibe.
Have a good day.
/close door. /roll eyes. /return to Falcon.
-
Every now and then a sniper appears on the forum!
-
There is no way that the dynamic campaign engine could be ported over to MSFS, even if you could get the artwork from the Falcon models into that flight sim. Prove me wrong, I’d love to see it… but I’m not holding my breath.
-
Agreeing with most of the comments here with respect to the logistics being impractical if not impossible, were it to even succeed would anyone think it a good idea to put the game into the lap of MSFS where it would have to react to changes, updates, etc. by tying it into another sim? BMS has to stay independent and self reliant and it seems to be in very good, capable hands right now.
-
Well, aside I’m not a huge fan of such idea there are few things to consider.
How it is gonna work? Would MSFS be just a renderer and BMS handle inputs, sounds, physics etc … and assuming viper in MSFS would be just pretty but empty shell (otherwise there would have to be Viper modeled system-wise to the level of BMS in the MSFS)
If so then one would have to find a robust way to inject into MSFS- textures for MFDs and DED
- state of all the dials/indicators/switches/buttons/warning-caution lights
- fault display
and that’s that’s the easy part
also find a way to display - radio subtitles
- comms menu
- end/abort mission window (interactive)
That might be more difficult, but I guess it still might be doable.
Have perfectly synced terrain (to avoid floating or sunk into the ground objects, proper collision detection and so on) and to be fair I think that’s ain’t gonna happen just because the way terrain is handled in both sims is vastly different.
On top of that MSFS should be able to spawn/despawn all the deaggregated objects, including all the flying objects, ground units and buildings. That is huge amount of things to process and I’m not sure MSFS can handle such amount of objects.
Assuming somehow it woudn’t collide with terrain in MSFS.And even if by some black magic someone would be able to make sucha feat I’d suspect there would be tons of glitches and bugs due to floats rounding in the conversion of the data exchanged between sims and I’d be worried about performance (which btw isn’t MSFS 2020 strongest side).
I’m pretty sure BMS devs could put some more elaborate insight but I think what mav-jp said is spot on, so I think there’s no need to waste their time.
-
@xeno said in Mod: Using MSFS as rendering engine for Falcon BMS - and enable VR:
I’m pretty sure BMS devs could put some more elaborate insight but I think what mav-jp said is spot on, so I think there’s no need to waste their time.
We definitely have other priorities and as said, I don’t think you even have a slight idea how far we went on the new terrain
-
From various glimpses here and there I’d bet it’s progressing damn well and it’s gonna be awesome.
I agree on priorities. It’s kinda makes no sense at this point for you guys to waste your precious time to explain why exactly this idea might be not worth pursuing.I just don’t wanna to sound so negative, all in all everybody can do whatever he/she like even if I see no value in their venues.