#4254384 - 04/29/16 09:53 PM
Re: Campaign after Campaign? - is this the new focus
[Re: Jedi Master]
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
|
Neither BMS nor EECH are commercial products you can buy today, being supported by a company that exists today. They are 90s programs that have been modded beyond recognition, perhaps, but they are still products that saw commercial release last over 15 years ago.
Therefore, they do not count because they are not current retail SKUs. Just because some simmers like them doesn't mean they're competition for new products. BMS has never been a product you can buy, but you **CAN** buy Falcon 4.0 via The Falcon Collection on Steam or GoG. While Falcon 4.0 is no longer "supported," BMS does have a very active "independent dev team" who, considering what they've done to a very old sim, are quite dedicated and talented individuals. I'm less familiar with EECH though so I'll hold my comments on that. A quick eBay search does easily turn up copies of EECH for around £10 though. If the criteria is "current availability," then Falcon BMS at least counts. Maybe not before this Tommo/new license thing where the only source of a legit copy of Falcon 4.0 were extortionate eBay prices, but with TFC on Steam/GoG, then that has made Falcon 4.0 and BMS available again. If the criteria is "support by publishers/developers," then yeah, Falcon BMS is obviously supported by the BMS team and has the "offical blessing" by the copyright owner(s). Again, I'm not so familiar with EECH but isn't it also being worked on as shown by the activity on the EECH sub-forum? The fact is that a 15+ year old game is still a valid alternative and is an in-depth, full switchology sim with a better (faultier?) campaign engine. It also has the F-15 (E version, I believe), F-18, and Harrier jets. So I guess in a way, you are correct. DCS falls short as competition.
- Ice
|
|
#4254386 - 04/29/16 09:58 PM
Re: Campaign after Campaign? - is this the new focus
[Re: Paradaz]
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,943
Nate
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,943
Dublin, Ireland
|
The author can and should test.......but he/she isn't necessarily going to know about every single change and dependency that is affected by the patch. The bigger question is probably why should the campaign author be responsible for changes and revisions needed for a campaign due to ED making alterations to the core sim. I'd imagine ongoing product maintenance is part of the 3rd party agreement - it certainly seems to be for the aircraft modules anyway. I don't see why a 3rd party campaign should be different in this regard. Again just assumptions on my part, I don't know the details. Nate
|
|
#4254401 - 04/29/16 10:59 PM
Re: Campaign after Campaign - ED's new focus
[Re: Paradaz]
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 850
toonces
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 850
Honolulu, Hawaii
|
I get where JM is going with the BMS comment. I don't necessarily agree, but I see his point.
Having said that, BMS remains installed on my system. To be perfectly honest, I don't even know how to reinstall DCS on my computer, what modules work with which version, or what. I'm sure I can figure it out with Google, but honestly I just can't be bothered.
What I can do, and have done, is completely stop buying ED products until this entire process is...fixed isn't the word, but maybe, until this is a product that fills that hole I'm wanting filled.
If FC3 was their money-maker, I just can't understand the resistance to capitalize on that. And, as mentioned a few posts back by Jerkzilla, I am most definitely making an assumption that an FC3 plane can be cranked out in a fraction of the time of a DCS:A-10 module.
I say this with absolutely no evidence to back it up, but I'll wager that the vast majority of users only use a fraction of the capability of a DCS-level aircraft. To be able to do that for multiple aircraft would be very impressive. The bottom line is that there are some things you need to have a good, enjoyable combat flight sim, and some things you just don't.
"A week or even a month for someone basically saying "shucks, this is pants" maybe. But their banhammer only has the forever setting. Gotta set phasers to stun for the localization of female undergarments, not kill yo." - Frederf
|
|
#4254404 - 04/29/16 11:05 PM
Re: Campaign after Campaign - ED's new focus
[Re: Paradaz]
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
|
I just want to make my position clear --- although I may come across as a BMS fanboi at the moment, there was actually a time where I knew of BMS being released but still continued flying DCS A10C and DCS Black Shark 2. However, DCS soon lost me after that. Competition is good; having choices is good. However, DCS is not something I would consider "competition" at the moment, and the ball is entirely in ED's court. They seem to be bumbling buffoos with three left feet at the moment. I would love to be proven wrong by DCS. I would love to see them pull their collective sh-t together and get their act going. As it stands, BMS has more maps and more aircraft, both of which are in better states of completion than DCS's offerings. I'm done being a beta tester for ED; my sim time (what little of it I have) is better spent flying and fighting in the sim, not fighting the sim.
- Ice
|
|
#4254407 - 04/29/16 11:09 PM
Re: Campaign after Campaign - ED's new focus
[Re: Paradaz]
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 17,632
SkateZilla
Skate Zilla Graphics
|
Skate Zilla Graphics
Veteran
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 17,632
Virginia Beach, VA
|
BMS Has 1 Aircraft, (Though Multiple Variants Modeled) w/ 3D Cockpits and Externals of Other Aircraft Skinned onto the above said systems.
HAF922, Corsair RM850, ASRock Fata1ity 990FX Pro, Modified Corsair H100, AMD FX8350 @ 5.31GHz, 16GB G.SKILL@DDR2133, 2x R7970 Lightnings, +1 HD7950 @ 1.1/6.0GHz, Creative XFi Fata1ity Platinum Champ., 3x ASUS VS248HP + Hanns�G HZ201HPB + Acer AL2002 (5760x1080+1600x900+1680x1050), Oculus Rift CV CH Fighterstick, Pro Throt., Pro Pedals, TM Warthog & MFDs, Fanatec CSR Wheel/Shifter, Elite Pedals Intensity Pro 10-Bit, TrackIR 4 Pro, WD Black 1.5TB, WD Black 640GB, Samsung 850 500GB, My Book 4TB
|
|
#4254410 - 04/29/16 11:14 PM
Re: Campaign after Campaign - ED's new focus
[Re: SkateZilla]
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,183
Force10
I'm just a
|
I'm just a
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,183
CA
|
BMS Has 1 Aircraft, (Though Multiple Variants Modeled) w/ 3D Cockpits and Externals of Other Aircraft Skinned onto the above said systems. What it does have is an engaging and immersive campaign system complete with a lively battlefield...something ED has fallen way short on since Flanker. I would rather have one heavily detailed aircraft that gives me a reason to want to fly it in a war-like scenario...then 20 different aircraft that grow tiresome in a lifeless and sterile environment. That's just my preference though...different people are after different things.
Asus Z87 Sabertooth motherboard Windows 7 64 bit Home edition Intel I5 4670K @ 4.4 ghz 16 gig 1866mhz Corsair Vengence Pro memory EVGA GTX 970 Superclocked 4gb Video Card Intel 510 series 120gb SSD (boot drive) Samsung 840 1TB SSD Onboard Realtek sound ______________________________________________________
Oddball from Kelly's Heroes: "If we're late, it's cause we're dead"
|
|
#4254434 - 04/30/16 01:49 AM
Re: Campaign after Campaign - ED's new focus
[Re: Force10]
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,410
Tom_Weiss
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,410
3rd Planet, Sun
|
I agree with Ice for the most part. BMS gets more stick time on my computer than DCS does. That's odd for a title that "can't be considered competition". You could argue that the current DCS is somewhat just an upgraded version of Flanker 2.0 from the 90's...similar to how BMS is an upgrade from Falcon from the 90's. They even kept the same Black Sea map for 20 years. Because of FSX I never managed to find the time for BMS, which is a pity, but the more time I spent with FSX, the better it got, and then P3D came and it got even better and I missed all the latest BMS updates. DCS is a very nice sim, once it is not your main flight sim, you grow more tolerant of its delays and development problems, and from a skin maker perspective, it can be very entertaining
|
|
#4254482 - 04/30/16 09:14 AM
Re: Campaign after Campaign? - is this the new focus
[Re: Paradaz]
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 623
Sobek
Professional scapegoat
|
Professional scapegoat
Member
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 623
|
You're going back to these childish games again?
It is hardly childish for me to clarify when i'm not understood. Especially so when you skew my position in the discussion. Finally they [assuming you mean ED here] have at least one leg to stand on and you want them to go back? I can promise you that is not gonna do what you want. None of that implies that i made a promise in a capacity for ED. I made a promise. The entity of ED is separate from me. ED had no part in it. I can do that, you know?
Last edited by Sobek; 04/30/16 09:19 AM.
|
|
#4254521 - 04/30/16 01:35 PM
Re: Campaign after Campaign? - is this the new focus
[Re: SkateZilla]
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
|
BMS Has 1 Aircraft, (Though Multiple Variants Modeled) w/ 3D Cockpits and Externals of Other Aircraft Skinned onto the above said systems. [sarcasm on]Yeah, because the F-16 has 4 MFDs, right? And it can do VTOL as well, right? It is also capable of carrier traps without ripping the undercarriage off, obviously. I'm also quite sure that the F-18 and Harrier jets have the same flight characteristics of the F-16. After all, it's just an F-16 re-skinned, right?[/sarcasm off] You seriously think the BMS devs would lower their standards to just putting different aircraft skins on?
- Ice
|
|
#4254655 - 04/30/16 09:18 PM
Re: Campaign after Campaign? - is this the new focus
[Re: Paradaz]
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 850
toonces
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 850
Honolulu, Hawaii
|
It's easy to get drawn into a BMS vs. DCS discussion, which certainly isn't my point. I hold BMS up as a standard though, to explain my point that it is not necessary to model everything at the DCS A-10 level of complexity.
To some extent the aircraft other than the F-16 ARE re-skinned F-16's. But to leave it at that is, in my opinion, to oversimplify things. While the underlying avionics and systems are F-16, virtually everything else is unique to the other aircraft. The BMS F-18 is pretty remarkable to fly, even understanding that it is not completely true to the actual aircraft.
But so what? And that's the point. For many, many of us, it doesn't have to be completely realistic to the F-18 to be "good enough." If you must have a hardcore, fully simulated experience, you have the F-16...just like in DCS you have quite a few aircraft- A-10 and Blackshark and MiG-21 for sure. So if that's what you want, you have options. But every single DCS module doesn't have to be at that level of modeling.
Am I crazy here?
I'd probably feel the same way, frankly, even if it was possible to crank out DCS-level jets at a rapid pace. The truth of the matter is that I'm starting to find BMS just too complex anymore.
At the end of the day, I want DCS to succeed. I just want to fly and have fun. Right now I can't, and I see the potential, but I can't enjoy it in its current state and that frustrates me.
"A week or even a month for someone basically saying "shucks, this is pants" maybe. But their banhammer only has the forever setting. Gotta set phasers to stun for the localization of female undergarments, not kill yo." - Frederf
|
|
#4254674 - 05/01/16 12:21 AM
Re: Campaign after Campaign? - is this the new focus
[Re: toonces]
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
|
At the end of the day, I want DCS to succeed. I just want to fly and have fun. Right now I can't, and I see the potential, but I can't enjoy it in its current state and that frustrates me. +1 I don't see the point on insisting that other aircraft are simply "re-skinned" F-16s though. Just because they team did not "start each aircraft from scratch," it doesn't mean the new aircraft has just been re-skinned. If they are just truly F-16s with a different "skin," then why do other aircraft (Hornet, Harrier, etc.) have characteristics not present on the F-16? EDIT: If anyone could clarify what they mean by "re-skinned F-16s," I'd be very grateful. I don't think I fully understand the phrase at the moment, or perhaps the phrase is being used inappropriately?
- Ice
|
|
|
|