Future of Falcon BMS
-
Ah the memories. And the contributions of Pete Bonani. Somehow it made everything even better knowing that a real Viper pilot was overseeing some of the tech stuff. My binder edition and maps are all still pristine and I hope to keep them that way. It’s like having been around when Atari was state of the art.
-
wheres the thumbs down button…?
I’m thankfull that I have other sims to fly if I feel like a change.
-
woah if there was a recording of that ad somewhere i would love to see it!
I’ve looked for it, but can not find it. Maybe someone around here has it. At the time, it was pretty awesome!
-
My 2 cents….I thank the team for putting their love into this and making it available to anyone who has love for the sim (and at no charge). Be grateful for what we have, do not be ungrateful for what we do not have
I have DCS as well and find it lacking in realism that BMS provides.
Peace out.
-
+1 Well said!!!
-
Falcon fans:
-
wheres the thumbs down button…?
Hope this helps educate the great unwashed, I was amazed by what amount of work went into the P51D BTW the FW190D9s FM cost $120000 to make.(who knows how much the F-15C or SU27 cost as both must be a challenge to model to this level)
-
Hope this helps educate the great unwashed, I was amazed by what amount of work went into the P51D BTW the FW190D9s FM cost $120000 to make.(who knows how much the F-15C or SU27 cost as both must be a challenge to model to this level)
What a shame… all that time and money and it’s still a collection of TE’s. Great looking but…
-
^^^^agreed. It gets old real quick doing campaign missions. You’re better off using the mission builder at times. Almost no different. It lacks the simulation of an ongoing war, only individual battles or sorties in a confined area on the map.
-
One can only estimate the costs to putting together a dynamic campaign in today’s world. When Microprose did it everything was less expensive and in reality I don’t think any of us really appreciated what we were purchasing back in the day as regards Falcon4. Now we are spoiled to the point that we tend to besmirch any flight sim effort that has to rely on “treed static campaigns” Once you’ve experienced F4 especially with all the improvements we’ve been blessed with over the years, it’s seems that good old Falcon 4 has set the bar really high. I sense that BMS will keep the bar waaay up there.
-
As a programmer i would say that dynamic campaign is not that expensive for many reason. That said my opinion about dcs is “if dynamic campaign was the only issue, then i could easily forgive the lack and enjoy it more but unfortunately there are more serious lacks/bugs/issues”.
This is why bms is the first one when it is about combat aircraft simulator, surely the game is not perfect but it is well tested. Not only it has dynamic campaign but also properly working weapons that leads to enjoyable ag attacks and more over amazing AA engagements (bvr or dogfights) that together the smart scaling makes it a big pleasure. The graphics is not even close but the performance is amazing (considering that it is DX9 and most cards are not getting optimized to DX9 anymore. Surely there are others sims out there that has a better balance between graphics/performance like Cliffs of Dover TM and others). If you pay attention to the original Falcon 4 you will see the huge work that has been done by the community (older falcon’s forks) and by the bms team.
That being said i hope that the reason that DCS has those problems is due to the fact that they have been putting almost all their workforce on the EDGE and once it is out they start addressing others issues and working on new features not because i want to drop bms but because it would be nice to have an alternative that satisfy me for more than 2 days of random game.
So thanks bms team because i dropped aircrafts games around 2004 but in 2013 i came back because of the amazing work that you have done.
-
So we are headed into BMS vs DCS territory … I will try to stay on topic here.
I don’t get it why it seems so important to declare a winner among the two. They are two different products giving simmers more choice. It’s a bit like buying a gasoline engine car; you cannot have top super-car performance, at the same time as you get the world’s best fuel economy. You have to choose. That doesn’t mean the one you did not choose, is a crap product - it just serves a different purpose.
If you enjoy dynamic campaigns, completeness of simulation, flying a fighter that enables flying a broad variety of missions, rock solid multiplayer stability, etc., then clearly BMS is the better product. If you prefer flying other aircraft than F-16 with detailed modeling, or have a thing for eye candy, then DCS may be preferred. I fly BMS, however that does not mean DCS is crap - I had loads of fun flying A-10C before I discovered BMS, and history does not change to make that “un-fun” just because I now like flying F-16 in BMS more. I fire up DCS once in a while to fly Ka-50, which is loads of fun - and not something I can do in BMS.
So in order to get back on topic; this thread started off with a question regarding the future of BMS, making new versions etc. There is no need to be better than DCS in every single area, or be defensive whenever someone brings up a strong point of DCS. Countering an argument that “in DCS you can now fly the Huey” with “well, yeah, but BMS has dynamic campaigns” is a bit like “my bicycle runs faster than yours”, with the response “well, yeah, but my father is stronger than your father”.
BMS has a certain focus and target experience, and as long as it remains true to that focus and keeps delivering the best sim immersion, that is the only thing that matters.
-
So we are headed into BMS vs DCS territory …
Typical.
-
A completely bug free single player Korea campaign would be ace! One can hope
-
Hope this helps educate the great unwashed, I was amazed by what amount of work went into the P51D BTW the FW190D9s FM cost $120000 to make.
… and it shows greatly how ED wasting their ressources for boring ww2 stuff.
A completely bug free single player Korea campaign would be ace! One can hope
Korea campaign is “winnable”. What do you need else?
-
Korea campaign is “winnable”. What do you need else?
Functional SAMs, campaigns without holy weapons, more real SAM kinematics modeling, better OOB, etc. The list is veeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeery long…
-
Typical.
Oh boy….
Dee Jay has put the word out now. This thread may get locked if it gets nasty over the bms vs dcs discussion.
We have a great sim as it is. It’s going to improve and evolve.
@ Molny,
Yep, I bet that list is huge! Lots of work and time testing. Seems that 4.33 is a long ways off. Still, it will be worth the wait!
-
Hope this helps educate the great unwashed, I was amazed by what amount of WASTED work went into the P51D BTW the FW190D9s FM cost $120000 to make.(who knows how much the F-15C or SU27 cost as both must be a challenge to model to this level)
Fixed it for you. COD already has WW2 covered, or IL2/1946. What a bloody waste.
-
And still, they do not have a dynamic campaign.
A big thank you to the BMS developers.
-
And still, they do not have a dynamic campaign.
A big thank you to the BMS developers.
For the dynamic campaign, its MicroProse you need to thank, but otherwise I agree.