This pair of cockpits are the typical display output of Allied Force using my Toshiba 42"...
AF display settings are set to 1024:768 -32 bit
Graphics set to full w/all option on, including Ultra-32bit
Naturally, when I set the output to a tighter resolution, say, 1900:1080 or any 16:9 ratio, then I'm back to the 4:3 cockpit.


My widescreen pit isn't the worst eyesore. And I kinda like the Ashton Martin Suede look -
I first discovered the view below the knee map. It displayed all the base info, etc.. ya'll know-
Accidently pushed down again and the wider-stretched cockpit revealed itself. Discovered the 'Sht-2' key combo by accident-
and whammo- good to go on the cheap...err...uhh...never mind cheap.


Toshiba-$800
Adobe v7-$1000

One question, why are you flying AF? Have you tried BMS yet?

Yes, and I love what I see.
I've spent about 3 weeks evaluating FreeFalcon5 and it's been nothing but CTD....sorely a disappointment.
I do enjoy Allied Force as it closely resembles the Falcon4 that I spent years using.
I have BMS and my only problem is that my system is the bare minimum to fully enjoy it.
At best, BMS will do about 42 fps...I know a better video card would help that but I just bought this card
and I want to wait awhile before I turn around and buy another one.
Allied Force gives me about 28 fps in the most graphic situations and around 76 fps when all is calm.
83 has been the highest, but that is before I engage high graphic settings in the app and on the v-card.

I read that BMS is very stable, but that its stability is for multiplay gamers and such. I assume this means that the solo user as myself would find BMS to be stable across the board. There's nothing worse than being in the middle of a mission and you get a CTD because some people are working with old codes and are really just hackers at best. That's my research regarding FreeFalcon5 and all of the goodies that one can add on to it.

One thing for certain....Allied Force doesn't CTD here.
My system is new/old...
Intel D915GAG board
Intel Prescott 3.2 Ghz
Crucial Ram 2 Gb
Seagate SATA 200 GB
500 watt p/s
XP service pack 2
Asus GeForce 8400 GS
RealTek OnBoard Audio
Realistic STA-780 receiver (1982)
Rebuilt Optimus 1 speakers (1973)
Cheap Joystick Logitech Attack 3...hey....it'll do.

So, from above, you'll notice that I'm on the edge.
But this little system will run LockOn MAC, Flaming Cliffs and IL-2 1946 w/full graphics and very high fps. (75-120 fps)
And no CTD from those either. Flaming Cliffs 2 didn't fair so well w/full graphics on...
But I don't fly online, and I can't get geared up to create my own missions and then turn around and fly them-

I really wish some professional coders would take the Falcon4 concept and totally update it from the ground up.
As I understand it, BMS did some of this. But I tripped up on something the other day called 'Dark Falcon'

You know anything about it, other than it would take a current hi-end system to use it?

BMS is very stable in SP as well. Dark Falcon is what the community used to call BMS before it was released and there was no real information on it. There are professional coders in the BMS team and yes it is Falcon 4 totally updated. My advice would be to spend some time evaluating BMS as well, like you did with FF, as for your system if you can't run BMS with everything on, try turning stuff down or off. It will still look much better than AF.

Ya know...I'm glad you mentioned BMS. I had it over on the backup drive. I loaded it one time...didn't get under the hood for anything.
It gave me very low fps, so I deleted it and forgot it. Spent enough time in Allied Force campaigns that I never gave it a thought.
So I just loaded it...had to tweak the video card settings...set BMS graphics to medium for starters and I'm getting between 45 and 60 fps for dogfighting and NOE flying through the metros...not bad....best of all
NO CTD yet.
I think I'll give the doc files a good going over.
My fav munitions were the clusters, the napam, durandals, and of course, harms. Wild weasel was always a fav of mine.
Do you know if BMS will let me load something that'll penetrate an underground factory or did they model that for the F-111 and F-117-
Trying to remember...I think it is the GBU-27 and 28 series...can't be sure yet.

Anywhooo....thanks for bringing up BMS.
You motivated me to put some other things on the back burner and get a better video card....cuz I know my system isn't top flight by any means. But truthfully, it does more than I ever expected it to do.

Good Mornin' to ya

I have noticed one thing though...
In BMS, my cockpit fonts ...esp the MFDs ...they appear to need some antialiasing or something.
Difficult to see clearly w/o shifting downward for the bigger views of the MFD.
Still have to see what needs to be tweaked in the video card settings.
Man do I miss the days when I had a Voodoo 5500. Seems like the settings were simpler to understand back then.
This little video card has 20 some options and triggers to fiddle with...it can become a choir finding the right settings.
I would have thought by now that everyone was on the same page as far as viewing graphics on a computer.

BMS will allow you to load up bombs to hit a underground bunker, I think the GBU-12's. I just got into dropping guided/laser bombs and i must say it is fun. My system is pretty old also 2.4 dual core, 8800GT and 4 gigs of ram. I'll be getting a new system within a few weeks. BMS is the only Falcon that I have been able to play, the graphics were the main thing stopping me from flying OF and I never tried AF. From what I have seen of AF, it didn't look good.

What settings are you using? your set up is stretched!

Guilty!
You passed judgement on AF because of still images. Screenshots always fail to catch the beauty
in motion, don't you know? And the few youtube AF movies out there are plain horrible.
AF's graphics is old for today standards, there's no doubt, but it is coherent in every aspect.
When viewed as a whole, you just accept it. It is clear that they did put more efforts in
'normalizing' the graphics than it is apparent at first glance. The tricky thing is... you don't
notice it because it looks so natural (as a whole). Look instead at BMS. Its beautiful lighting
(if not a bit garish) is in stark contrast with the shabby terrain. It's not coherent.

I'm sure they're working on it. Remains to be seen for how much longer you'll have to play with
pretty lighting and shabby everything else, on the promise that some day you'll receive better.
Yeah, promises promises... BMS has been around for ages. And the most part of the improvements
you play with, in BMS 4.32, are from the decade old BMS versions.
Turn off the hype, turn off the enthusiasm. Turn off the "everybody says it's cool" thing. Try to
be neutral and objective: how much of the actual BMS is truly 'new' stuff?
If we exclude the graphics, there is very little 'new' left.

I'm not saying that BMS is a fake. Gods, not at all. It's promising and the people behind it are
competent (what they have done speaks for itself). The problem is that they produce new stuff at
a snail's pace. It'll be months before you get to see terrain adeguate to the pretty levels of
the lighting and the cockpit. It'll be months before you get a proper and working 3D cockpit (lke
that of the F16) for each of the different jets they allow you to fly.
And it'll be months (to not say years) before you get to see the many bugs plaguing the new BMS
avionics finally squashed and buried.

Don't look down on AF. The LP guys made a choice. They chose to rid F4 of the infinite bugs it
had. And they chose to improve things while still keeping the product as accessible to pretty
much everybody-and-their-pet as was possible. They have succeeded magnificently. Top Score!
BMS, instead, by design, is not going for accessibility. They target people with modern hardware,
as they openly state somewhere in their main page or where there are the system requirements, I
don't remember, but it's there - just read around the front page.

With all that said, if you like BMS so much, do keep playing with it. Nobody says you should stop.
Just do not look down on AF because it hasn't the same graphics. There's more to Falcon 4 than
graphics. The many F4 mods in the last 12 years and counting have taught the world whole new
meanings of the terms 'CTD'.
AF doesn't CTD - barring system instability / hazardous mods on your part, that is.

Sometimes I wonder. If there was no AF, would there be a BMS 4.32 today?
Can't count on OF and FF to keep Falcon 4 alive. Their tendency to crash for the smallest thing
is the worst ads they could make to the simulator.

Well it seems you didn't spend much time wih BMS.
Really they did tons of really hard work.
- first complete technology update for GFX engine, it's not about shiny things, but also autogen, shadows, ability to push hi-polycount scenes, proper 3d pit etc... It's huge task on its own
- new flight model engine - correct edge-of-envelope and stall behaviour
- new weather and athmosphere model - wind gusts, turbulences
- lots of improvement in F16 systems modeling.

I think you've reall missed lots of things.
F4AF was good in it's time, but it over.
And yes BMS would be there without F4AF, my guess it'd be released even earlier than it was.

Hello.

Why don't we resume this in a year from now and see what major *new* features can be listed further
along with those you just mentioned? You'll see what I mean when I say snail's pace.
Nothing to argue about the things they have *done*. I have said they speak for themselves, in case
you missed it in my post. The problem is that you aren't going to see much more than that anytime
soon.
When the current hype about BMS will subside we can see, facts at hand, what's been actually
accomplished and what's been promised but is still to come.

As for F4:AF, it is not over.
It's still by far the most complete and, at the same time, accessible + polished + bugfree package
you get to play with today. When and if BMS shall surpass AF in every regard, then we (me too) will
say that AF is over. Until then, it's not fair to declare its death just because you don't use it
anymore (I assume you don't).

But don't let what I said ruin your day. Not my intent. We're just exchanging opinions.