Falcon BMS vs DCS comparison

[rolypoly]

I haven't been able to find much on this topic. How does Falcon BMS compare to DCS modules in general, or the DCS F16 module in particular? DCS as far as I can tell has the most advanced simulation of both flight models as well as systems. Most other sims lag pretty far behind in both categories. From the videos that I've watched about Falcon BMS it is hard to say what level of simulation is there.

[lefty1117]

Also I would add one more thing, the Falcon series was of course dedicated to and built around the F16. I think the f16 feels a little bit better to fly in BMS and that shouldnt be surprising. DCS is broader in scope with some of the aircraft being outsourced to partners for development, with varying levels of quality. But the lack of dynamic campaign as I said before hurts it. Was just getting into BMS again after a long time and yeah, the campaign stuff is just so good. DCS with the BMS campaign stuff or BMS with the DCS graphics engine … either would be a dream

[Cabal]

Just my opinion; being into sims since the late 80s.

DCS always felt like a dislodged mixed up sandbox sim, creating more problems than solutions. It wasn't different with Enemy LockOn and the Flanker series (IL-2 suffered from similar stuff). They all lacked a soul and felt sterile. Not to mention the horrible UI. I don't even want to imagine their dynamic campaign with an editor-like dead UI. Compare it to Falcon with all the intact comms in the 2D menue, an event-ticker incl. a 2D map with dots showing what happens in the battlefield. It felt alive.

Those who enjoy DCS are hardcore nerds with crazy rigs who don't even know about Falcon 4.0's high standards since 1998 thx to it's dynamic campaign which was created by almost one developer. It was always about nice graphics and making pretty vids.

Next: Too many 3rd party modules are a problem, meaning they all need to be babysitted throughout the years and if these 3rd party devs quit, the module will hang.

Missions can be obnoxious. A redflag mission for the Viggen:
You rampstart from the airfield, flying a long journey to the "interesting part"... just to miss a little detail and repeating all this beginning crap again. Falcon gave you choices to skip that rampstart ♥♥♥♥, being ready to takeoff at the runway at a specific time; since it doesn't make any sense repeating it dozens of times.

DCS feels like it's more an eternal construction site than something built. There is too much happening; it's massively fragile. Just look up the patch notes. Modules being fixed even after many years since Early Access-release; so is everything else like campaigns and missions.

Regarding Campaigns: these as well as paid campaigns are trapped inside all the scripted "do this and then do that" stuff. This kind of "mission-string" is obsolete since decades. A mission isn't better just because they incl. lots of comms which you need to hear upon failure -> over and over and over again instead of skipping this part. Note: Not all missions are like that.

The feeling in Falcon 4.0 when flying over the FLOT at night, past a visible ground battle, getting "pinged" by enemy SAMs to estimate the course of our flight package just for one to get active below us (ambush)... every asset destroyed means that it has an effect. Yes, even SAMs employ tactics which are described in the Falcon 4.0 manual; something I never have experienced elsewhere. While all this happens, you hear the comms of other flight groups; everything moves in your 3D bubble as well as in the 2D bubble outside.

Among all flight sims I've played, DCS, LockOn and the Flanker series were the worst experiences. Good that I didn't knew back in 1998... that it would take decades for something potential to be announced again.

Fun aspect in DCS: Learning a module. But afterwards... you are left hanging. Not so in Falcon.

Additionally: It's thanks to a big share of the combat flight sim-community (especially on YouTube) which made the niche-genre forget about dynamic campaigns for many many years.

If you have a new rig and want graphics for your money: go DCS but don't expect much.
If you want a war experience (that's what it's about, right?) with even more realism reg. the F-16: go Falcon.

[XGUNNARX]

dcs is the better simulation.. but offen times there is nothing to do... online is fun in dcs but the scale of whats going on feels small.. the campaign in falcon/bms is 20 years ahead of its time.. and still has not been copied/recreated in modern simulations. Falcon feels like a real war is goin on out there.. 1000's of units out there while your doing your mission.. you feel like your just a cog in the machine.. all types of mayhem.

[Spiderman4000]

Dr. Jester の投稿を引用：

It is superior to DCS. In every way.

No even close at lease you can leave the game not this one.

[Dr. Jester]

Spiderman4000 の投稿を引用：

Dr. Jester の投稿を引用：

It is superior to DCS. In every way.

No even close at lease you can leave the game not this one.

Yes you can. That is a you problem.

[Hootman]

XGUNNARX の投稿を引用：

dcs is the better simulation.. but offen times there is nothing to do... online is fun in dcs but the scale of whats going on feels small.. the campaign in falcon/bms is 20 years ahead of its time.. and still has not been copied/recreated in modern simulations. Falcon feels like a real war is goin on out there.. 1000's of units out there while your doing your mission.. you feel like your just a cog in the machine.. all types of mayhem.

One game that sort of came close with a Dynamic Campaign was the Enemy Engaged series. I still have EECH loaded, and with the patches to bring it up to speed, it's quite enjoyable.

I'm really hoping the DCS Campaign Generator will be on the level of F4, or better. In the meantime, DCS Liberation campaign generator fills the void pretty well.

[Spiderman4000]

Dr. Jester の投稿を引用：

Spiderman4000 の投稿を引用：

No even close at lease you can leave the game not this one.

Yes you can. That is a you problem.

are u stalker?

[Dr. Jester]

Spiderman4000 の投稿を引用：

Dr. Jester の投稿を引用：

Yes you can. That is a you problem.

are u stalker?

You quoted me. Deal with the answer.

[Spiderman4000]

Dr. Jester の投稿を引用：

Spiderman4000 の投稿を引用：

are u stalker?

You quoted me. Deal with the answer.

Yep your a stalker. No the game does not let you leave, When you press the falcon bms.exe. That is starting the game, well to every one it is but apparently not to you. So it gives a new screen. I CANNOT LEAVE THAT SCREEN. Try it yourself, to get out of the game i have to press launch and then the game has an exit in button in lower left corner. So for 99% of games i can leave by the launcher screen, they do not lock on to the screen. I can move it around and press to leave at the top right corner. They do not MAKE me go deeper into the game so i can close it down. BMS has bad UI. I had to take a screen shot to see this but apparently the launcher does have a X in right hand top corner but its so dark you can miss it. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F5NZ9NZWoAA9gFW?format=jpg&name=medium

[rolypoly]

Can you please take it to PM? I found this thread to be extremely informative, let's not ruin it please for others.

[Spiderman4000]

Hootman の投稿を引用：

XGUNNARX の投稿を引用：

dcs is the better simulation.. but offen times there is nothing to do... online is fun in dcs but the scale of whats going on feels small.. the campaign in falcon/bms is 20 years ahead of its time.. and still has not been copied/recreated in modern simulations. Falcon feels like a real war is goin on out there.. 1000's of units out there while your doing your mission.. you feel like your just a cog in the machine.. all types of mayhem.

One game that sort of came close with a Dynamic Campaign was the Enemy Engaged series. I still have EECH loaded, and with the patches to bring it up to speed, it's quite enjoyable.

I'm really hoping the DCS Campaign Generator will be on the level of F4, or better. In the meantime, DCS Liberation campaign generator fills the void pretty well.

Yes i have that game. I just found it again lol. It was good game for its time. Yes the original falcon 4.0 campaign is amazing. I remember in a flight looking at the horizon and seeing massive flashes of light a battle raged on.

[Spiderman4000]

Cabal の投稿を引用：

Just my opinion; being into sims since the late 80s.

DCS always felt like a dislodged mixed up sandbox sim, creating more problems than solutions. It wasn't different with Enemy LockOn and the Flanker series (IL-2 suffered from similar stuff). They all lacked a soul and felt sterile. Not to mention the horrible UI. I don't even want to imagine their dynamic campaign with an editor-like dead UI. Compare it to Falcon with all the intact comms in the 2D menue, an event-ticker incl. a 2D map with dots showing what happens in the battlefield. It felt alive.

Those who enjoy DCS are hardcore nerds with crazy rigs who don't even know about Falcon 4.0's high standards since 1998 thx to it's dynamic campaign which was created by almost one developer. It was always about nice graphics and making pretty vids.

Next: Too many 3rd party modules are a problem, meaning they all need to be babysitted throughout the years and if these 3rd party devs quit, the module will hang.

Missions can be obnoxious. A redflag mission for the Viggen:
You rampstart from the airfield, flying a long journey to the "interesting part"... just to miss a little detail and repeating all this beginning crap again. Falcon gave you choices to skip that rampstart ♥♥♥♥, being ready to takeoff at the runway at a specific time; since it doesn't make any sense repeating it dozens of times.

DCS feels like it's more an eternal construction site than something built. There is too much happening; it's massively fragile. Just look up the patch notes. Modules being fixed even after many years since Early Access-release; so is everything else like campaigns and missions.

Regarding Campaigns: these as well as paid campaigns are trapped inside all the scripted "do this and then do that" stuff. This kind of "mission-string" is obsolete since decades. A mission isn't better just because they incl. lots of comms which you need to hear upon failure -> over and over and over again instead of skipping this part. Note: Not all missions are like that.

The feeling in Falcon 4.0 when flying over the FLOT at night, past a visible ground battle, getting "pinged" by enemy SAMs to estimate the course of our flight package just for one to get active below us (ambush)... every asset destroyed means that it has an effect. Yes, even SAMs employ tactics which are described in the Falcon 4.0 manual; something I never have experienced elsewhere. While all this happens, you hear the comms of other flight groups; everything moves in your 3D bubble as well as in the 2D bubble outside.

Among all flight sims I've played, DCS, LockOn and the Flanker series were the worst experiences. Good that I didn't knew back in 1998... that it would take decades for something potential to be announced again.

Fun aspect in DCS: Learning a module. But afterwards... you are left hanging. Not so in Falcon.

Additionally: It's thanks to a big share of the combat flight sim-community (especially on YouTube) which made the niche-genre forget about dynamic campaigns for many many years.

If you have a new rig and want graphics for your money: go DCS but don't expect much.
If you want a war experience (that's what it's about, right?) with even more realism reg. the F-16: go Falcon.

I have the games you mentioned, yes you are right they do feel sterile once you leave a certain area. Falcon 4 .0 is not like that. The problem with the game it was very hard to get into. Lots to learn even though they gave you a big manual which helps a lot. I might find that game box again. Yeah i still have the original game and manual. Bms is problematic because its so confusing. It does not gently get you into the game your told to read the manual with no help from the community except "people" who have bms as a religion coming out to defend it. The problem of course is in real life, USAF, USN, RAF, etc all train their pilots in stages. They have to but not here. its bang your in a F16. Of course i am not saying do not fly a F16, there should be help to learn the game in sections instead of reading 4 or 5 manuals. IL2 and DCS have their place, they were great games in their time. Il2 certainly saved the flight sim game in the early 2000s it was dying on its feet. Not many sims were coming at that time. Even now they are few and far between. Il2 was great for online fights though. I cannot use mouse look. Some say use alt +2 but not does not work. I tried going into 3 but it does nothing. Some say drag can click on the right mouse button. it does nothing. Manual does not help.

[Dr. Jester]

Spiderman4000 の投稿を引用：

Dr. Jester の投稿を引用：

You quoted me. Deal with the answer.

Yep your a stalker. No the game does not let you leave, When you press the falcon bms.exe. That is starting the game, well to every one it is but apparently not to you. So it gives a new screen. I CANNOT LEAVE THAT SCREEN. Try it yourself, to get out of the game i have to press launch and then the game has an exit in button in lower left corner. So for 99% of games i can leave by the launcher screen, they do not lock on to the screen. I can move it around and press to leave at the top right corner. They do not MAKE me go deeper into the game so i can close it down. BMS has bad UI. I had to take a screen shot to see this but apparently the launcher does have a X in right hand top corner but its so dark you can miss it. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F5NZ9NZWoAA9gFW?format=jpg&name=medium

Prove it.

I can see the "X" in there for you to quit. That is again a you problem.

Show me a game where you can quit it by the launcher.

[Relay]

Falcon will win the long run

[|HATE|]

McDonald Steve pretty much nailed most of it. I have both BMS and DCS Viper, and to be honest, DCS is really fun to fly if you want a little bit more visual gratification...however...the BMS team has been crafting and honing that simulation for YEARS. They are really extreme in their dedication to implementing systems in a way that puts DCS to shame in every single way. If you want an immersive flight sim choose DCS, if you want an immersive combat and F-16 simulation, choose BMS.

Unlike others, I actually found key binding in BMS to be easier and more intuitive. It can be a little more overwhelming, because so much more is implemented in BMS then DCS.

You absolutely cannot compete with the BMS dynamic campaign. It truly is one of the greatest features of any game, any where. And, you don't need other people to truly enjoy the complexity of the game. DCS doesn't really have any available that comes close.