kylania Posted October 3, 2011 Posted October 3, 2011 Not fair to say that there isn't an F-16 sim, since the Falcon 4 / BMS / OpenFalcon / FreeFalcon / whatever the hell malarky is going on with that has kept the sim alive and (somewhat) up-to-date more than the F-15 and F/A-18. Making a DCS F-16 commercial product would be a waste. As well done as those mods and conversions are, a DCS quality level F-16 sim would totally overshadow all of them. The quality levels with each of those is so varied that it's distracting and all of them "feel" old to me. Not to mention for someone new coming into the mods they have to track down and buy a 13 year old, out of print, $60+ price gouged game just to use the new mods while at the same time not getting confused with available retail F4:AF which looks like it's the same game but won't work. All good products, but none of it compares to a DCS module. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Christmas Cheer - A Landing Practice Mission : Beta Paint Schemes : HOTAS Keyboard Map : Bingo Fuel - A DCS A-10C Movie
HerrKaputt Posted October 3, 2011 Posted October 3, 2011 Will we? Some of us customers are very discerning and picky. :) Yep (no sarcasm).
Moa Posted October 3, 2011 Posted October 3, 2011 (edited) Whatever we get it'll be something that air forces use *now* since that is where ED/TFC get the bulk of their development money from military sources. F-16 is a great market for training (used by lots of air forces world-wide), so is F-15. F/A-18 is less of a market (but the US Department of the Navy is a big enough customer to be worth it all by itself, with 1000+ Hornets of various flavours). The F-14 is only currently used by Iran. That's no market. (plus, apart from fuel range, it is junk IMHO compared to modern fighters, just let your antiquated Top Gun fantasies go fellas - try the VNAO mod and you'll quickly see the AIM-54C is only good against lumbering targets not fighters). The other alternative is that the next DCS could be a US trainer aircraft (T-34, T-6) if there was sufficient money in it for ED. This would be disappointing for the majority of us, but most of us would stlll fly anyway :) As Wags' signature says, "EVERYTHING IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE". Edited October 3, 2011 by Moa
Laud Posted October 3, 2011 Posted October 3, 2011 If it would be a T-34 or T-6 (or similar) the A-10 will keep most of the attention on it. ;) Everybody asks for afterburner and then you get a prop??? LOL! [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Asus ROG STRIX Z390-F Gaming, Intel Core i7 9700k , 32gb Corsair DDR4-3200 Asus RTX 2070 super, Samsung 970 EVO Plus M2, Win10 64bit, Acer XZ321QU (WQHD) TM HOTAS Warthog, SAITEK Rudder Pedals, TIR 5
RIPTIDE Posted October 3, 2011 Posted October 3, 2011 Two afterburners! Not one! TWO!!!!11!!! :D [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Sov13t Posted October 3, 2011 Posted October 3, 2011 Two afterburners! Not one! TWO!!!!11!!! :D We want MOAR! [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] 51st PVO Regiment | Forum | Statistics DCS: MiG-21Bis
RIPTIDE Posted October 3, 2011 Posted October 3, 2011 . (plus, apart from fuel range, it is junk IMHO compared to modern fighters, just let your antiquated Top Gun fantasies go fellas - try the VNAO mod and you'll quickly see the AIM-54C is only good against lumbering targets not fighters). baah.... The thing is, pulling G's to shake the AIM-54C(s) immediately puts one on the defensive where a 120C/D can then finish the job on a faltering, yet High-G, SA and energy deficient target. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Pilotasso Posted October 3, 2011 Posted October 3, 2011 He who truly loves aviation will love whats next no matter which one. nuff said! .
RIPTIDE Posted October 3, 2011 Posted October 3, 2011 He who truly loves aviation will love whats next no matter which one. nuff said! If they surprise us with MiG-23MLD, will you also love this? [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
104th_Crunch Posted October 3, 2011 Posted October 3, 2011 Not fair to say that there isn't an F-16 sim, since the Falcon 4 / BMS / OpenFalcon / FreeFalcon / whatever the hell malarky is going on with that has kept the sim alive and (somewhat) up-to-date more than the F-15 and F/A-18. Making a DCS F-16 commercial product would be a waste. I will respectfully disagree. I have BMS 4 on my desktop ready to try, but all the community updates, while awesome, are still based off of code from 1999. I will just point out the graphics alone of these updates. Sorry, but to me graphics are an important part of immersion now a days. Hard to go back to something that looks like it came form 1999, and all those mods still look like they are from 1999. If they didn't, I would be simming with a Falcon 4 mod right now and NOTHING else. That is just me though.
Dimebag Posted October 3, 2011 Posted October 3, 2011 Yes, CRAZY talk!!!!! Let's see, the last... F16 sim: Falcon 4 Release date 1999 (all other variations are based on this) F18 sim: Janes F18 Release date 1999 F15 sim: Janes F15 Release date 1998 12 years since the last non survey sim for these 3 aircrafts. 12 years since any of us have had a full combat simulator of a fast jet. That is a freaking long time in the computer world. FC does not count as it is a survey sim. I can not agree that these jets have been done to death lol. I tell ya, the frustration I have of not having a fast jet on the same level of DCS since 1999 is killing me. I love FC, but I want something using modern PC tech and is a hi-fi sim of a fast jet. When I think about it, it is almost unbelievable that we have NONE. Exactly, just because you might have played it to death doesn't mean they have been done to death. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Find us at http://virtual-roulettes.forumotion.com/
evilnate Posted October 4, 2011 Posted October 4, 2011 I will respectfully disagree. I have BMS 4 on my desktop ready to try, but all the community updates, while awesome, are still based off of code from 1999. I will just point out the graphics alone of these updates. Sorry, but to me graphics are an important part of immersion now a days. Hard to go back to something that looks like it came form 1999, and all those mods still look like they are from 1999. If they didn't, I would be simming with a Falcon 4 mod right now and NOTHING else. That is just me though. After you give it a try and become comfortable, reply again with your opinion :). On topic: F-18 for the win and ED to get lots of revenue!
jp203000 Posted October 4, 2011 Posted October 4, 2011 I tried very hard to adapt to BMS but failed.Not only because of the poor graphics ,but the plane is so stable that I can't get a feeling of fly.
thaisocom Posted October 4, 2011 Posted October 4, 2011 BMS graphics is quite alright as long as you don't fly too close to the ground. :D [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] CM HAF-X | Corsair HX1000i | ASUS P8P67Pro | Intel Core i7 2600 @ 4.0GHz | Corsair CWCH70 | G.Skill 8GB DDR3 1600MHz | ASUS GeForce GTX 970 4GB | Plextor M5Pro 256GB | WD Caviar Black 1TB * 2 RAID 0 | WD Caviar Green 2TB | Windows 10 Professional X64 | TM HOTAS Warthog | Saitek Pro Flight Rudder Pedal
vrv Posted October 4, 2011 Posted October 4, 2011 plus, apart from fuel range, it is junk IMHO compared to modern fighters :megalol: [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] EtherealN: I will promptly perform a sex change and offer my hand in marriage to whomever
104th_Crunch Posted October 4, 2011 Posted October 4, 2011 After you give it a try and become comfortable, reply again with your opinion :). On topic: F-18 for the win and ED to get lots of revenue! Quick flight tonight. For sure the best looking Falcon 4 mod yet :) , AFAIK. Still behind, but good. Anyone, please PM me with any mods that may even make it look better. I just might get back into Falcon with this. Sorry for the O/T.
Cali Posted October 4, 2011 Posted October 4, 2011 Crunch, I was the same way you are. I flew Open Falcon years ago, but could never really get into it because of the graphics. I think the BMS guys did a good job and I think the graphics don't look too bad now. Maybe it's because it was years ago when I tried and forgot, but I like BMS. FC2 is still fun, but all the servers are the same, same ole stuff, some or worse then others. This month so far I got into the habit as a lot of people. I don't care to much if I die, oh well, treating it like air quake. Maybe it's the many years I have been flying it and it's finally catching up to me. That's basically all I see now, people doing dumb things or the same thing over and over and over and over again......get my drift? i7-4820k @ 3.7, Windows 7 64-bit, 16GB 1866mhz EVGA GTX 970 2GB, 256GB SSD, 500GB WD, TM Warthog, TM Cougar MFD's, Saitek Combat Pedals, TrackIR 5, G15 keyboard, 55" 4K LED
Phantom88 Posted October 4, 2011 Posted October 4, 2011 Can you imagine flying this with todays Great graphics and DCS high fidelity flight model? Patrick
jp203000 Posted October 4, 2011 Posted October 4, 2011 (edited) ED knows people want a mutirole Flighter ED wants a mutirole Flighter ED wants the Fligher to be good ED therefore redoubles effort to meet people's need. Enough has beed said about the comparison .I just don't think the two games are comparable , after all f16 is a flighter, a10 is a striker , at this point a10 is put at disadvantage. DCS has the advantage over bms in graphics. Edited October 4, 2011 by jp203000
hitman Posted October 4, 2011 Posted October 4, 2011 Crunch, I was the same way you are. I flew Open Falcon years ago, but could never really get into it because of the graphics. I think the BMS guys did a good job and I think the graphics don't look too bad now. Maybe it's because it was years ago when I tried and forgot, but I like BMS. FC2 is still fun, but all the servers are the same, same ole stuff, some or worse then others. This month so far I got into the habit as a lot of people. I don't care to much if I die, oh well, treating it like air quake. Maybe it's the many years I have been flying it and it's finally catching up to me. That's basically all I see now, people doing dumb things or the same thing over and over and over and over again......get my drift? You can uhh...always hop into FSX and actually fly without the urge to go blow stuff up, you know...:music_whistling: Intel 13900k @ 5.8ghz | 64gb GSkill Trident Z | MSI z790 Meg ACE | Zotac RTX4090 | Asus 1000w psu | Slaw RX Viper 2 pedals | VPForce Rhino/VKB MCE Ultimate + STECS Mk2 MAX / Virpil MongoosT50+ MongoosT50CM | Virpil TCS+/ AH64D grip/custom AH64D TEDAC | Samsung Odyssey G9 + Odyssey Ark | Next Level Racing Flight Seat Pro | WinWing F-18 MIPS | No more VR for this pilot.
Cali Posted October 4, 2011 Posted October 4, 2011 You can uhh...always hop into FSX and actually fly without the urge to go blow stuff up, you know...:music_whistling: I can't do that....what's the fun of just flying around? i7-4820k @ 3.7, Windows 7 64-bit, 16GB 1866mhz EVGA GTX 970 2GB, 256GB SSD, 500GB WD, TM Warthog, TM Cougar MFD's, Saitek Combat Pedals, TrackIR 5, G15 keyboard, 55" 4K LED
hitman Posted October 4, 2011 Posted October 4, 2011 If you love to fly, flying is all that matters...you bloodthirsty combat pilot maniac. :D Intel 13900k @ 5.8ghz | 64gb GSkill Trident Z | MSI z790 Meg ACE | Zotac RTX4090 | Asus 1000w psu | Slaw RX Viper 2 pedals | VPForce Rhino/VKB MCE Ultimate + STECS Mk2 MAX / Virpil MongoosT50+ MongoosT50CM | Virpil TCS+/ AH64D grip/custom AH64D TEDAC | Samsung Odyssey G9 + Odyssey Ark | Next Level Racing Flight Seat Pro | WinWing F-18 MIPS | No more VR for this pilot.
Recommended Posts