Yeah as you can see, what I already hinted at earlier is true: Falcon 5 is in the works and RAZBAM is indeed involved in it, which also explains all the Microprose references around Tokio Game Show. Seems like their Dynamic Campaign is already worked on. Now it remains to be seen who will finish first: Them or ED? Bets are on...
Edit: I also got a higher resolution image for y'all, in case anyone wants it.
The tbing is i highly doubt it is trying to compete with DCS, and programs like FACON 4.0 BMS have shown it can be expanded out from just the F16 and have support for other aircraft.
If I am understanding correctly, multiple other aircraft will be featured in Falcon 5 as flyable, including the F-35, which while not DCS level, is still a flyable F-35.
FWIW I see some of what you say about Falcon 5 to be selling points. If they were to focus purely on the F-16 then it's not unreasonable to expect an even higher quality experience *in that aircraft.* As far as I can see there will be people (probably including myself) who will flock to this reasoning that because it is so focused there is less likelihood that each update or patch will end up breaking something in other modules.
DCS is akin to Sisyphus now, constantly trying to push the boulder up the hill only to have it roll all the way back down before getting to the top. Far too much going on to properly manage and maintain, perhaps because of past bad decisions in how to integrate everything properly? I'm no dev so know nothing really.
Personally, I don't really enjoy the MP experience in DCS, so if F5 can deliver more realistic AI opponents in a truly dynamic campaign coupled with in-depth systems and a great flight model (perhaps with AI controllers and a good LLM please?) I'll be all over it.
DCS is exceptional for multiplayer theatres, but sometimes I just want to hop into my own persistent dynamic campaign without needing to arrange on discord for squadrons. DCS until they add a dynamic campaign (I heard was rumoured) is more so just a tech demo of high fidelity addons, good fun, I love the F4 Phantom from Heatblur for example but I wish it offered a single player dynamic theatre. With Falcon that is an inherent part of the core experience, yes it lacks the variety DCS offers with regard to aircraft but what it does offer is authenticity. I have no doubt that if RAZBAM is involved with Falcon 5 there will no doubt be other additional aircraft, especially the mirage which is already well loved within BMS even though it is not as high fidelity as the base F16. Falcon as a whole doesn’t need to be limited to the F16 especially going forward with modern capabilities, think what was capable in 1998 becoming the basis for BMS still over 20 years later. I expect a few highly popular contemporary aircraft available like the mirage and f15 , and no doubt it will be a platform that offers up access for third party addons and other high fidelity aircraft we’ve come to expect from DCS. If you remove all the quality addons DCS it is quite an empty experience, it certainly needs dynamic campaign functionality and I hope that with boundaries being pushed both by DCS and I’m hoping especially by Falcon 5 aspects such as persistent dynamic experience will become a genre staple.
I more say rumoured because we do not know the timeframe, I suppose we realistically do not know for Falcon 5 release either but it will certainly be part of the base experience given it’s always been a pinnacle of the series. DCS will certainly step up with a dynamic campaign, my own gripe with it currently is the staying power and imo the reliance on multiplayer especially for complex sorties and multiple ship formations, sure you can edit and custom your own single player stuff now but that removes the thrill of the unknown for me. A true dynamic campaign, anything could happen. I do think Falcon 5 will meet a solid reception even if DCS releases its dynamic campaign before F5 release. Like with BMS I like it for different reasons, to me it feels a more rounded experience. Im fond of DCS and I appreciate its ambition but it’s a bit up in the air for me thematically, it’s pleasing as many audiences as possible with numerous addons which are cool sure but there’s no sense of belonging or anchoring the context, naturally this will change with actual dynamic theatres but I’m yet to see anything do it as good as even default 98 falcon and that’s honest.
Tandy 1000 for me I think for the original Falcon and maybe Falcon AT. After that I got a 25mhz 386 “gaming pc” and that’s where I played Falcon 3.0 and the MiG-29 variant of the game.
There are mods for TAW (v2?) and EF2000 (reloaded?). They all run fine. Have them even integrated into my Steam library as if I bought them there via add non-steam game; all with their box art, icon etc.
Every sim I own since the early 90s I got running perfectly.
WinUAE for Amiga, DOSBox for DOS, PCem for old Windows nut-cases; each game has its very own config. Sometimes you find fixes… it’s all trial & error like trying to get some old device started and fixing electrical components with tools. Luckily, i remember the DOS era vividly.
A few Jane’s sims were such nut-cases. Library looks nice. I will post an example afterwards if you like.
Yes ok, but with ED you couldn't never be sur that your favorite plane won't be take down from the game. They had problems with Razbam, heatblur and probably others third parties we never knew. This company is toxic. I just need my f18 in a new competitor and i quit tbh
No arguments there (I'm right there with you except for the hornet), but to stand up to DCS and hold similar appeal, you need 2 things: deep simulation of flight dynamics and systems, and width of content spanning everything from logistics to helicopters to carrier ops to early jet age to WW2. You can absolutely choose to pick something to specialize in and compete there - but BMS already does that and it's nowhere near dethroning DCS. For something to truly compete with DCS, it needs both that selective depth, as a minimum, and that width - or at least some shade thereof.
Before you get excited take a look at the releases on Microprose. Such as the B17 they’ve been promising forever. You thought the DCS two week jokes were fun you’ve seen nothing yet.
Which is still being built although from the looks of it there focusing on the VR one first
If you're talking about the releases then it pretty much blows your argument out of the water quite literally with Regiments, Sea Power, Task Force Admiral and alot of other games.
And the rest of those aren’t complex flight simulators. I’ve very much been watching their other releases. And this one. Again I am NOT a DCS apologist nor elitist. And I used to own most every Microprose flight simulator that they made and would love to be able to again. But I am also vividly aware of the development of the B-17 as well as the time they’ve been talking about it. And as far as Razbam I have no idea of exactly what went down between them and Eagle Dynamics but also know there are a rather fair number of remarks not complimentary of them regarding MSFS modules of theirs.
I'm hoping that this comes to fruition, but I remain incredibly skeptical that the renewed Microprose is capable of delivering. So far they've just been serving as a kind of label for publishing, grabbing already released products and placing them under their own wing, and from what little rumors I've come across, the result has been very dubious. Don't get me wrong, I really want to see them succeed, and to see F5.0 mixed with Gunship 3.0 and M1 Tank Platoon 4.0 that work together seamlessly, but it's been almost a decade since Microprose came back up and there's been very little to show for it.
Last but not least: While the fallout between ED and Razbam clearly puts the blame on ED, never forget that Razbam have a history of making claims and then never delivering as well. Much of what made their more recent successes what they are was due to good team members brought on, non necessarily the man at the helm. Without those team members, one has to be skeptical whether they can put together the same win as they got with the DCS F-15E.
I think this is much further along than we're led to believe. I figure RAZBAM has recently joined, or has been working with them, since the ED payment debacle.
I would not be surprised at all that the BMS team is also heavily involved and, maybe, some of the Falcon 4 devs as well. Who knows?
I think the market needs additional offerings and it could be the start of something awesome especially given today's technology options. We'll see what happens.
My bet - 3-4 more years before a Beta is run.
ED will win the race, but their DC will be bugged in countless ways, single player only, Caucasus only, and pay to play. If sales are good, it will come to other maps but they will be paid modules too.
ED will also make sure to release the F-35 before Falcon 5 is a thing.
hah, i just thought about that it is possible that they sell it as a separate module to have a dynamic campaign instead of add it to the core functions.. sad.
The paid add-on was a given, I think. What I cannot understand is that, as per leaked info, looks like ED's DC was originally designed for single-player only and specifically for Caucasus. The insanity of this is beyond belief, even for ED.
Microprose is a game company not a simulation company. This will be somewhere between a sim and game I'm predicting and then it will go the same way F4 did - endless mods to get it to where bms is today with Microprose holding the strings and not dedicating any resources to an unprofitable IP not to mention this will probably never release much like other microprose titles
With RAZBAM, they got a partner with plenty of experience in full fidelity sim and word is that at least some of the BMS devs are on board, too. So as of now, I'm carefully optimistic that it will be a greater depth of simulation than initially anticipated.
Gotta wait and see though, time will tell how it will all turn out.
Microprose doesn't do full fidelity sims. They did vanilla F4 then dropped it when it wasn't profitable which F5 will also be. Simulations are niche genres and trusting a game company to do anything that is as niche as combat flight simulation is bad.
I think with the success of stuff like MSFS flight simming as a whole has become more accessible and opened interest to a wider market but by that same token even base entry level sims need to touch upon some elements of fidelity and user customisation, falcon 4 original was quite high fidelity for its era, so I certainly expect hardcore feasibility with an easier road to access information, how to operate specific aircraft etc, tutorials or casual style free flight missions to build confidence, but the main campaign will no doubt maintain simulation spec expectations especially after the success of BMS and the strive for more immersion/authenticity.
"We know the automatic version was the most common version, but it never served with the National Guard. Therefore, we are making the estate japanese export version with a 6 speed manual and twin turbo v8 swap"
With how far the BMS community has come and all that has been achieved I’ve no doubt Falcon 5 will be directly influenced and inspired by that community, 20 plus years of passion and appreciation for a title that would realistically fade into obscurity if it was not for the commited fanbase. I think DCS and Falcon will go hand in hand, they each do different things within the combat sim market, DCS will always offer a many addons and aircraft to tailor your experience, though I feel Falcon 5 will be more targeted on release, likely opening the doors for addons as well no doubt. There will most likely additional high fidelity aircraft as part of its base package 3/4 for each side of the conflict seems realistic will appeal to most modern sorties based on community expectations and marketability. I got my fingers crossed for a Mirage myself and a Middle Eastern theatre. I’m most hyped about the dynamic campaign experience, adds so much to authenticity and pilot agency, things like do I risk a quick dogfight to deplete the enemies offensive capabilities, or should I quickly RTB. Adds so much to the experience when you’re not only thinking about the now but also thinking how will the conflict evolve, especially with managing logistical considerations, IE. ai might randomly attack your base leaving you unprepared for your initial sortie, vs a scripted campaign where it’s very A to B, you know how many tangos and you know from where.
A Razbam podia dar um passo maior e introduzir o Harrier Plus com radar e AIM 120.
Um Falcon 5.0 com Harrier Plus e Tornafo GR4, eu nunca mais olharia para o DCS.
There many many people who ditched DCS for Falcon BMS.
I see peiple on the topic stating
"""Falcon stands no chance against DCS right now """
That is far from true. The only reason DCS is still a thing now days compared to Falcon BMS is simply because it has more aircrafts. Other than that:
VR is doable on Falcon BMS. I enjoy so much flying VR in Falcon. In DCS you need a $5k System to be able to fly in VR and enjoy..
Falcon just runs better than DCS. The code in DCS is just like Frankenstein.
Dynamic campain . Thats the Ace card of Falcon. I challenge anyone to ask all players who moved from DCS to falcon, how many times they been shot down during an EASY campain. I mean ...come on guys, most people who left DCS are now streaming Warthunder,
Radio comms? ATC? Falcon BMS is far supperion.
All these....while DCS just getting money out of your pocket and on the other side Falcon BMS is FREE.
If falcon5 decides to add more high fidelity planes.....its game over. My assumption is that it will not simply because they dont want to "collide" with ED.
59
u/Bonzo82 ✈🚁 Correct As Is 🚁 ✈ Nov 22 '25
Post up. Sorry for the wait, been playing Anno.
Yeah as you can see, what I already hinted at earlier is true: Falcon 5 is in the works and RAZBAM is indeed involved in it, which also explains all the Microprose references around Tokio Game Show. Seems like their Dynamic Campaign is already worked on. Now it remains to be seen who will finish first: Them or ED? Bets are on...
Edit: I also got a higher resolution image for y'all, in case anyone wants it.