DCS F-16C

viper12 · by **viper12** » 25 May 2019, 19:31

Seems like a kinda neat flight simulator :

Wonder though if they're gonna have a fully dynamic campaign like Falcon 4.0.

sprstdlyscottsmn · by **sprstdlyscottsmn** » 25 May 2019, 21:57

DCS does not have dynamic campaigns, but it is otherwise amazing with the right modules.

gtg947h · by **gtg947h** » 26 May 2019, 11:32

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:DCS does not have dynamic campaigns, but it is otherwise amazing with the right modules.

I'm sort of surprised nobody else has tried to implement a dynamic campaign since. Not that I have the time to mess with it any more

durahawk · by **durahawk** » 29 Jul 2019, 16:09

Latest trailer... looks amazing!

Scorpion1alpha · by **Scorpion1alpha** » 31 Jul 2019, 13:43

durahawk wrote:

Latest trailer... looks amazing!

That trailer was more exciting than that Top Gun 2 trailer!

basher54321 · by **basher54321** » 31 Jul 2019, 17:21

Think I will disagree with that - Top Gun has the nostalgia factor and loads of cheese to boot

sprstdlyscottsmn · by **sprstdlyscottsmn** » 31 Jul 2019, 17:54

The F-16 Trailer definitely made my bank account quiver in fear.

jaws · by **jaws** » 02 Aug 2019, 05:35

Awesome! Negative Maverick, the AF took care of business!

invictus · by **invictus** » 02 Aug 2019, 18:31

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:The F-16 Trailer definitely made my bank account quiver in fear.

So true,got the same problem

indigowarrior9 · by **indigowarrior9** » 20 Aug 2020, 06:11

DCS F16C Launch trailer:
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXZsi7CTpys

das__kardinal · by **das__kardinal** » 18 Jun 2021, 10:20

As a DCS player I bought the F-16 module after trying BMS (a long long long time after I used to play Falcon 4...), but I was spoiled by DCS' modern graphics. Anyway, the module's far from finished yet it's already a very pleasant thing. It's nice to be able to compare the cockpit philosophy with the F-18 for example. Poor Hornet feels like a pig when it comes to performance though... :mrgreen:

ricnunes · by **ricnunes** » 21 Jun 2021, 14:45

I don't have the DCS F-16 module and one of the reason is that IMO Falcon BMS 4.35 is far superior to DCS except for graphics and some "flight feeling" (which nonetheless is also great in BMS).
Not only BMS has the already mentioned awesome dynamic campaign (something which I believe DCS will never have) but it also has a superior modeling is systems such as Datalinks, IFF and of course ATC operations/radio comms are far superior to DCS. On top of this the AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles actually work in BMS while in DCS they are a crap (for instance any Russian missile like the AA-10 or AA-12 is superior) since they display some extremely odd behavior during the final stages of flight. The recently released DCS update promises to correct the AMRAAM problems but even if it does (and hopefully it does) it took ED more than 10 years to fix such as basic bug which IMO is almost unforgivable!

On top of this BMS is free :wink:

sprstdlyscottsmn · by **sprstdlyscottsmn** » 21 Jun 2021, 17:38

I have them both. As I fly in VR for the last several years now, DCS takes the cake. The modeling is not up to BMS standards yet, but they fully advertise as being Early Access and are improving it constantly. Falcon 4.0 and BMS gave me many years of joy, but now I sit in the cockpit of the F-16, look around at everything I am already familiar with, do a cold start-up from memory, wrap my hands around my Thrustmaster Cougar, and take off across the Persian Gulf flying through volumetric clouds.

ED says they want to do a Dynamic Campaign, and while part of me says "why is it taking so long, Microprose did it in the late 90s?" I then have to remind myself that, AFAIK, ONLY Microprose has done it. Not Janes, not Novalogic, not Eagle Dynamics, no one. Falcon 4.0 was so far ahead of its time, but the core engine simply does not allow for the visuals that DCS does.

basher54321 · by **basher54321** » 21 Jun 2021, 18:38

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote: Falcon 4.0 was so far ahead of its time, but the core engine simply does not allow for the visuals that DCS does.

They can make it look like DCS however just the slight issue of someone sitting down and putting in the coding work (C++) for better graphics and VR.

DCS has had coding work from paid employees constantly since its early iterations of Flanker etc. Falcon on the other hand has had mainly part timers doing it for free in their spare time.

sprstdlyscottsmn · by **sprstdlyscottsmn** » 21 Jun 2021, 20:42

That is very true. The other advantage that DCS holds for now is a much higher number of high fidelity planes (so I can fly with buddies who aren't Viper guys) and a much more diverse map selection. BMS4.33 maps still look like 1998 F4.0 maps once you get up at altitude, you can see the tiled texture.

BMS has been an amazing way of keeping F4.0 relevant even through the Lo-Mac age.