Hard Light Productions Forums
Hosted Projects - Standalone => Fate of the Galaxy => Fate of the Galaxy News => Topic started by: chief1983 on October 29, 2010, 05:22:11 pm
-
That's where a lot of development has been taking place lately. Did you guys see this (http://img203.imageshack.us/img203/8606/nuisd041.jpg)? We've also still got ongoing campaign progress, and we've been writing a lot of Tech Room data lately. I wanted to make a video with the new HUD code that's now in testing combined with our selectable primary firepoint grouping code, using the code that nearly doubled frame rates for many users, but my main PC has been out of commission for several weeks. New PSU is in the mail though, so hopefully next week I'll be making a new video. If I'm not too busy playing Minecraft or IL-2 anyway :)
-
Minecraft
:mad: :mad2: :mad:
-
... If I'm not too busy playing Minecraft or IL-2 anyway :)
*waves with hand
you don't want to play Minecraft or IL-2. You want to spend your time on more important things... like the video.
:D
-
Tell you what, release some pics of the cockpit interiors and we'll be more patient. ;)
-
Thanks for volunteering to make them Vector Leader!
-
Who said anything about cockpit interiors? I thought everyone just turns those off anyway? ;)
-
Thanks for volunteering to make them Vector Leader!
lol I would like to formally retract my previous statement. :nervous:
Who said anything about cockpit interiors? I thought everyone just turns those off anyway? ;)
Blasphemy!
-
Minecraft
:yes2: :D :yes:
FTFY
Halloween update is almost here! Woohoo!
-
Good luck with the new part chief... I know your pain.
New mobo, ram, and cpu on the way for me....
-
Who said anything about cockpit interiors? I thought everyone just turns those off anyway? ;)
what, WHAT!??!
-
That comment was obviously mostly tongue in cheek, but there's a hint of seriousness there. Cockpits do add to the realism, and are great eye candy, but when given the option between having them on, and having just the HUD on my screen while playing competitive multiplayer, I'd want to have the least view obstruction possible and would probably have them turned off if given a choice. But don't worry, we do still hope to have cockpits eventually.
-
i prefer cockpits in every situation.
Also, how hard can it be to make a cockpit? All you have to do is to create displays, buttons, keys, switches, wires, circuit boards, modulators, stabilizers, safeguards, ... uhm... nevermind.
-
That comment was obviously mostly tongue in cheek, but there's a hint of seriousness there. Cockpits do add to the realism, and are great eye candy, but when given the option between having them on, and having just the HUD on my screen while playing competitive multiplayer, I'd want to have the least view obstruction possible and would probably have them turned off if given a choice. But don't worry, we do still hope to have cockpits eventually.
I like cockpits, but agree that there is some truth here. The only way I like having cockpits in competitive multiplayer is if there's a server setting disables the option to turn them off so everyone is on an even playingfield. Is there, or could there be such an option in FS2?
-
That feature isn't necessary. If you prefer graphics over gameplay, and it affects your multiplayer performance, it's your fault.
-
i prefer cockpits in every situation.
Also, how hard can it be to make a cockpit? All you have to do is to create displays, buttons, keys, switches, wires, circuit boards, modulators, stabilizers, safeguards, ... uhm... nevermind.
I know you're being sarcastic, but indeed, cockpits are quite a labor to do - If you've ever been to a flight sim forum, making a good and useful (aka reasonable polycount or an otherwise fancy trick to make the cockppit look higher-poly than it actually is) cockpit is a pretty extensive task.
However, I do have a suggestion... At some point, Stellar Assault will have actual cockpits. To make the process of making them easier and more realistic, I've started building an object library of standardized parts, including panels and switches, all of which are properly sized. When we're ready, we can then rapidly put controls where we need them and go from there. I understand there's a huge diversity gap in FotG, but if you can do something like this, it may help you greatly.
-
Like...cockpits where you actually have to click stuff, a la Falcon 4.0? Or just controls that react to your keypresses?
-
As far as I know, interactive cockpits are not possible in FSO, and in most cases, even if they were, the player would not want to use them due to the usual gameplay of FreeSpace. Now, it would be quite cool to have things in the cockpit that change due to your own actions, but the main thing you'd want would be working displays.
FSO doesn't lend itself to clickable controls, and if it did, using them would be inconveniant. I'm speaking of something different here - having a control object library is useful as it lets the modeler rapidly build the cockpit from a library of standard parts which an aircraft or spacecraft would most assumably have at some level. Again, this is probably something which wouldn't work as well for FotG due to the diversity in cockpit design, but if you can pull it off, it might speed the process up quite a bit.
-
That comment was obviously mostly tongue in cheek, but there's a hint of seriousness there. Cockpits do add to the realism, and are great eye candy, but when given the option between having them on, and having just the HUD on my screen while playing competitive multiplayer, I'd want to have the least view obstruction possible and would probably have them turned off if given a choice. But don't worry, we do still hope to have cockpits eventually.
*Whew* My comment was tongue in cheek too, but I really do want cockpits. After some of the latter comments on this thread, I was beginning to think they really had been canned. :shaking: I LOVE the extra layer of authenticity that truly immerses the player. :nod:
Having a few screens of the cockpit interiors would be epic, but even having some exterior screens of the craft with the cockpit interior and pilot visible through a transparent canopy would be awesome, as well. I can't wait to see that. :yes:
That feature isn't necessary. If you prefer graphics over gameplay, and it affects your multiplayer performance, it's your fault.
Ouch! I was going to ask the same thing CountBuggula did. :sigh:
-
i prefer cockpits in every situation.
Also, how hard can it be to make a cockpit? All you have to do is to create displays, buttons, keys, switches, wires, circuit boards, modulators, stabilizers, safeguards, ... uhm... nevermind.
I know you're being sarcastic, but indeed, cockpits are quite a labor to do - If you've ever been to a flight sim forum, making a good and useful (aka reasonable polycount or an otherwise fancy trick to make the cockppit look higher-poly than it actually is) cockpit is a pretty extensive task.
However, I do have a suggestion... At some point, Stellar Assault will have actual cockpits. To make the process of making them easier and more realistic, I've started building an object library of standardized parts, including panels and switches, all of which are properly sized. When we're ready, we can then rapidly put controls where we need them and go from there. I understand there's a huge diversity gap in FotG, but if you can do something like this, it may help you greatly.
It was meant as joke actually, as i know how much work it takes to create a lp cockpit, not to mention a hp one.
The idea with an cockpit object library sounds cool though.
-
Well luckily in our universe, the TIE cockpit fully covers about 6 of our ships we already have in the game. The rebel fleet is a bit more diverse of course, but we could probably share cockpits or most of cockpits between manufacturers, so Z/X could probably have a very similar or identical cockpit, etc.
-
i prefer cockpits in every situation.
Also, how hard can it be to make a cockpit? All you have to do is to create displays, buttons, keys, switches, wires, circuit boards, modulators, stabilizers, safeguards, ... uhm... nevermind.
I know you're being sarcastic, but indeed, cockpits are quite a labor to do - If you've ever been to a flight sim forum, making a good and useful (aka reasonable polycount or an otherwise fancy trick to make the cockppit look higher-poly than it actually is) cockpit is a pretty extensive task.
However, I do have a suggestion... At some point, Stellar Assault will have actual cockpits. To make the process of making them easier and more realistic, I've started building an object library of standardized parts, including panels and switches, all of which are properly sized. When we're ready, we can then rapidly put controls where we need them and go from there. I understand there's a huge diversity gap in FotG, but if you can do something like this, it may help you greatly.
It was meant as joke actually, as i know how much work it takes to create a lp cockpit, not to mention a hp one.
The idea with an cockpit object library sounds cool though.
Sure. In aviation, a sub-contractor usually makes a guage or control that goes into the cockpit of the primary contractor's vehicle. If you can accurately model the device (which is often in itself quite simple), you can use it in any aircraft that has it as an instrument. Furthermore, a great many of those devices have the same style or size, which means you can just slap in a different texture onto the guage - work smarter, not harder. :)
Next, panels themselves are often quite simple. They become complex due to the instrumentation therein. Thus, if you have all of the instrumentation produced separately, applying it to the main panel is trivial. My suggestion for our project is that the high-resolution models be used as normal maps within the cockpit, while a lower-poly 3D model is used as the primary. This allows us to get in all the detail with a low poly game model. Furthermore, as a cockpit .pof has no need for hit detection, the resultant model should ideally display as smooth as silk in-game. :)
-
Depends on version, Z-95 Headhunter may have X-W style canopy or a newer bubble canopy.
-
That feature isn't necessary. If you prefer graphics over gameplay, and it affects your multiplayer performance, it's your fault.
Ouch! I was going to ask the same thing CountBuggula did. :sigh:
I'm glad I'm not the only one! There's plenty of games that have features such as this - Battlefield 1942 comes to mind. It's useful for realism servers and such - it allows people to play competitively using realistic settings without being at a disadvantage.
-
Depends on version, Z-95 Headhunter may have X-W style canopy or a newer bubble canopy.
As long as the cockpit matches whatever version of the craft is in the game. :)
That feature isn't necessary. If you prefer graphics over gameplay, and it affects your multiplayer performance, it's your fault.
Ouch! I was going to ask the same thing CountBuggula did. :sigh:
I'm glad I'm not the only one! There's plenty of games that have features such as this - Battlefield 1942 comes to mind. It's useful for realism servers and such - it allows people to play competitively using realistic settings without being at a disadvantage.
Same here. ;) I say the more authentic the better. lol The only disadvantages that would exist with cockpits forced on would be inherent to the design of the ship (which, the sensors and targeting systems somewhat compensate for). So I can see where TopAce is coming from, but it would still be great if we were given the option to force cockpits on when hosting.
That reminds me, will we have the ability to free-look while in cockpit view? I don't recall if that was ever discussed.
-
Depends on version, Z-95 Headhunter may have X-W style canopy or a newer bubble canopy.
As long as the cockpit matches whatever version of the craft is in the game. :)
That feature isn't necessary. If you prefer graphics over gameplay, and it affects your multiplayer performance, it's your fault.
Ouch! I was going to ask the same thing CountBuggula did. :sigh:
I'm glad I'm not the only one! There's plenty of games that have features such as this - Battlefield 1942 comes to mind. It's useful for realism servers and such - it allows people to play competitively using realistic settings without being at a disadvantage.
Same here. ;) I say the more authentic the better. lol The only disadvantages that would exist with cockpits forced on would be inherent to the design of the ship (which, the sensors and such somewhat compensate for). So I can see where TopAce is coming from, but it would still be nice if we were given the option.
That reminds me, will we have the ability to free-look while in cockpit view? I don't recall if that was ever mentioned.
From what I remember, FS2 supports head-tracking through the likes of FreeTrack, so you should be able to.
And yes, much of the disadvantage depends greatly on which craft you're flying. The Y-Wing, for example, is FAR more restrictive than an A-Wing visually. Those kinds of differences could have drastic and interesting effects on gameplay (and tactics) but only if there's a server-side option to force users to use them. Why use tactics to attack a craft in its blind spot when the enemy can just turn it off?
This may be getting beyond what FS2 can handle, but it also could open the door to things like sensor jamming, which was alluded to several times in the movies (and EU sources saying is included as a package in the A-Wing). "Pick up your visual scanning!"
-
From what I remember, FS2 supports head-tracking through the likes of FreeTrack, so you should be able to.
Suh-weet! :pimp:
And yes, much of the disadvantage depends greatly on which craft you're flying. The Y-Wing, for example, is FAR more restrictive than an A-Wing visually. Those kinds of differences could have drastic and interesting effects on gameplay (and tactics) but only if there's a server-side option to force users to use them. Why use tactics to attack a craft in its blind spot when the enemy can just turn it off?
This may be getting beyond what FS2 can handle, but it also could open the door to things like sensor jamming, which was alluded to several times in the movies (and EU sources saying is included as a package in the A-Wing). "Pick up your visual scanning!"
Indeed. However, with the sensor and targeting systems each craft is equipped with, I don't believe it'll have as big of a detrimental impact in allowing someone to get the drop on a player as one might first think. In any case, it would be more realistic and optional. So I'm totally with you on it. :cool:
I don't believe jamming is something that's possible in FS2. I vaguely remember a discussion about it, but yeah, that would be awesome to include as it's definitely part of Star Wars lore.
-
maybe you could do jamming, just have to be a little creative:
disable things like 'next player' keybinds, and make a countermease that creates targetable ships with the same name as the type of ship you are, which looks like the ship to the scanner, but is actually a tiny and very low poly model of the ship, and is tagged as hostile.
then the player has to actually see their target to tell if its a real positive, but once locked on, your locked on.
*this would also need to have targeting not by flight but by the ship name.
-
I just want to know if the X-Wing cockpit will have that weird-shaped glowing display thing that seemed to serve no purpose. :p
-
I just want to know if the X-Wing cockpit will have that weird-shaped glowing display thing that seemed to serve no purpose. :p
of course it should. It's canon, thus it has to be in.
And how do you know, that it didn't serve any purpose? :P
-
It's probably just the radar's screen saver, seeing as there's too much jamming for them to get much use out of their scopes at Yavin. I'm sure they would have the rebel crest bouncing around the screen if it weren't distracting for the pilots. Or pong.
-
It's probably just the radar's screen saver, seeing as there's too much jamming for them to get much use out of their scopes at Yavin. I'm sure they would have the rebel crest bouncing around the screen if it weren't distracting for the pilots. Or pong.
this is what happened to porkins
-
Poor Porkins :(
-
might have also exceeded the vehicle's useful load though; historians are split on this point
-
I still want to play Deep Fat Fryer: An X-Wing and a Prayer
contend with the nachos under your ejection seat; keep the grease off the stick
-
Sorry Brand I did some research and turns out our X-wing is too skinny:
(http://www.jedi-business.com/images/actionFigures/e4/e4_JekPorkins_Big_2.jpg)
-
Stay on target.
-
Sorry Brand I did some research and turns out our X-wing is too skinny:
(http://www.jedi-business.com/images/actionFigures/e4/e4_JekPorkins_Big_2.jpg)
You mean that... the proportions are wrong?
(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a162/supergreenjedi/LukeSkywalkerNooooo.jpg?)
No.... no! That's not true! That's impossible!
-
actually, porkins can arrange his fat to fit, so no worries, really.
-
actually, porkins can arrange his fat to fit, so no worries, really.
And if he shifts it right, he can even use it to operate the side consoles!
:P
-
Like so (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJLIATqP2hI)?