Funny how everything has to turn into a word war shouting match with you.

Bottom line is that BMS is still a mod no matter how you look at it. A fancy one at that but still a mod. And I wasn't actually saying that it's bad, just different. I haven't seen any of the other theaters. I was only comparing it with the Korea one. And yes, I have installed it recently. The F/A-18 is the F-16-52 cockpit avionics and it looks like crap compared to every module in DCS including the Hawk. I'll take the high fidelity DCS stuff over the old Falcon stuff any day. And that's coming from someone that actually ran a Falcon group regularly and loved the dynamic campaign. It's not just worth it to me to deal with such an old sim. And if you haven't tried Buddyspike Blue Flag, I suggest you try it. It's all PVP and will make you soil your shorts. So, AI campaigns are cool, but flying against real people in a much more realistic combat theater, albeit slightly limited in some ways, is where it's at for me now.

Glad you found the humor in it!
And yeah, I know which side of the galaxy you're on, nevermind which side of the fence! Hahaha!!

There's no Hornet in that game either

Got a Viper though.

I'm not sure I like that version though. I still prefer the Earth-bound one

You obviously haven't played BMS 4.33. That 3 is a remarkable difference in terrain graphics, trees everywhere and many other idiosyncratic nuances. Umm, and the core part of the sim? You're being VERY disingenuous. The BMS flight model was rewritten from the ground up using actual F-16 simulator data and is incredibly advanced, and no longer relies on "computation tables" which you see in 99% of other flight sims. You should read up on the detailed explanation of what they did on BMS' site. There are remarkable differences between BMS and the previous iterations, and .33 takes it even further.

It isn't a mod for F4. It is a complete re-working of the F4 code. It IS the latest and greatest simulation "thingy."

And no, we won't move to DCS. I have DCS A-10C and Black Shark 1 and 2, and they're quite boring once you realize the world you're flying in is static.

Well, then I stand corrected if that's the case. I know that the BMS people had been trying to get their hands on the F4 code for a long time. Up to some point it's just been a mod. If that's the case and they were actually able to do that and rewrite it then more power to them. Just so I'm clear on this though, the version I have that I downloaded and ran recently is 4.33. And it did require the original disc so that's why I assumed it was no different from previous versions.

After I installed it and flew around Korea, it looked exactly the same as it did in the original Microprose version with the exception of trees here and there. So I don't know where you're getting the different graphics you're referring to. Also, I did try the carrier ops. I was able to land but when I taxied I blew up and went through the deck. The avionics looked exactly the same as the F-16 so if you're seeing something different I'd like to know why. But the bottom line is it looked the same to me and still had the same bugs. So I tossed it back in the trash can. And I did have the add on Korea and Israel theaters.

Maybe someone could post some screen shots. I'd be interested in seeing them.

Never mind, I found some screen shots. Looks like "High Tiles" with some scattered trees. Also, I'd like to point out that I had problems with the airports vanishing. This is an old F4 bug. So obviously the BMS guys still have a ways to go before they clean up the old messes. I'll stay away from it.

WHO IS SHOUTING??!!?!?!!
Hehehe...


You say that like it's a bad thing. Like the dated graphics. So what if it's a mod? I've never argued that it wasn't. And it doesn't require the EXE nor does it require a full Falcon 4.0 install. These "requirements" have been in place for TOTALLY different reasons.... oh, and I'm not shouting, it's all caps for emphasis.


Jon Snow.


Hardcoded limitation, just as the 2D menu is at a much lower resolution (1024x786 IIRC?) but the 3D world can handle higher resolutions (5896x1080 in my case). Don't confuse avionics with flight modelling though.


Again, BMS does not compete in the graphics department. It's a COMBAT flight simulator, not a wallpaper and screenshot generator.


And the reasons for it not being worth it are??? Aside from being an "old" sim...


And if you haven't tried Falcon Online, I suggest you try it. It's all PVP and will make you soil your shorts. So, AI campaigns are cool and you can totally do that in Falcon, but flying against real people in a much more realistic combat theatre is also totally possible in BMS, is where it's at for me now.

And you know what the FUN part is? Online PvP in a MULTI-ROLE aircraft!!

Dude, you need to lay down and take a nap.

"You stand corrected", I think is what you mean.


Just because it requires the original disc, you jumped to all sorts of conclusions. Just because you ran 4.33 and installed using the original disc, you thought you know everything there is to know about 4.33. Nice.


Oh, totally agree with you there. I provided some screenshots below and cannot see the difference at all!!







I think you've shown us really how reliable you're "it looked the same to me" statements are. Can you cite one bug that existed in F4.0 that is still there now?


You just said you didn't see any other theaters.... but now you say you have Israel theatres too? Which one is it?


See above! See if you can spot the differences too and tell me which one is Falcon 4.0 original Microprose and which one is the mod? I bet you can't tell them apart!!


Which airports are vanishing? If it's an old F4 bug, I'm sure you can tell me straight away which airport it is and how to replicate this bug.


And so it begins.... attacking ME instead of countering the CONTENT of the posts...

Your posts are annoying. It's a constant barrage of quote mania. You need to chill out, take a deep breath and just learn to have a regular meaningful conversation instead of banging a gong all the time. I'm out of this conversation completely. This is supposed to be about DCS anyhow. Had it with the BS.

I can't attest to the authenticity of the BMS F-18. I love the Viper, and have spent an overwhelming majority of my seat time in it.

Does this look like vanilla Falcon 4.0?



vs. vanilla:

Because it sure as hell doesn't to me. I have flown almost every single iteration of the sim, starting with the original SuperPak and Freefalcon and yes, the original BMS from way back when. There's no comparison with the original, vanilla version and what we have now.

{edited] I have no issues with giving DCS credit where it is due (graphics, training scenarios, DCS A10C, good for beginners, and so on) but mis-informed statements and [edited] deserve to be exposed to sunlight and shown for what they really are.


You need to get your eyes tested and get new glasses. You also need to grow a thick skin and learn to respond to direct responses to your posts. And as with most Pro-ED supporters, you need to learn to be honest with yourself and with the flight simming community.


Someone else asked about BMS and you responded to it and we responded to you.... and now you cry about it? You had the choice of responding or not... and now you throw your toys out of the pram? Hypocritical of you to tell me to "chill out", isn't it?


For those that have open minds, here's an interesting thread on the FMs in BMS. If you still think that the other aircraft is just a "re-skinned F-16" in terms of flight model, please post your argument on that thread so that the developers can respond to you directly and you can get the correct answer DIRECTLY from them.

Really? Coz I can't see the difference between original Microprose Falcon 4.0 and BMS 4.33.3 as shown in the screenshots above.... can you?

Also, in the top picture, you can clearly see the airport but it's not there in the second picture... this is the long-known Falcon bug of airports vanishing!!

BMS can trace its origins far, far back to the days eFalcon 1.09 ... which was based on the original Falcon 4.0 1.07 source code. The Realism Patches and Free Falcon (up to a point in time) have always been mods, e.g. tweaks of the original data files but using the 1.08 executable. However, eFalcon 1.09 and all variations thereof through to BMS 4.33 are newly compiled executables from source code. In that regard BMS 4.33 is a more than just a mod. But no, it's not a 100% completely new game, some of the original code still remains.

But BMS 4.33 has vastly different graphics capabilities. Those trees aren't planted there by hand, that's auto-generating terrain features, something the old Falcon 4.0 could not do. Look at the sky, clouds? Didn't have those either back then. Changing weather patterns, complete with rain and low hanging clouds and thunderstorms. That's definitely something new as well and not something you can "hack into the game with Notepad". Also the HDR lightning and shadow casting int he cockpit, the water glare and both cloud and object reflections, those are new too and again, something that requires significant programming to achieve.

If your Falcon 4.0 installation looks exactly like the original Microprose version, are you sure you installed the right game?

I get that BMS is not even close to be a top notch in graphics among flight simulators but not only it is not that bad (lol saying that nothing has changed since AF is a little too much) but also it should not be about observe the scenery (this is not xplane or p3d), it is about situation awareness and engagement....in other words IT IS ABOUT WAR. This is exactly why DCS sucks and probably will for many years to come. DCS has an amazing flight model simulator (although its flight model has some flaws too) but everything related to WAR sucks...weapons sucks, damage model sucks, the combat environment sucks, the ground forces collaboration sucks, the AI sucks.......well everything that is important to the war zone simulation sucks in this game.

DCS is just a result of modern games trending, which i don't like. Players these days ask for eyecandy features and/or more accessible gameplay and that's exactly what most today developers aim to! They just ignore AI improvements (which get counterbalanced with artificial difficulties), increase gaming factors/effect (grinding, artificial difficulties, etc...), fast game matches (eg. elaborated game sessions takes too much time so let's make a scenario where the airbase is just 4 min from the war front....this is so realistic) and focus on eyecandy features forgetting everything else....let's not forget that gamers are even proud to either pay high prices or pay for split contents, DLC, that most of times adds nothing

I'll be honest with you, i would 10 times definitely pick a game with Falcon 4: AF graphics but still 3d cockpit and BMS changes rather than an airframe simulator like DCS that has little longevity due to no real time dynamic campaign, which for me most of time get translated to repetition and no combat zone feeling. Obviously i love if the game has a more realistic graphics, but gameplay come first and, in case of a war game, war feeling come second right after the gameplay.

Heck, if you don't notice anything else, how can you miss a full 6DoF cockpit with all gauges, switches, knobs, and buttons working? In AF, the pilot had to switch between the 2D pit for cockpit work and the 3D pit to maintain SA... and in the 3D pit, only a select few gauges were working.


Major sucky-sucky in many levels...


One of our first MP flights in BMS 4.32 and our 3-ship was on egress and we had contacts on our scope coming hot. We panicked, afraid we were getting jumped. AWACS must've been down as we couldn't get him on the horn to ID the contacts for us. There must've been a "buddy spike" call but in the ruckus, we all missed that. Moments later, our TGP shows us the familiar shape of F-15s... they were on their way home and their flight path took them about less than half a mile from us. The first thing one of the guys says is "You don't get that in DCS!"

He was wrong. He is wrong. Sure, you can get that in DCS. However, the main difference is that you'd have to script in all of those things. Having an AI flight jump your flight, having AI friendlies RTB as you egress, you'd have to script all of that. In a DC, it is simply there because of the nature of the DC.

I've always said that one of my initial worries when playing BMS was whether I could cope with the lower graphics. The cockpit shadows in 4.32 were.... bad. The graphics in BMS when coming from DCS leaves a LOT to be desired! However, once the immersion kicks in.... well....

For someone who rants on in a post about the thread being about DCS yet finishes the rant with "Had it with the" Black Shark"??? your point is invalid my friend. You need to upgrade to BS2 found Here
You will it enjoy BS2 more than BS mate

Thats the point. It´s like a strategic game with a flight sim on top of it. It´s designed from ground up for this purpose.

Despite the original LOMAC was announced to have some sort of a DC (the feature was canceled later), AFAIK DCS is not build with that feature in mind. Over the years reading the DCS forum, I got the impression that they are happy with the mission and campaign structur they have. I doubt we will ever see a built-in-DC in DCS. Mbot`s campaigns are great and show what is possible with LUA programming for DCS, though it will never be so immersive. So I happily take DCS as it is and continue dreaming.