@Scorpion82 Yup, same here. It was this one: https://www.scalemates.com/kits/revell-4379-mig-29-a-fulcrum--143832. It had AA-8 missiles and then some that were supposedly AA-10s but which were wildly incorrect.
Latest posts made by Antares
-
RE: MiG 29A Soviet camo
-
RE: What if: Falcon 5 (Poll)
In the 90s, there were so many military flight simulators on the market - think about the Janes’ Combat Simulation Series (ATF, Longbow, US Navy Fighters, IDF, F-15), Flanker/LOMAC, EF2000, Tornado, F-22 Total Air War, etc….
Of these only Falcon 4.0 and Flanker/LOMAC (now BMS and DCS respectively) remain is highly niche products.
There’s a very good reason for this almost complete collapse of this market segment. The investment is huge, the market is small and niche and the Return On Investment (ROI) is years - not weeks or months.
It also exclusively limited to the PC market and requires expensive joystick/HOTAS to enjoy.Another reason for sure would be cultural-political. In the early 90s, the Gulf War and the overwhelming role of its air campaign spurred a huge interest in flight-simming. To a lesser degree, Norther/Southern Watch and the Balkan interventions kept that interest going to a lesser degree. After 9/11 though, the ways the new wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were fought changed, putting more emphasis on boots on the ground. Hence the rise of the military shooters.
I’m reasonably sure that if tensions with Russia and/or China continue to rise, or another air campaign focused war kicked off, interest in flight-simming would also increase again. If that’s something one should wish for is another debate that probably has no place here.
-
RE: Falcon BMS 4.35 U1 Wishlist
you seem to be quite new to our community
Yes, and no. I usually just don’t get involved, but am more of an lurker. But I’ve been watching the F4 community, on and off, since 2001.
you should know that we never let the community down with nasty bugs…
just be patient, we know what we are doing , OK ?
Mav, I know you do, really. I know what it’s like, too. I’ve been in the core team of a major (like 100k downloads per release) open-source game project for five years. I know that users can get annoying, and that you’ve already forgotten about the current release by the time it hits the torrents when you’ve been working on the next one for half a year already. And that users have different ideas than you about what should be important and what shouldn’t. I know, I’ve been there lots of times.
But that’s why it’s important that your processes like bug and feature tracking are absolutely on point. They need to be transparent and discoverable. It will help you keep the users off your back. Just saying ‘open a thread and keep track yourself’ doesn’t cut it. Not only is that pretty awful as a technical solution, but from a PR standpoint it’s downright abysmal.
All I’m saying is that it just might lower the level of frustration on both sides. Which is important, because in the end everyone is doing this for fun. You won’t get rid of all annoyances. You’ll never be able to make everyone happy. Such is life. But you can help make it easier and more enjoyable for yourselves.
And with that I’ll be going back to lurking.
-
RE: Falcon BMS 4.35 U1 Wishlist
No. And rather pointless … because it applies to the Dev version.
Yes, of course. You can’t fix bugs retroactively. That’s true for every software project ever.
Opening a thread, then following it and using the known issues would be already a good things for users.
That would be too unstructured and unorganized for my taste, but maybe someone else will have a go at it.
Thanks for the clarifications, Dee-Jay. I see more clearly now.
-
RE: Falcon BMS 4.35 U1 Wishlist
Guys, please stay civil everyone.
I generally agree that having a public bug tracker would go a long way as far as visibility of outstanding issues is concerned. Just a forum is awful for that purpose. But as I don’t really have any insights on BMS development myself, can someone please clarify something for me:
1. Is there an internal bug tracker used by the dev team?
1a. If yes, could that be made public, even if just read-only?
2. If someone from the user community, as suggested by Dee-Jay, created a bug tracker, say on Github or a similar service, would the dev team start using it?Thanks for all your hard work in any case!
-
RE: Link 16 things you want in the next update
I think all these posts for fixing/updating things outside of the F-16, the terrain, and some minor glitches are great but will need to be addressed by the people interested in these other planes, not the current devs (unless of course a few of them ARE interested in bringing forth other plane improvements?). Data tables and plane graphics are accessible to anyone, no?
I understand where you’re coming from, but in order to really properly support aircraft other than the F-16, the BMS avionics model needs to be modularized so you don’t have to work with the F-16 avionics in all those other planes, but can make them up component by component. And that requires (probably quite significant) source code changes. Same goes for support for a backseater position, let alone a networked backseater.
Don’t get me wrong, it’s the thing I’d welcome most in BMS right after Linux support, but even without having ever read a single line of BMS code I have enough experience in hobbyist game development to tell you that this is an undertaking that would take several years to pull off.
-
RE: F/E/A-18E/F
What do people do when they’ve fired their last HARM? Or do they just keep one for the way back?
-
RE: Mavericks, Not just for ground targets?
Man, that story is so old, you’d think the Internet would have forgotten about it by now. Poor guy is not ever gonna live it down. They’ll probably put it on his epitaph.
-
RE: Test low-poly toys in BMS4..
The second one is a German LARS, right? What’s the third one?
-
RE: Wind Turbines WIP
No I’m not talking about Github as a repository, but more about the Bugtracking it offers. I don’t know if you can’t do one without the other but in worse case we can possibly use some dummy repo or maybe even an active one with Release version data for small fixes which are suitable.
Yes, a dummy repo would be the way to go. Valve, for example, do something similar for their Linux Steam client: https://github.com/ValveSoftware/steam-for-linux. They just have a mostly empty repository containing just a couple of text files, and instead they only use it for tracking issues. I’m pretty sure there are other examples as well.
The downside of that approach is that you wouldn’t be able to take advantage of all the built-in hooks, triggers and actions (e.g. closing an issue when a fix gets merged), but that could be worked around by using custom actions. Lot of effort though, and ultimately icing on the cake.