Was I wrong about DCS World?

A Journey of a BMS player. Forgive me for the hilarious audio edits.
0:00 Prejudice against sims
01:56 what made me reconsider DCS?
03:54 ENIGMA COLD WAR
05:36 my future in the sims and the answer

[@Wheelman_PCAS]

It’s great to hear from so many of you who appreciate the choices we have! I didn’t emphasize enough that the milsim /“realism community” is alive and thriving in DCS- and that mission makers make glorious scenarios for people to sim in. But from the training missions to the manuals to the discord channels- no one can deny milsim and simulation of “being a fighter pilot” is what people go to BMS for. With luck DCS will figure out a way to earn some money giving more dynamism, optimization, and in some cases realism to those looking for it.

[@rwhunt99]

I've been around the block a few times. i flew BMS and Falcon 3/4.0 and been flying DCS for a decade or more. I'm not picky, I love to fly, I enjoy ground pounding in several aircraft and I have been flying DCS nearly constant since I retired. I like that we have choices and IMO DCS is a big sandbox with plenty to offer everyone. I am glad you're enjoying what the sim world has to offer.

[@getsideways7257]

I always wondered why people need to choose sides with software products. I personally don't give a damn about allegiances - if it works for me, I take it. I have pretty much every usable sim out there and enjoy it for its particular strengths while trying to ignore its weaknesses, thus in a sense merging them all into one near perfect sim. If the developers give me grief, I don't hold back on voicing my opinion, because there is only once side worth standing for - the end user side. Your mistake is dwelling on the dynamic campaign part. Chances are, once it's included in DCS it will still be as raw as it gets, so be careful about what you wish for. Enjoy BMS for a more accurate battlefield and F-16 simulation, enjoy DCS for the high immersion cinematic dogfights and especially its rotorcraft - problem solved. Don't expect DCS to become BMS and forget about BMS getting close to where DCS shines for another dozen years or so - you'll make the life easier that way.

[@Wheelman_PCAS]

The truth will set you free!

[@wootle]

"I always wondered why people need to choose sides with software products." Totally agree. On socmed when I see MSFS vs X-Plane12 simmers slugging it out out I just shake my head. Why cant people just enjoy this fun hobby. MSFS, Xplane, DCS, War Thunder lets go have fun!

[@getsideways7257]

@@wootle War Thunder is a bit too much fun for me, but indeed - it's not that we took a loyalty oath to conscript for our liege lord or something. But I guess some people are just like that, they gladly "lose their lives" in Coke vs. Pepsi wars and so on.

[@TomWilson-sy4jo]

DCS has the pluses and minuses of a game with much of its content created by subdevelopers. The benefit is that you can fly airplanes from any era and any country. From 109s to Mig-29s. However this format comes at the cost of an overall lack of vision. A Northern Australia Map before a Vietnam map, an F-15 without a Mig-23(upcoming) or Mig-25, A Christen Eagle and Yak-52, but no F-111,F-117,F-8 or BF-109G. In short it is somewhat of a jumbled mess, however it is a jumbled mess of amazing crafted and designed aircraft, and occasionally you can find times like you have had wtih the A-4(perhaps my favorite aircraft in DCS), where the jumbled mess of it all just disappears and your are left with just the joy of flying a fantastic warplane over enemy territory.

[@robertkalinic335]

You can get mig23 in dcs?

[@radoToy]

⁠@@robertkalinic335 you could without the ED-Razbam situation…. Now we can only hope. More of the dev-subdev quirks I guess

[@joejoe2658]

not understanding why a Northern Australia Map is (unfortunately) extremely relevant seems to highlight your own "overall lack of vision".

[@nakazonegamestreaming896]

I sim race in VR and love it so much, now no kidding my eyes went wet with the scenes and imagining how much training is required to control a Flight sim like the real deal, the complexity is no joke.

[@icecold9511]

It took months to learn the Hornet.

[@Eric.A.Gonzalez]

Ive been trying to get into BMS for years now but Ive never been able to get into the community. DCS for me has always been easy to just hop onto a server and have fun. Even with DCS and it's problems it's been my go to combat sim and I enjoy it to this day.

[@Wheelman_PCAS]

Well, I hope you haven’t found anyone in the community to be particularly rude or offputting, majority of people seem very cool, and there are these very casual pick up flights on Sundays and Saturdays with the UOAF. Casual, but leaning towards MILSIM.

[@Eric.A.Gonzalez]

@@Wheelman_PCAS it hasn't been any negative interactions but Ive gotten extremely unlucky with only finding dead forums/groups and/or groups operating outside of my availability. I also didn't have any guidance for where to find people so I'll look into who you mentioned

[@ShuRugal]

IMO, the thing which really holds DCS back in terms of 'milsim realism' is the mission editor. The mission editor is an unbelievably clunky tool. You will spend HOURS trying to get units positioned where you want them, then hours more setting up trigger logic and scripts, just to get a basic "go here, kill this, don't get killed by that, go home" mission. Then, when you fly the mission, you'll find a dozen things that don't work right because the trigger and AI commands don't work the way their function names imply, and you'll spend hours MORE troubleshooting. I think this is why DCS multiplayer tends to devolve into AirQuake sessions. This is also why offline campaigns are sold as standalone modules. The sheer volume of work that goes into making good missions in DCS means that very few people are bothering to even try.

[@Wheelman_PCAS]

Hundred percent agree- in BMS it’s all there- you just frag and plan. Love that it just sets you up to choose a seat -1 2 3 or 4. W/in a package. Not really optional. DCS wingmen are optional…….. antithetical to combat.

[@arkashalethal]

Both DCS and BMS have their merits. The dynamic campaigns of BMS are absolutely stunning from my perspective as a DCS player. However, something that I'll likely never get to experience in BMS that has absolutely captured my heart in the last several years is flying helicopters in DCS. I've never had as much fun in a flight sim.

[@Wheelman_PCAS]

Excellent! I wonder if I’ll ever get bit by that rotary bug. Gotta follow where the passion leads!

[@pauljrix]

DCS, Falcon BMS, IL2, MSFS, X-Plane and even VTOL-VR.. what you get out of them is directly proportional to what you put in.

[@Wheelman_PCAS]

Have you seen the BMS manuals? Unparalleled. Not all sims are equal! But I think I get what you’re saying.

[@ArchOfficial]

@@Wheelman_PCAS The funniest part is that the manuals don't even cover everything, even more than DCS manuals usually.

[@ruger2275]

Where do you get the base Falcon 4.0 to apply the BMS mod? I've got the disc in storage but I don't feel like digging.

[@CommDante]

Think you only need the executable, but pretty sure GoG still has the original 4.0 for sale for a few bucks.

[@getsideways7257]

@@CommDante It's also on Steam

[@CommDante]

@@getsideways7257 Nice to see the old classics getting some love. 🥰

[@SkateZillaSimulations]

not trying to be mean, But even BMS, anything other than the F-16, is still the F-16. the BMS A-10 is a A-10A Cockpit with the F-16 MFD on the Maverick display, lol. I fly both, and develop for DCS, but honestly, despite that, they are both different flavors for mil-jet simulators. There's things in BMS that I appreciate that DCS doesnt have and vise versa.

[@ZeSpektrum]

Well... Thats slowly starting to change.

[@stevenford6107]

The have already made a break through with the introduction of F-15C

[@Medieval1-1]

I'm still dying for a dynamic campaign

[@ahmed-ze9ng]

Nothing beat falcon 4 dynamic campaign

[@Hustler9g]

Honestly dcs is only ever been what you make, it for better or worse. The lack of dynamic campaign means you have to spend a lot of time making missions in a virtual squadron to create something that feels like a dynamic campaign. Enigmas server is definitely the best public pseudo dynamic campaign and im glad you've jumped in and had some fun. One of the nice things if your time limited is most of the aircraft in that server are pretty simple and dont take long to learn and pretty cheap during sales. Huge recommendation to fly the saber if you want to bfm in there. 👍

[@devilsoffspring5519]

When video games start to become work, just like a job but with no money being made, then fuck 'em. DCS is awesome but I gave up on the Mission Editor a long time ago, it's the best part of DCS but actually using it to invent new missions & campaigns is overwhelmingly tedious and feels damn near futile.

[@ivaniii9707]

Stumbled randomly across the video and I think I should try BMS. I have major issues with DCS as I only care about air to air combat and there isn't a single DCS server which offers a AA focused PvE experience which is what I am looking for. I think the only computer game which offers the experience I am looking for might be IL2 great battles series, but I might give BMS a shot. Thanks for reminding me to check out BMS.

[@The_Tau]

Imo its just hard to do fun open PvE pure AA server. I would suggest joining some DCS squadron for that

[@griffy07]

why would you rather a PvE to PvP a/a server? If you're desperate for PvE, just do instant action or smth. I think one of the flag servers might have PvE a/a too

[@ivaniii9707]

@@griffy07 Because everyone in PvP nothing happens ever. You fly around and fuck all happens. Instant action is not a substitute for an actual campaign.

[@griffy07]

@@ivaniii9707 have you tried using gci before

[@tabernaclejones6115]

@@ivaniii9707I hear ya. Il2 is a great game for what it’s worth

[@Lefty1-5]

I would recommend you try any Grayflag server for DCS, it's as good as it gets when it comes to PvE multiplayer.

[@RogueBeatsARG]

Broo that's the Strike Fighters 2 music? So good

[@Ravn_Wingman52]

For BFM, id say going back to warbirds in IL2 Sturmovik is the way to go, and that is where the most competitive players are. It leans more towards arcade, but still the flight model is pretty good. Skills from IL2 translate well to modules like A4, F5, F14... Probably also more maneuverable red aircraft like mig29s- on the red side I only use mig21, so its a rocket that will start rocking whenever you get out of the AOA it likes, so I did not feel IL2 gave me much there, but in the A4 I felt I was using skills brought over from the other sim. :)

[@CocoDave37]

Like you, I started with Falcon way back but in 1993 with Falcon3.0 then 4.0, then Allied Force and then BMS and now DCS. I miss the dynamic campaign and the shoulder to shoulder experience you don't get in DCS. There is a dynamic campaign mod that came out, but I'm not sure if it works properly. You might want to look into it. Funny thing, when I first flew DCS with some guys, they were all flying at angels 8. I said, we should climb to 27 and they said, why? Coming from BMS I was perplexed! Then I realized there was no need as the SAM threat was none and the ground clutter was nice to look at. For those who want to try DCS but always say it's a pay to play, DL DCS world beta for free and the A4 Skyhawk is free as well. Really good way to start and check it out. Another good FREE module is the UH-60 Blackhawk heli. No weapons but great to learn on if you like choppers. There are other free planes as well so the stigma of pay to play is not true. OH, the Marianas map is free as well! Jump in, the water is fine :)

[@jehusturbo]

They are both SIMULATIONS and great in their own way respectively. It just comes down to personal choice. You'll find that a lot of people who do play DCS are going to be as serious as you'd like because they have just started flying and DCS is such a well known sim it's easy for them to get into, but if you look hard enough you'll find serious groups who match BMS.

[@joejoe2658]

SIMULATORS*

[@delayed_control]

My main problem with the BMS is that I'm not interested in the F-16 or in frankenaircraft using F-16 avionics. Might get into it if F-15C is finished, but still, I don't think I will be able to shelve it now that F-4E is out, as well as when MiG-29 releases. BMS doesn't offer you the flying experience for analog jets. It doesn't even have a proper F-16A. If they made a proper early block F-16A I would give it more time.

[@Wheelman_PCAS]

Hear hear to the F16A!

[@ThomisticAmerican13FOX]

Isreali 1980s Campaign provides a good F16A, its not a perfect cockpit representation. But the FM is good, and weapon loadouts are restricted for the period.

[@icecold9511]

And I don't thing bms offers the carrier experience nearly as well.

[@rossmum]

Same here, what little interest in BLUFOR aircraft I have is all pre-MFD stuff which BMS is unlikely to touch for a while. REDFOR you may as well forget about, and that's what I enjoy flying...

[@loganvelasco1889]

My issue with BMS is I don’t like the F-16 that much. I like the MiG-21 too much

[@PappyGunn]

I had no idea what BMS is, so maybe spelling out acronyms out the first time they are used would be a good idea. I played Falcon 3.0 back in the day. The lack of a dynamic campaign is definitely felt for DCS. Liberation and Briefing Room are options but unfortunately and despite great effort by the community fall a bit short. But maybe it's just me, I should give them a better try. There are some campaign DLCs out there, some better than others. Reflected Simulations certainly made some enjoyable WW2 campaigns. Escorting a couple of boxes of B-17s in a WW2 fighter doesn't get old, especially in VR. The realism of the aircraft is what really draws me to DCS.

[@rollnloop]

BMS is the acronym of Benchmark Simulation, 3rd party developper group for Falcon 4.0. Their work is provided for free, you just need to own a copy of Falcon 4.0.

[@PappyGunn]

@@rollnloop thank you I found the web site.

[@larrythorn4715]

My biggest regret about DCS is...Spending money on DCS...I really wish I would have stuck to Falcon BMS.

[@IndoG117]

Although it's very hard to beat the feeling of flying in the BMS dynamic campaigns and fragging your own missions in a squadron, I think at least for the single player side when comparing BMS and DCS, it's pertinent to also mention the excellent roster of single player campaigns available in DCS like those made by Baltic Dragon, Reflected, and also some other ones like Kursant and Rising Squall. It's a shame that great 'experiences' like the Raven One campaigns, V for Victory, Kursant, etc aren't getting as much 'attention' as the aircraft modules do, when in fact I think a great campaign should be treated to a similar level of 'appreciation' and 'celebration' as a good aircraft module.

[@FusionTrain]

As a DCS player, I've always honestly wanted to try Falcon BMS, it seems great, i mean yes its old but the F-16 is also my favourite jet, hence why its my most flown aircraft in DCS even though i almost own every single fixed wing aircraft. There's also just something about the sounds in BMS that i absolutely adore, it feels "retro"? but also realistic? I really dont know how to describe it. Also I understand where you're coming from saying that DCS feels more just "hop in and shoot stuff" rather than a hardcore sim. For this i would highly recommend you try and find groups that do actual operations! They're great fun honestly. And another point is that ED are working on a dynamic campaign system which should hopefully be here soon. Anyway, brought up some great points and I'm thankful you've been able to enjoy both simulators honestly. I hate when people just pick a side and stick with it saying "its the best" without ever really giving the other side a chance.

[@Wheelman_PCAS]

Yes! I had a short but awesome time with the FOD A-10 discord group which does badass CAS FACA and CSAR milsim. But I need the flexibility to jump off and not feel like I’m letting people down so will return when I can.

[@ArchOfficial]

Why don't you try BMS? A Falcon 4.0 key is very inexpensive and BMS is free. The setup procedure is also greatly streamlined and improved lately.

[@FusionTrain]

@@ArchOfficial the main thing that has put me off is the fact that DCS seems a bit better to fly solo as I dont really have any friends who play the same type of games

[@ArchOfficial]

@@FusionTrain BMS AI is much better than DCS AI and are somewhat useful as wingmen, if that's what you mean.

[@takeoffwithjakesoft]

I tried BMS a while back. The F-16 is my favorite jet in DCS anyway, so it was appealing to me. I found that a lot of what I'd learned flying the Viper in DCS translated perfectly to BMS so I was instantly at the same competence level in the jet once I got trough all the setup and bindings. The setup itself was actually my biggest gripe about the whole experience and why it might turn some people off. Luckily I had a friend to walk me through it, but it's not as easy as just DL from Steam especially if you want to do multiplayer. I never thought I'd say this about DCS, but it's more accessible.

[@getsideways7257]

Of course it's much more accessible... I'm puzzled about why the BMS developers haven't ditched that ancient engine and switched to some modern engine yet. The Dynamic Campaign code is most likely already available, so porting it should be at least easier than coming up with one from scratch - all that would also help to gain technological edge over ED, whose basement-built engine is also about as old as our Sun.

[@devilsoffspring5519]

BMS/Falcon 4.0 is a MUCH better video game. It's just that the graphics totally suck and for a modern flight sim, good graphics are an indispensable part of "immersion" (distraction.) BMS is pretty cool, but I can't get over the crude and crappy graphics. Otherwise I would have played it a hell of a lot.

[@getsideways7257]

@@devilsoffspring5519 Not to say that DCS is all that grand in terms of graphics either... About time to ditch both engines.

[@devilsoffspring5519]

@@getsideways7257 DCS is about as good as a combat flight sim EVER got in terms of graphics. They're working within the limitations of the DX11 based graphics engine.

[@getsideways7257]

@@devilsoffspring5519 Do you realize that's the most used graphics API at the moment? Not only DCS does not have any HDR support - it's actively refusing the attempts to extend the output into HDR. Well, compared to something like BeamNG DCS does look ok, but that definitely does not mean it is "about as good as a combat flight sim EVER got in terms of graphics"

[@behindthen0thing525]

i wish they had campaigns tho. and in depth ones

[@eatthisvr6]

it DOES need a dynamic campaign, and it REALLY needs vietnam

[@baccarah7010]

Also try VTOL VR if you have a VR headset. Any is fine, even standalone ones.

[@erola2023]

You landed on a taxiway, you know that right? 6:22

[@Wheelman_PCAS]

Runway closed due to cratering from the beginning of the video. Also being shot at head on while landing and being chased by a mirage. I’m telling you it’s fun but it is cringe to the hardcores.

[@manuel.camelo]

How dare you to have been skeptical towards DCS??? 👁️👃👁️🙏

[@PaddyPatrone]

cold war is the way to go

[@chronichurdle1802]

Broo I have 2k hours in DCS and I rlly want to get into BMS but the menus and settings and controls and stuff were soo confusing and backwards

[@Wheelman_PCAS]

I felt the same about dcs lol. You should watch Prime (Aviation Puls’) KZbin vids on how to get goin

[@getsideways7257]

@@Wheelman_PCAS Seriously? I grew up with a Sinclair Speccy and saw Falcon 3.0 plus the original Flanker among other things, but I definitely find DCS' UI much more intuitive and appealing than that of the Falcon series. I believe even DID's EF 2000 did it better than that (pardon the pun)

[@Wheelman_PCAS]

@@getsideways7257I mean the launcher and controls setup in bms (as of the arrival of the alternative launcher) is easier and more intuitive than dcs- but I think ED has improved it some since 2020..? The concept of starting from “THE MAP ROOM” with your data cartridge ready to tweak and a beautifully relevant briefing in BMS seems so much more appropriate to a combat sim than the way DCS does it.

[@getsideways7257]

​@@Wheelman_PCAS Well, to me the controls setup in BMS is already a pain enough to postpone the configuration "until later". I agree that the controls setup in DCS still has enough room for more improvement even after the recent updates (and I do welcome the separate application approach for it), but even as is it's definitely easier for me to just slap up a mission, load it up and at least partially configure a new aircraft's controls in just a few minutes before plunging into the said quickie mission. It's great that in BMS you can fully simulate a good slice of actual warfare and fly the campaign with a whole squadron of people using more real tactics and lingo than actual fighter pilots use, but to do that all the time honestly sounds like a job... and a pain. I simply don't have time for that anymore, and you admitted in the video you barely have any either. Sims are good exactly because we can dictate how much action and seriousness EXACTLY we should have each and every time. With the dedication and seriousness of some the border gets crossed behind which there is very little sense in continuing this in a sim instead of just going and landing oneself such a JOB. Although, for some that job is already in the past - but even then there is enough "casual" former fighter pilots on KZbin who take sims in a very relaxed manner... and end up flying DCS.

[@Bronco-1776]

Do you still have to do that hokey download thing to DL BMS.... ya know where you have first download Falcon 4?

[@taw_chiron7252]

actually there is a realism community in DCS

[@Wizzar_sillymus]

DCS is more a sandbox

[@S3NTRY]

I was waiting for a long time for BMS to get VR. Didn't take long to jump over from DCS, where I was getting bored of the rinse-and-repeat of learning systems and cockpits, only to have nothing meaty to use them with. Liberation doesn't cut it when compared to BMS DC, and there are so many broken underlying systems in DCS that are made stark by BMS. BMS has solid bones. DCS simply doesn't. Forever hoping DCS improves, but my faith rarely gets a top-up.

[@Wheelman_PCAS]

That’s a great way of putting it. It has a bones or a frame. A sandbox is fun but all that sand doesn’t hold shape for long.

[@kypdurron62]

There are some dynamic campaign servers

[@raviar_dcs]

This is a "digital cockpit simulator"! Look at the bomb effects! Has anyone seen the Mk-82 live ammunition in action? It's terrifying! In DCS, it's like watching fireworks! There's no mobility kill, the effects are poor! The ground graphics are horrible! Without high-quality ground textures and infantry, why would anyone want to simulate helicopter operations? You can't create dynamic missions or campaigns without extensive scripting, and even then, the performance is terrible. Currently, the multi-crew feature in the F-4 causes a 50% FPS drop, and turning on the radar causes another 50% drop! Test it for yourself! Scripting can become buggy with updates. You can never truly simulate a battlefield-maybe a mission, but even that can be historically inaccurate due to poor terrain. Key events in modern air combat are missing! Desert Storm, one of the most important terrains, is absent! Vietnam! I'm not even mentioning Korea! Where should I fly my F-86 without Korea! how about block 50 Viper and SE! I need Iraq and Saudi Arabia! Where should I fly my F-5?! I dont like to do campaign with F-14 in Nevada! F-4 and UH-1 needs Vietnam! Where is Mariana WWII! what happened to DTC ? Volkan API? ED has broken promises since 2018! First, the excuse was COVID, and now it's the Ukrainian invasion. I own most of blue modules and almost all terrains (except SA) and all campaign! my relationship with Ed is love and hate ! spending 10 years in DCS! Just fly BMS and try it, the graphic is horrible BUT almost 1 guy developed dynamic campaign! its community driven! no one paid for BMS! Falcon 4 is only few dollars! check the COMMS in BMS, kneeboards, AI, IFF ... all and all much better than DCS!

[@Wheelman_PCAS]

I understand, and I think a lot of my optimism comes from being a new player. BMS team doesn’t make promises that I’ve seen- or at least one that can’t keep.

[@WaynePlaysGamez]

I had always been under the impression that DCS had the more lively "milsim" community, where does one go to find equivalent BMS groups? I have wanted to get into BMS for some time now that it finally supports VR, but don't know where to find like minded "realism/milsim" groups.

[@Wheelman_PCAS]

You can dip your toes with the UOAF casual group. After that you can link up w/ individual pilots on the Falcon lounge discord, or join a squadron which is where the best milsim experience comes from.

[@WaynePlaysGamez]

@@Wheelman_PCAS I am doing the milsim thing on DCS currently and enjoy it, just don’t have any exposure to the BMS side. Is there a good forum or other repository where to go find recruiting ads, like how the DCS forum has a recruiting section?

[@scottl9660]

@@WaynePlaysGamez Howdy mate, the bms forum on a honest to god website has a squadron post. It will have some info on virtual squadrons that are out there for the BMS platform. I personally think multiplayer with wingmen and flights is the way to go but be warned if you dip your toe into that water you may find solo-flying unsatisfying the rest of your life. I know I did 😅

[@v3teran75]

DCS does have a dynamic campaign its a mod you download. Grim Reapers has a Tutorial video on there channel

[@RW-zn8vy]

A mod isn’t dcs

[@v3teran75]

@@RW-zn8vy It works though

[@icecold9511]

​@@RW-zn8vy BMS is a mod, in case you don't know that.

[@RW-zn8vy]

@@icecold9511 we aren’t talking about bms and I know what bms is, I play it.

[@NovaTrap1312]

If they add a flyable ff Mig 23 to bms im in. Otherwise I dont have much interest in it tbh

[@enyakk]

That's all pretty reasonable reasonings. :D

[@mattst2717]

As someone who chronically plays DCS, I enjoy the rotary aircraft a LOT. BMS has its great parts, but I just don't have much of an interest in the F-16 and/or its systems. I say that, because when I was researching BMS I found out that all of the displays in other aircraft are just the systems from the f-16. I will just continue to play DCS for the PvE servers and the Cold War PVP.

[@ArchOfficial]

That used to be true, but custom avionics is a thing now. The F-15C is on it's way to being full-fidelity, and is currently higher fidelity than the DCS Flaming Cliffs one.

[@ArchOfficial]

Been playing DCS ever since it was DCS. It's fun in some scenarios, but for the most part junk as a simulator because the models are almost all quite bad and mostly junk as a game. Too much work to setup realistic scenarios, and they'll never be as dynamic as BMS. PVP is probably where it's at right now, but I'm not interested in PVP. All of the servers, including Enigma, are highly arcady either way, as is the course for unscheduled multiplayer. Occasionally I'd give a module a try on a free period and learn it in the a week or so, that's always entertaining. I'll probably get the OH-58D if not simply because any scenario where it would be used in can be made in a not entirely unreasonable amount of hours. Making something realistic and worthwhile for jets starts to go into the three digits and mission making in DCS is quite painful even compared to antiquated sims like Steel Beasts, if not simply due to it being a modern combat flightsim with all the complexity and scale that entails. Ironically, I mostly prefer BMS because it's *less* work and takes *less* time than doing something worthwhile in DCS. BMS can generate acceptable scenarios in a relatively dynamic environment in minutes; and keep generating them sequentially in a way where they provide context to eachother. DCS needs this sooner than later. I don't much care for the graphics, although BMS is improving lately which will be good; moreso DCS has some QoL functions which would be welcome. It's not enough to get me to fly it more, though.

[@Cessna152ful]

DCS has many campaigns made my Reflected that go from WW2 to Fairly recent that are built around briefings and such. The AI has recently gotten way better as well, and rarely ever feels like UFO's

[@sparrowlt]

laughs in AI SU-33 and M2000 and F-14B doing 1250 knots after 10s of aceleration at 20K f with full missile loads laughs in AI F-5E keeping 7G indefintily at 600knots laughs in AIs engaging other planes throught mountains laughs in AI firing missiles backwards laughs in AIs evading phoenix missiles 20s after firing and 40s before pitbull laughs in AI engaging targets directly bellow 90º laughs in AI F-16 sudenly being at 140K feet

[@lucainaudi3701]

Hey man! Miss flying with you!!

[@Wheelman_PCAS]

Let’s catch up man!

[@TF2enjoyer2008]

Can we play yak 52 in bms ? No . That why dcs is the best game of all time

[@Hustler9g]

😂

[@mro9466]

Floggit leaking again

[@scopefalcon]

ouflogged again.

[@Altrote100]

hahahahahahahahahaha yeah!!! and BMS doesn´t have the dynamic grass, zero inmersion

[@romagnolo]

Well said, brother! ✊🏻

[@billcedarheath387]

There are DCS groups that aren’t seen by the mainstream players. There are groups of former military on closed servers that bring us back to the brotherhood of yesteryear. These servers often use DCS Liberation to give the war campaign experience and have a level of “play” that is 100% no nonsense military professionalism. DCS like BMS is what you make of it. I’ve played both and found them enjoyable in their own ways. For my taste, I like DCS more for the servers the civilian players will never see. Bottom line… play what you enjoy and enjoy what you play. Whatever you play only needs to make you happy and that doesnt matter to anyone else.

[@getsideways7257]

Also, why not play BOTH... Along with any other sim you might happen to enjoy

[@billcedarheath387]

@@getsideways7257 I mentioned that I did play both and enjoyed them for their own reasons. I play DCS for specific circles of folks I want to be with in the game for specific levels of gameplay. I’ve not discovered those circles in BMS. It doesn’t mean I don’t have BMS installed and can jump on. I just find myself in DCS far more. Everyone has their valid reasons to fly what they do. I’m not going to tell others what to play or why as my experiences and reasons aren’t theirs.

[@getsideways7257]

@@billcedarheath387 Interesting... Does that mean that former military pilots still prefer DCS over BMS? I mostly use DCS, but was pretty sure it was the other way around...

[@billcedarheath387]

@@getsideways7257 I’m sure that everyone has their own circle or circles that they like to travel in and what those circles bring to experience can mean a whole lot. Each circumstance creates what it does for reasons unique to needs and means. It’s a lot like open to the public virtual squadrons. Even the general public drifts into circles of players with like minded goals and preferences in play. None of them are right or wrong as they fit the needs of those within. There should be no judgement of one being better than others. One may be better for you but it doesn’t mean that is the way for people with different expectations or experiences than any other given player.

[@ZeSpektrum]

Personally DCS is going to be the only real option due to helicopters and ease of access to persistent MP campaigns stretching over months.

[@Eihort]

It's interesting that I came to the same crossroads in almost the same way, and chose DCS instead. I'd played Falcon 3.0, and then 4.0 on release. I'd had Allied Force, even played some BMS. What I didn't like about BMS was all the "Falconisms" that still existed. You can tell me up and down that they're "full fidelity modules" for the A-10, F-15, etc. in BMS, but they're not. They're reskinned F-16s with tweaked flight models. You're perpetually flying with horrendous atmo haze because of rendering limits. Getting multiplayer to work correctly is a massive pain. Even setting up your controls is... yikes. I didn't feel the dynamic campaign and excellent IADS simulation was worth the trade off in the long run. So somewhere around 2007 I started playing Flaming Cliffs/Black Shark/A-10C/DCS exclusively, and never looked back. Both of those things, in the end, were primarily, because multiplayer was such a pain to get working, singple player affairs. And what I really wanted was to game with other people. DCS was a much easier conduit to do that with. A few wrong clicks with BMS and you can completely bork a shared campaign. DCS is, at a glacial pace, getting closer to that dynamic campaign and IADS simulation. Someday they might get there if they don't keep shooting themselves in the foot, in terms of relations with their own fan base. There's definately a space in the market for both, considering the price point for one of them, but eventually, sooner than later, the ancient code in BMS isn't going to keep up anymore.

[@Wheelman_PCAS]

I don’t think many people know this- their new F15C is not a reskinned f16

[@ArchOfficial]

There are no "falconisms" in BMS flight models. The FM is entirely proprietary and made by a third party unrelated to Falcon 4.0. Same goes for the F-16 avionics, actually, and the F-15 avionics. They share nothing with Falcon. In fact I'm pretty sure most of the campaign code and all of the AI code is new and proprietary too. The UI did share some campaign code before, but they've uncoupled those now.

[@Wheelman_PCAS]

@@ArchOfficial I don’t think the campaign code is new - wait is that what you’re saying?

[@ArchOfficial]

@@Wheelman_PCAS Yes. The campaign code is new, for the most part. Falcon 4.0 campaign code is an insanely buggy mess that doesn't actually even work.

[@AKATenn]

the problem with BMS is it's good at what it does, but it only does what it does... DCS does everything except for a dynamic campaign better.

[@wmouse]

Wait what? BMS has better combat AI, proper ATC, a functioning mission planner with DTC, better A2A refueling (AI + humans together), better SAM AI, hot join (AI takes over for you if you get disconnected so you can rejoin!), better damage modeling (rockets and cluster bombs are anemic in DCS), and a bigger variety of assets for air and ground units, and AAA + flak that doesn’t have laser-like accuracy. The list goes on.

[@scopefalcon]

@@wmouse yeah, exactly what the guy meant, its good at what it does :)

[@wmouse]

@@scopefalcon lol OK you got me there

[@ArchOfficial]

You can't even over-G the stores in the DCS F-16C (last I checked). The flight model is all messed up and almost none of the systems are accurate. I guess if you don't care about simulation, then DCS does everything better.

[@WarDucc]

holy shit is that Money for Nothing i hear???

[@mvaldman2001]

Is this Angry Mike Humphry…? 😅

[@Luminoso72]

…lands on taxiway…

[@Wheelman_PCAS]

Being evasive hostile at my 6 and 12, and the runway was cratered, critical fuel. Word was enemy ROE: “don’t shoot them once wheels down” :-p

[@josepablolunasanchez1283]

I like planes but I am barely competent in ATF Gold. I bet I would be easily downed by any amateur DCS pilot. LOL

[@fonesrphunny7242]

20 years since LOMAC. Aircraft AI is still incredibly dumb, ground units regularly get stuck, radio comms are seriously outdated, nothing like IADS networks, old missions/campaigns remain broken.... All these shiny modules, but the core gameplay has barely improved in the last few years.

[@Hellfire0220]

The problem with DCS. Its always unfinished. Every module, is Unfinished. So much is placeholder, So much is lied about being accurate only for die hard fans to actually rip code out and catch them lying. Controversy after Controversy such as ED not paying its developers,Core mission makers and Modders leaving the game even with Key KZbinrs leaving, and when games like BMS and Warthunder Dominate the market everyone always asks them selves, do they really want to spend 80$ on a product that is made by a company with a track record of not finishing anything they promised to finish. its easy to pass on DCS.

[@thejetfighter]

The good thing about BMS is that is cheaper and does not need a NASA level PC.

[@Wheelman_PCAS]

I’d say BMS still is hungry for all the CPU hz and cache you can give it. But cpu upgrades are at least affordable.

[@thejetfighter]

@@Wheelman_PCAS It depends on the Motherboard and how upgradeable it is to see how cost effective would be. But yes, that's an option.

[@Wheelman_PCAS]

@@thejetfighter yes I just think about the 4090 and the wide gap in affordability between that and almost any other piece of hardware!

[@lovecchio420]

Big wizzo energy

[@RedFail1-1]

It's all fun and games until the AI continually fails to function properly. That's my main problem with it and the source of my frustration. That and ED breaking campaigns/missions every time they update the game. Okay... Truth is there are a lot of reasons I hate the game. Too many to list. The problem is there is literally no game like it so it's DCS or nothing.

[@ejb6822]

"cockpit simulator", "worthless without a dynamic campaign" - there is no single dude who played more than a tiny fraction of undynamic campaigns. if anyone tries to tell me that he mastered reflecteds topgun campaigns without serious training for hundreds of hours, you know that dude's nothing but a clown.

[@mro9466]

DCS is a broken and boring sandbox. BMS is a living and breathing battlefield. ED really needs to give DCS the BMS treatment, otherwise all these maps and modules will forever feel like wasted potential.

[@ArchOfficial]

Wasted potential is accurate. There's not so much *inherently* wrong with the environments or simulation models in DCS. Sure the FMs are inaccurate and the systems are inaccurate, but it's not enough to be a dealbreaker for a consumer sim. BMS's F-16 is great and a step above every other consumer sim model, but it's no professional sim either. The problem is there's very little to actually do with them, and what there is to do with them is quite restricted IMO, as opposed to just fragging your own packages in BMS. Dynamic campaign engine would bring a lot of relevance and context to the content in DCS.

[@Tomcatwings]

What is BMS?

[@Fastbikkel]

Falcon BMS

[@montrose699]

It's a sandbox. I belong to a group of 30 and we fly missions all the time, some of them are days long. There are many amazing mission builders in the DCS community.

[@devilsoffspring5519]

I've played DCS for years and years. Now that it's FINALLY starting to get decent because of the Multithread version, I'm mostly tired of it. That's what happens when it takes decades to develop a game AFTER it has already been released! DCS is still f@cking *amazing* and is better than ever! I'm just mostly sick of it because it's never really ready enough to be "finished" and probably won't be in another 10 years.

[@Jesters-Jinx]

What the hell is BMS?

[@RW-zn8vy]

An f16 sim

[@Fred-rv2tu]

I don’t fly with air quakers or the grim reapers. Yes DCS is lacking. But I fly with a pretty good squadron and I build my own campaigns and make each mission after the previous.

[@joejoe2658]

we forgive you for labeling your own content "hilarious".

[@workshopneko]

16 dislikes so far. Guess which community is butthurt by this video 😂😂😂

[@Wheelman_PCAS]

I really don’t know! Both? People who think my production quality is too lo most likely lol

[@Foxtrop13]

so, the skyhawk get you down of your high horse

[@muhammadsaleh7229]

Long live BMS . Dcs world will continue releasing unfinished modules while BMS will get a major graphics overhaul on par with War thunder . And many new aircraft will come . Also Falcon 5.0 is also in the works. Dcs wont last long if they still continue their crude ideas

[@ArchOfficial]

It's kind of messed up that ED might fail as a company before DCS has the chance to become long-term viable in the continued future.

[@ChrisPBacon-my7yt]

Serial module abusers lol

[@icecold9511]

You're first problem is your choice of planes. If you don't fly a Hornet, why bother?

[@Whykikamoocow]

Why do people keep calling these games a sim?

[@Wheelman_PCAS]

Good question, also, why are RL wargames not called war simulations?

[@ViperXSS2]

DCS is hands down way better 😂than whatever this other thing is.

[@Wheelman_PCAS]

If it wasn’t for comments like yours and glonkinstein’s I’d think we were living in a vast simulation ourselves 😅

[@mro9466]

Don't forget to pre-order your CH47 bro

[@getsideways7257]

@@mro9466 Which is neither a helo, nor a plane...

[@gnolkenstein5527]

dcs sucks so very much i hate it

[@GhostsofRazgrizDCSOverkill]

BMS is purely a Viper sim. Every. Single. Plane. in BMS has a flight model modded from the Viper. I have played BMS, and have countless hours in sims in general. Your bias (which is your prerogative, EXCEPT in informational videos such as this one) is showing. DCS World has plenty of mil sim players out there. The fact of the matter is though: DCS World is lightyears above BMS when it comes to the planes. You want to learn how to fly an Eagle: DCS. You want to learn how to fly an Apache: DCS. Yes, there are no dynamic campaigns yet, but they're coming, and there are in fact servers with dynamic campaigns present in DCS as it stands. the ONLY thing BMS has on DCS is age.

[@Wheelman_PCAS]

The bms F15C is unique, and if you think about it, almost any plane’s digital flight model could be adapted from any other to a workable place- but I take your point.

[@GhostsofRazgrizDCSOverkill]

I agree, it could, to a workable place, but not as spot on as the numbers, hell, even DCS isn't an exact copy, regardless of which plane. Only flying the real deals will achieve that. I don't know the state of the BMS sim these days, but when I played it, it was the best for it's time, hell, it even had my favorite Viper: The XL. Dunno if it does or not these days, and I'm sad we'll never see it in DCS, but I still hold hope they might do it. I didn't mean for this post to come across as harsh, and I apologize for that.

[@ArchOfficial]

The BMS flight model is proprietary and the other planes do not have anything to do with the F-16. Especially the F-15 which is even more specific in it's modeling. None of the models in DCS are even *remotely* as accurate as the BMS F-16 in FM or avionics. Almost all of them lack extremely basic features like store over-G and all the munitions are arcadefied to provide a more even playing field. It's not a simulator, at least in modern fixed wing.

[@ArchOfficial]

@@Wheelman_PCAS Every serious flightmodel will just be a collection of lookup tables and formulas. You could make the argument that a helicopter flight model is just a modified propeller plane flight model if you are deranged enough.

[@Wheelman_PCAS]

@@ArchOfficialgotta say the DCS lack of store over g /speed is pathetic. And yet they spend time making grass flex in jet exhaust, superfluous bomb fuse types, this INS drift update for the F16, come on guys! And make your clouds block laser/IR.

[@KeithDavey2014]

The F-16's fly out of Tucson International (Arizona National Guard) As far as I know, no F16's fly regularly out of DM.

[@Wheelman_PCAS]

Oh of course - I’ve made this mistake before despite seeing them at Tucson Int multiple times when I go back to visit. It’s only the warthogs that fly out of DM then I think? And C130.

[@calumlittle9828]

BMS is way better. But dcs is ok. Dcs is a game. BMS is a simulator.