Lock granularity, bubbles, shaders, texture filtering
-
The reason why we want to remain a “small” team, working with guys that we trust and that we know is in Falcon4 history.
Yes we could have more talents in the DEV team … but above all … we want them to be “friends” first and be sure that they 100% understand BMS objectives and philosophy.
… It will take more time … yes … thats is not a problem … for BMS team, time is not money.
Team’s friendship is paramount… but everything is possible. Team member list is not “locked”.
I’m sorry but the way I understand that statement is that you want to keep the team small because you only want “friends” working in the team. It sounds like elitism and just patting each other on the back….
I agree with you that time is not money, we are playing with a sim that is more than a decade old, but if allowing the community to help out means that features get added sooner rather than later, isn’t that a good thing? As for “BMS objectives and philosophy,” I see where you’re coming from that is why I mentioned concerns about “different versions” of BMS, but your post does not help at all. If someone from BMS would come up with rules that “3rd-party modders” would have to respect and follow, I’m sure those with the skill would be happy to oblige; if not, then they simply do not work on BMS.
Just like with the FLARE project, if the original modder had not opened his work to others, who knows when FLARE would be released? On the other hand, if he had opened his work earlier, maybe we’d have FLARE by now? I’m pretty sure that the guys working on FLARE now would’ve still respected the original modder’s wishes even if he opened his work ages ago. So why not do the same with some parts of BMS?
Just my 2cents.
-
BMS server without a graphics card, running at 100+ FPS on ramp.
I see, thanks for explaining.
-
Well, if I were a deciding factor, the load of crap I read on this very forum certainly wouldn’t convince me to give access to more people in the way you describe
Doing that, it would go to hell in about the same time lapse this forum went to hell when it was opened to the public.
that’s my opinion only and does not engage the views of the BMS dev
-
Ice:
I’m more concerned about limited human lifespan. I’d rather not get things done in 3-4 generations…
Atari (which dies in gote with 9-stones handicap and negative komi) bogeyman is a tired old song. Better to contribute back (yes, “back”, as BMS didn’t create the code in a vacuum) the flight model, stability changes et al. than use excuses.
Fragmentation? Better than monoculture…
But wouldn’t use such hostile tone as Ice did…
@__Red Dog__:
Doing that, it would go to hell in about the same time lapse this forum went to hell when it was opened to the public.
Please define “go to hell”.
No one says anything about read-write access for arbitrary people. Just review of sane incoming patches…
-
I’m sorry but the way I understand that statement is that you want to keep the team small because you only want “friends” working in the team. It sounds like elitism and just patting each other on the back….
We just want to avoid code leak and troublemaker.
-
I agree with you that time is not money, we are playing with a sim that is more than a decade old, but if allowing the community to help out means that features get added sooner rather than later, isn’t that a good thing?
Adding features is a VERY easy job.
Adding features without introducing bugs in a totaly diferent part of the code and be able to coorditate all those new features to make everything working fine with all other DEV updates is a totaly diferent challenge.
Do not think that we do not like the idea of “improoving BMS” good and fast. but it is not possible … just take a look to the critisms from the community about the UP4 which has been released a bit too early …
-
I’d love to have the bubble issue fixed. Not being able to see anything past 20-30nm is annoying, especially coming from DCS A10C. The F-16s TGP just seems like a big step backward.
Nothing have to be fixed. This is a feature, this is the price of dynamic campaign. Buy a supercomptuer and you can forget the bubble. Most of players do not have supercompter. If annoys you BMS4 fly DCS and do not complain…
-
BMS could release parts of code needing refactor to those who are able.
Forget about that idea.
If you have a part of the code, it is because you are team member.
-
Red Dog, I agree with you on that and that is one of the reasons I am thinking that there needs to be a set of rules to abide to. Plus I would guess that the BMS team would have a good idea of who can do what. I’m not saying open EVERYTHING to EVERYONE, but I’m just thinking a small addition of skilled and dedicated manpower will not be a detriment to BMS.
sthalik, like you, I am very grateful for BMS. The team has definitely given life to this old sim, so much so that I cannot return to DCS without feeling like stepping backwards a few steps. “Paying it forward” definitely is the way to go.
Dee-Jay, please note that my previous post was not meant to contain any hostility, and I am happy to see that you have not viewed it as such. I understand your points, and would gladly volunteer to be a tester should a position open itself. Regarding code leaks and trouble, again, I’m not saying release the code to everyone, but rather tapping the correct individuals on the shoulder and asking them to join the fold.
Surely not everyone in the BMS team knew each other personally when you guys started? Why not let some new and willing individual step forward and prove himself, rather than just closing the doors all the time?
I know that it’s easier to “stay as you are” and keep within the comfort zone and opening up, even a little, sounds very scary and risky. All I’m saying is that the end benefit to BMS just might be worth it, if someone is willing to stick their neck out a bit.
Again, my useless 2cents.
-
Nothing have to be fixed. This is a feature, this is the price of dynamic campaign. Buy a supercomptuer and you can forget the bubble. Most of players do not have supercompter. In annoys you BMS4 fly DCS and do not complain…
Wow, that was mature.
Why not just get rid of all the eye candy, some people play on laptops after all. Are we going by the majority or by least-common-denominator?
-
Nothing have to be fixed. This is a feature, this is the price of dynamic campaign. Buy a supercomptuer and you can forget the bubble. Most of players do not have supercompter. In annoys you BMS4 fly DCS and do not complain…
because DCS is not going to elicit complaints?
what a ridiculous statement….
with my computer, I feel limited more by the code than by performance. Id prefer to have it an option that can be fixed.
-
I think everybody misunderstood Molni comment.
He’s not wrong about bubble. Bubble system is not so bad and have no direct issue with the problem. the problem is the capacity of sensor to deaggregated unit outside the bubble when this particular sensor have the ability to see outside this range (TGP, FCR, …). Increase the bubble will be slideshow in campaign, even probably in TE. That’s not the solution. The solution is to give the capacity to the sensor to force the unit to be deaggregated trough the FOV of the sensor, and keep it deaggregated during the TOF of standoff weapon. Then, aggregated again when sensor FOV is outside the unit, and no weapon in flight.
We have not wait public comment to work on it ;).I love people comment like “yeaaahhh I know, it’s easy, just do that”. That’s why is better to keep the code for people have experience with Falcon code, sometimes the solution is not the more easy to have.
-
Nothing have to be fixed. This is a feature, this is the price of dynamic campaign. Buy a supercomptuer and you can forget the bubble. Most of players do not have supercompter. In annoys you BMS4 fly DCS and do not complain…
It’s the price of Microprose coding. But not to be too hard on them, it’s one of the very first threaded games. Things are done differently nowadays, but that comes with years of experience.
We just want to avoid code leak and troublemaker.
What’s with the mindset? A “leak”? You seem to be awfully possessive of the code for little reason. It’s just a frame of mind…
Yeah, code’s yours. But that doesn’t make you any less possessive…
-
It’s the price of Microprose coding. But not to be too hard on them, it’s one of the very first threaded games. Things are done differently nowadays, but that comes with years of experience.
Yo do not have to code. Change the bubble distance and be happy with the lower FPS.
-
Or fix the damn thing and let everyone have proper FPS.
-
I have a few observations which I’ll follow up with an idea. Please understand that these are my opinions, and I don’t suffer from the problem of thinking I’m right all the time. At least that’s what I tell everyone
First, as a professional software engineer with almost two decades of experience I can say that Falcon BMS as it stands is an outstanding sim and piece of software. I refer to the results, or end-product as I’ve never seen the actual code. Yes there are limitations, a few design mistakes, bugs, and a lot that’s out of date etc, but infinite perfection would require infinite time and infinite money. This is a niche market and so it requires the work of enthusiasts, because as a business venture this segment has never been a cash cow.
I know that without the excellent work - for free - by the BMS team, there would simply be no comparable sim. DCS is wonderful, but it doesn’t compete in the fast multi-role fighter category unless you include Flaming Cliffs which I classify as a game and not a sim. What’s more, even with steady income and a small but reliable market it’s going to take DCS a long time to release their F15/F18 alternative. They’re not even going to have their new terrain engine ready until early next year.
Right now, in my opinion and I think that of many other people, Falcon BMS is the very best fast multi-role fighter sim available. And that in my mind both stands testiment to the quality of the original code and also justifies the develeopers choices about how they handle their project and team members.
That doesn’t mean theirs is the only correct opinion though. There does seem to a growing desire to be part of this line of development by different people and for different reasons. Some are eager to contribute their knowledge from their particular field of expertise, others want to help increase the speed at which BMS improves, and yet others want to replace the aging parts of the engine with more modern and up-to-date alternatives.
So my big idea, which isn’t new or original in any way, is this: Why don’t this group gather together and start building the world’s first truly open source combat sim, modern, and from the ground up. Open source software is making huge strides these days and I personally believe it is already the dominant software platform if you consider all categories of computing. This would give the community the ability to build and contribute exactly as they desire. I myself would contribute as and when time and interest allowed. But also, and I think vitally, it would add another competator to what is still a very small market. More variety might bring more and more diverse interest. Competing or co-existing products often learn from each other and so this could create a larger pool of ideas, and finally this may yet end up in BMS. For example; if the open source sim had a new and capable world engine and licenced the source liberally with, say, the MIT licence instead of the GPL, then there would be no reason that BMS couldn’t use that very engine to upgrade Falcon.
To the BMS team: You guys are my heroes! To those who want to add-build-innovate: You guys can, if you dare to dream, rewrite the future as YOU want it to be, and be even bigger heroes. As for me, I’m just grateful I still have my Falcon 4.0 box!
-
My personal opinion for those who may care to know it:
sthalik’s argument that it would be easy to fix parts of the code is undermined by his statements that the code is antiquated and inefficient with, in his words, “global variables, cross-references and other trash, a mixture of ancient kindergarten C++ and old-style non-standard C that makes Fortran programmers blush.”
I am not a programmer nor a do I understand much of how the code operates, but IMO if there are cross-references throughout the code then “fixing” a portion will no doubt impact another portion.
I have watched and appreciated sthalik’s work on the headless server as well as his work on the binary files, but I believe fixing the bubble issue would likely entail more than 10 minute’s work.
Moreover, I have a great deal of confidence in the current BMS team and their commitment to excellence and detail. Do I wish they would move more quickly? Yes. Do I understand why they do not always move quickly? Yes. Am I still frustrated? No, but to be sure, I have been around this sim for ages and have become accustomed to 3 to 4 weeks. Granted, it might be nice to see 3 to 4 days.
Regarding the code being “guarded” by a chosen few:
This is (again IMO) an example of good work ethics. Opening the code to everyone would only cause confusion and mayhem. One would have multiple code lines being developed that would quickly become incompatible with one another. One group may solve the bubble problem, but find it would not work with another group’s shader fix, etc…
Yes, Falcon is an odd and old and tired beast. BMS has their vision and philosophy. Consider that maybe that philosophy is the reason why BMS is still around.
-
Maybe sthalik can use the code from https://github.com/FreeFalcon/ to show some of his ideas in case the bms team doesn’t recruit him.
-
Dee-Jay, please note that my previous post was not meant to contain any hostility
No prob mate … we are just discussing …
-
BMS is closed for the very reason we see in this forum.
Yes, we are all good friends who trust and respect each other. Some of us have known each other for years and some for just a few months. We do not always agree on things but I’ve rarely seen heated or disrespectful discussions in BMS, and that is the key. Argumentative people, such as some we see posting here (on this forum and speaking in a general sense) do not fit well in BMS. Skills are important but skills do not buy you entry into the team. Its attitude and then skills, and the opinion of all BMS members that gets you in. You can be the best and most efficient programer, artist, data editor, or tester in the world but if your attitude is disrespectful you will never get in. BMS is a team and it functions very well.
For those who feel they can do better the F4 source code is out there. If you’re that good grab it and develop it and you should surpass where we are within a few months based on what I’m reading.