Santa's wishlist for BMS
-
This post is deleted! -
@suhkoi69 said in On what grounds would you wish 4.37 to be developped?:
@Mav-jp said in On what grounds would you wish 4.37 to be developped?:
@Logic said in On what grounds would you wish 4.37 to be developped?:
Things like the 4.36 ext lighting implementation (although impressive) adds zero value for me.
i think you miss some important gameplay that goes with it
not only you are now able to see who is who based on the number of strobe flashes
but as lights are detectable by Enemy, fying covert gives you a tactical advantage
pos ligthings are also a plus for formation flying
detectable by ennemy : very interesting!
Supposedly this has been a thing discussed even back in the RP days, maybe original F4.0, but itās been a long time since Iāve seen it confirmed.
-
@Mav-jp - I was hoping for thisā¦fantastic!
-
@b0bl00i said in On what grounds would you wish 4.37 to be developped?:
-New renderer that actually looks like something from this century while support VR. Good and realistic lighting, proper height maps (sharp mountain peaks and ridges) crisp and sharp textures, ground decals, volumetric clouds, plenty of forests and buildings, huge draw distance, scalable spotting, updated plane models (Doesnāt have to be UE5 good looking but a heck lot better) ** highest prio
You are probably confusing us with M$ or that other sim which keep delivering unfinished alpha versions while the game itself stays unfinished and actually sandbox, forever (Yes forever, you read correctly).
BMS will do the graphical jump but donāt expect it to be a-la M$FS. We arenāt there and even if assuming we can get close, itāll take time (i.e years, so things will improve but not as fast as you think). We donāt have teams of Devs to develop every small graphical feature. What we can offer though is a graphical improvement that will come on top of an already working sim.
Regarding the 3D models: On what models are you talking really?
Our ugly F-16s? https://i.imgur.com/T56B7jd.png
Ugly B-52? https://i.imgur.com/DbAPGtl.jpeg
Ugly Rafal?: https://i.imgur.com/9AWm4C3.png
Ugly Flanker maybe? https://i.imgur.com/3CPZcOQ.png
Ugly EF? https://i.imgur.com/lB0Rj0e.png
Ugly F-4s maybe? https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/263474413909835776/968185715353608192/2022-04-25_192347.pngReally I need to know, because our 3D modelers are doing awesome work and you should show some respect for getting all that, for freeā¦
Iād be willing to chip in on the dev costs through Patreon.
Ha no - We donāt take money, and for sure we donāt work for anyone. This is a hobby for us and we do it for the fun and challenge.
-
Full JTAC
A-A SAM human control.
F-16 MFD - Moving map -selectable from avioncs config
FULL LINK16 implementation-PDLT
F-16D shared cockpit (New 3d D model Cockpit with details for each variant)
Autoupdate (hotfixes) function.
Repair option without dance!
NEW UI -But keep the buttons and menu orientation from legacy Falcon4.0 like it is now! (it is very important as āuser friendly marketingā to keep things for users simple as it was many many years before, like every old Falcon 4.0 -BMS simmer used to have with previous releases ,but renew them with new interface and images but keep UI orientation the same. Or
Total from scratch new UI -(VR &4K) friendly but we need sometime to used too ) -
A shared f-16D would be awesome.
-
@Geraki said in On what grounds would you wish 4.37 to be developped?:
A-A SAM human control.
Forget it. You could not model even an S-75M Volkhov properly it has so many function and submodes. If you wish to get ANY enjoyable SAM modeling simply the current EW - radar modeling part of the game can be rewritten to 0 to such way that the engine should be able to model the following mai radar types from the 50s just the reach the S-300PT/PSā¦
pulse radar (SA-2 Dvina)
coherent pulse radars (SA-2 Volkhov)
CW radars (SA-5, SA-6, HAWK)
quasi CW radars (first PESA) PATRIOT, S-300PT,PSAnd you need such model to defined TOTALLY different fire control and targ. ac. radar. And these were only some SAMs. Just imagine the lots of other stuff, SA-8, SA-15, SA-19, and just because SA-6 is CW it is not identical with the SA-5 etc.
Even the SAMsim just scratches the surface of the topic.
If you ask me it would be great to have at least a well modeled deployment time for old and towed/deployed SAM vs real mobile SAMs. To model a real skilled opponent what canāt be killed with some HARM launches
-
Aside from the obvious long standing request for VR. My second most desired feature in BMS would be a more capable mission builder. The ability to add ātriggered eventā would be a huge step forward for BMS mission builders.
-
@I-Hawk said in On what grounds would you wish 4.37 to be developped?:
@b0bl00i said in On what grounds would you wish 4.37 to be developped?:
-New renderer that actually looks like something from this century while support VR. Good and realistic lighting, proper height maps (sharp mountain peaks and ridges) crisp and sharp textures, ground decals, volumetric clouds, plenty of forests and buildings, huge draw distance, scalable spotting, updated plane models (Doesnāt have to be UE5 good looking but a heck lot better) ** highest prio
You are probably confusing us with M$ or that other sim which keep delivering unfinished alpha versions while the game itself stays unfinished and actually sandbox, forever (Yes forever, you read correctly).
BMS will do the graphical jump but donāt expect it to be a-la M$FS. We arenāt there and even if assuming we can get close, itāll take time (i.e years, so things will improve but not as fast as you think). We donāt have teams of Devs to develop every small graphical feature. What we can offer though is a graphical improvement that will come on top of an already working sim.
Regarding the 3D models: On what models are you talking really?
Our ugly F-16s? https://i.imgur.com/T56B7jd.png
Ugly B-52? https://i.imgur.com/DbAPGtl.jpeg
Ugly Rafal?: https://i.imgur.com/9AWm4C3.png
Ugly Flanker maybe? https://i.imgur.com/3CPZcOQ.png
Ugly EF? https://i.imgur.com/lB0Rj0e.png
Ugly F-4s maybe? https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/263474413909835776/968185715353608192/2022-04-25_192347.pngReally I need to know, because our 3D modelers are doing awesome work and you should show some respect for getting all that, for freeā¦
Iād be willing to chip in on the dev costs through Patreon.
Ha no - We donāt take money, and for sure we donāt work for anyone. This is a hobby for us and we do it for the fun and challenge.
Hello I-Hawk
Glad you read my comments!
Iām very happy with BMS except the graphics and some quality of life things, like key mapping woes and some minor immersion things. I know you are not Asobo or ED. But still, modern graphics an UI should be highest prio for sure. BMS is so far ahead on everything, except graphics. It should be the 100% focus for 4.37.
The ground textures with the satellite map looks very dated, buildings need to be all 3d! Forests are not dense enough, the grey wall (view distance), poor height mapā¦ If you improve on this, the sim would truly come alive!
When it comes to models, I agree that they look great but in-game everything is bland, perhaps itās due to the overall engine limitations (lacking proper lighting, shadows etc?)
This comment " (Doesnāt have to be UE5 good looking but a heck lot better)" does not relate to the models, itās the overall graphics look.
BMS need to get a modern graphics engine and UIā¦ everything else is really good! Please donāt forget VR, and donāt be afraid of increasing the performance impact, itās 2022.
The sonic boom effect is in need of update too!
-
@b0bl00i shhh buddy the V-R is a touchy subject I heard the devs lost their VR guy. Legend has it he was dragged away from his desk by hooded men from the Simpit Mafia at 2 in the morning
-
@spotdott
Lol to be honest, I can live without VR but I love the immersion levels it adds. I think itās time for BMS to get that new graphics engine in place and add on VR. If the new engine supports it, I would be thrilled to use it! -
All those wishes are cool. I would love to see all this.
But then we need more good developers in the team who are constantly working every day and week (as we do). Go for it and please make your dreams come true https://www.falcon-bms.com/join-bms-development/ -
I dont understand all this talk about better graphics. Is it that you are just taking the F16 up for a āspinā to do some sight-seeing?
If thatās the case I dont think this is the Sim for you.
My two cents. -
@Jaycee said in On what grounds would you wish 4.37 to be developped?:
I dont understand all this talk about better graphics. Is it that you are just taking the F16 up for a āspinā to do some sight-seeing?
If thatās the case I dont think this is the Sim for you.
My two cents.Well, let me disagree. There are few things where improved gfx could have serious impact on improved realism of the sim.
- First, extended terrain rendering distance would be closer to what you can see in rl under clear sky condition
- Second, high-res, more dynamic terrain mesh would improve ability to use terrain masking which could both make your life easier or much harder (enemy setting low-alt ambushes, ground units hidden in the valleys etc ā¦)
- Proper, highly populated cities would make you reconsider your attack profile on units inside (unless youāre playing red side, which have no issues with dropping cluster munition and and such on urban areas )
- more of distinct ground objects can help with navigation or might be used as reference for locating targets on the ground.
- Improved light sources behavior (blinding effect when something is much brighter than ambient light) would make all the instrument dimming knobs useful. Nobody would fly at night with HUD/MFDs etcā¦ on full brightness.
- volumetric clouds than doesnāt rotate when you fly under/above
I guess the list could just go on and on. So nope, better visuals are not just for eye candy.
-
@Micro_440th Hello my friend i had made an application and still i am wainting for feedack.!?
Actualy not as developer but DB editās and QA beta testing and advisor .
Kind Regards
-
@Xeno
Thanks for the reply.
Those are all very fair points which would probably make the Sim look more realistic visually but most of my in-game time in the 3D world is spent checking all the different Sensors mostly my MFDs apart from making sure to keep visual on my wingman or lead or checking for nearby bandits.
Same goes for when I go for the deck or inbound.
My priority is to keep the jet in the air without crashing to the nearby ground and I mostly rely on the on-board sensors for that.
When Iām flying low Iām usually looking forward through my HUD and or keeping visuals with my flight.
Attacking ground targetsā¦more of the same.
Better graphics is always a good thing but for me this Sim is already full of good things.
Best regards. -
@Geraki I donāt know. Thatās Max business.
But I believe developers have priority right now. -
BMS need to get a modern graphics engine and UIā¦ everything else is really good! Please donāt forget VR, and donāt be afraid of increasing the performance impact, itās 2022.
what means its 2022?
what means dont afraid to increase performance impact?
you mean make it uplayble ?
that sentence is unacceptable
if you want to show your admire about new graphics you have to have a measure to your words
you see that a lot of ppl here comment the performance even 10 fps is a matter of joy for them anyway i think the team knows betterone more thing how do you push buttons in vr? how do you control the plane besides throttle and stick ,and how much time
you can stay with vr without loosing your eyes and head? can you stay for 5 hours for example? -
@Aragorn said in On what grounds would you wish 4.37 to be developped?:
On the grounds of Buckingham Palace.
LoLā¦
Alll jokes aside would really love to see bugfix and stabilization first and then all these amazing feaures that peeps are quite rightly asking for.
436 is the best i have ever seen the sim but if we could have a really fixed AI and everything in the campaign engine working as intended that would rock.Then features galore.
-
- More naval assets most of which can be civilian, junks, trawlers, maybe even a cruise ship. Maybe some code to go along with the assets to make it seem more lifelike.
1a) also if thereās sea traffic, just know weāll use it to boresite mavericks so ya knowā¦be aware.
- Kinda piggybacking off of #1, maybe some more civilian assets too, personal trucks, maybe a train or two, or at least a train yard.