Hey all, curious for some input.
I am interested in the mission and planning quality of BMS, as currently DCS is, as we all know, lacking in this area.
The issue is that I’m a VR addict. I cannot imagine going back to a monitor for flying. I will only clarify that I have not used head tracking with a monitor, and I suppose that would be needed for BMS.
Is the juice worth the squeeze for both learning the Viper, a new UI, and buying head tracking?
BMS is upgrading to DX11/VR arent they? (edit: DX11 should be out already, VR is on the plans, but I dont see any definite date)
Yes, definitely VR in about two weeks.
If it’s at all technically possible, I believe the BMS team can do it, but that said, it’s an engine originally designed for 2D in 1998. Trying to make it output two separate visual renders for VR has got to be daunting. I sure hope they do succeed though, because the experience in Falcon BMS is second to none. The F-16’s not even my favorite plane by far, but I love the environment the campaign has, with a living war on such a huge scale, and your actions matter from mission to mission. It is very hard to go back to pancake mode though.
I’ve heard it put this way: DCS is a great (the best?) fighter cockpit simulator. Falcon BMS is the best fighter pilot simulator. I think that’s about right.
I’d definitely suggest trying it. Any knowledge you gain on the Falcon will translate to DCS eventually, and you’re out what, $6? If you don’t want to buy a headtracker, there might be a way to play it on a virtual monitor in VR, with headtracking that way. At one point our brave leader had a previous version working in VR with VorpX too.
This is a great example, that ties directly into what I was saying in the DCS WWII thread. What kind of realism is it you want to simulate?
Trying out F4 for the first time gave me one of the greatest wow factors ever, as a flightsimmer. Topped only by trying VR for the first time…maybe?
Everything from the GUI and music to the flightmodel, systems modelling and the campaign, just blew me away. And I already had the TM F-22 Pro and F-16 TQS, which just enhanced the experience.
But, like you, I have a hard time going back to 2D again…
VR is a blessing, and a curse.
dont know if you looking at trackIR but there are also cheaper alternatives available
I found F4 to be a almost impenetrable simulator for casual play (maybe one session a week)
I made a good effort with it and have been meaning to download 4.35 but just don’t have the time to really dive into it
Do it! You won’t regret it. I am every bit as VR-addicted as you are. But when the COVID nonsense started, I got bored and BMS called me back. There is so much rich detail not found in any other sim that I won’t begin to try to list them. But, yes, TrackIR or similar is essential.
imagine F4 Korea map, F4 dynamic camping but instead F16 insert F86, F9F and MiG15, how hard could that be for BMS team !? 
I would never leave the house again 
Yup, this. The feeling, or sensation, of being in an aircraft, of any type, is what hooks me - being “enclosed” in a cockpit helps a lot (add in some haptics and things go up even further). VR does that for me. That “enclosed” bit has its negatives too though.
As a game, BMS has always been ahead - one ‘cog’ in a big machine sort of thing. More strategy game I guess. Sims back in the day HAD to have gameplay - the graphics were simple (for a reason). BMS is an “old school” sim.
A lot of analogies here; BMS is like a full-blown, multi-million dollar defense contractor procedural simulator + war-game - the “sensations” bit would be wasted on the the target audience. Versus something that is much prettier yet dumbed down regarding gameplay (not systems).
Graphics and systems seems to be ED’s priority, not game play. Graphics sell games; BMS doesn’t have to make any money. ED, IMHO, rely on multi-player for game play - think “air quake” and/or scenes from the movie “Braveheart” as ‘Paco’ Chierici, I think it was, once said:
I think BMS’s graphics are fine, it’s just missing the part where I feel like I’m actually in a plane, not manipulating a 2D image. I’m never going to get the combat flight sim of my dreams (unless I win the Lotto and convince my wife I can throw away $20 million of it, or more, to start my own company). So I make do.
When, if?, BMS gets VR then I’ll be about as close as I ‘dreamed of’ for about $5000-ish.
Off-topic but, MSFS2020 is lacking in all of the above - TO ME (likely not you, dear reader from the future). It is the scenery viewer King though and another last great hope of stimulating interest in the hobby. That’s a Good Thing.
I’ve drifted. Back to my coffee, G’Day all.
Regarding the head tracking , i have a TiR 5 with a Pro clip that has been gathering dust since i went VR 3 years ago . You can have it if you pm a shipping address . (U.S. only)
The next version (4.36) will be around in the next few months and is set to include avionics and more AI changes. A bigger change might happen next year with 4.37.
VR may be in one of the latest versions apparently so potentially it could be seen eventually. The Devs work so many versions ahead of the release.
Based on old code means nothing if you have access to the source code and have the time to rewrite it - so the real limit to Falcon is actually available resource.
Considering they are having trouble finding 3D Artists for the assets now,
and the fact that even the other aircraft use re-wrapped F-16 Avionics.
Slim to None.
They have the source code and have rewrote the core GFX Engine to DX11, but iirc, there’s an issue with the a few ways the frame buffer and core rendering format structure of F4 is written.
Afaik, they are looking into a way around it, stereoscopic rendering is first, then VR integration.
DCS had a easy road to oculus, it had already supported stereoscopic rendering.
really? interesting. thought there are planty of 3D artists out there but coders are few and far between
Depending on the constraints, even a good 3D artist might nope out of it.
I definitely “nope-d” out of a few texturing requests…
I was part of several game mod projects and the hardest part always was the art.
for some reason I thought it is the coding especially for flight sims as there are lots of systems
but talking about casual approach to F4 BMS. is there a way to restrict the weapons used in a campaign (stock or third party) ? I mean if I want to fly the style of '60/'70 with only dumb bombs and heatseekers. is something like this possible?
because in the end it doesn’t matter if I fly F86 or F16 its the various weapon systems management which makes the difference imo.
Thats an interesting idea. I like this
The Izzy’s did a lot of stuff with their F-16A’s with only dumb bombs and heaters for quite a while. The Israeli theatre is pretty fun to play in BMS.
Come to think of it, until the AMRAAM, the Viper was a heater only fighter. Never got the Sparrow in USAF service, if I recall correctly.
The USAF did have some Sparrow capable F-16s and not just the ADF models from the 1989/90 period. They were basically replaced by AMRAAM by the time the capability was put on them though.