Hard Light Productions Forums
Modding, Mission Design, and Coding => FS2 Open Coding - The Source Code Project (SCP) => Topic started by: Deepblue on May 12, 2004, 09:32:33 am
-
I think the top three effects that people want implemented for after 3.6 are
- Environmental mapping stuff (already their, just needs to be implemented)
- Overexposure (this looked absulutely awesome)
- 3d cockpits (adds a feel of realism and depth)
If other people have different priorities feel free to post them.
-
self-shadowing models
pixel/vertex shaders
Environment Mapping
-
Before new big features (and new bugs) are introduced, I'd like a small fix for the non-standard resolutions, namely for 1280x1024.
I know that correcting the whole interface would be tedious, but I only want the lead indicator and the missile lock-on triangle to work properly, these are the only significant bugs in higher resolutions.
And since they still work, but are only a bit out of place ( I think they are calculated for 1024x768, but drawn in 1280x1024), it might be corrected by replacing some "1024"s with "1280"s ? :rolleyes:
-
a decrease in most wanted threads?
-
Some of the new SEXP's requested and that thing to tie team loadout and persistant variables together that I keep asking for. :D
-
Helps inspire people with ideas and what have you I guess...
As for me, I have to go with PhReak and add one other of my own - volumetric fogging (IE - nebuli you can enter/exit as as you could a cloud of smoke).
-
Originally posted by PhReAk
self-shadowing models
You're dreaming, even the latest games like doom3 won't do that.
-
cool it with the GFX please, let's concentrate on playability and functionality for a change...like...in order of wanting it the most
-Personalized textures (like I am flying a Herc Mk II and the game would look for _fighter2T-03*.* textures, read the thread (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,23255.0.html) for more details)
-in-game on/off toggles for various HUD elements.
-landing on surfaces,
-take-off/returning to mothership/hangar,
-In-Mission jumpdrive that doesn't end the mission
-atmospherical flight/fight (skyboxes are nice immitation but it ain't the 'real deal'), with which I mean, if ship enters the atmosphere of a planet at too high speed, view goes glowing reddish from heat, speed slowdown from drag, in short, flying should 'feel' different inside a planet's atmosphere. Codewise this would only need a 'correction factor' be applied to the flight model when the 'in-atmosphere' flag would be true, making the stearing-controls react/act just a little bit different.
-In-Game resolution switching (from options screen)
-In-Game gamma-control
-In-Game selecting of different HUD forms (the Top,Right and Left-Arc ani's)
-
lets see. in addition to environment mapping which is already on its way:
-overexposure effect
-sharper looking textures (what Lightspeed is doing, unless someone feels like re-doing them from scratch)
-whatever sort of new and cool lighting you can get in there.
-new impact effects (like on the Lightning Marshall pic in the highlights)
-more of Lightspeed-quality nebulas.
-
Originally posted by JarC
cool it with the GFX please, let's concentrate on playability and functionality for a change...like...
landing on surfaces,
take-off/returning to mothership/hangar,
Done. You can do both already.
atmospherical flight/fight (skyboxes are nice immitation but it ain't the 'real deal'), with which I mean, if ship enters the atmosphere of a planet at too high speed, view goes glowing reddish from heat, speed slowdown from drag, in short, flying should 'feel' different inside a planet's atmosphere,
In-Game resolution switching (from options screen) Pain in the neck to implement from what I've heard and considering how easy it is to do it using the launcher I hardly see the point.
In-Game selecting of different HUD forms (the Top,Right and Left-Arc ani's) Not a bad idea if you're talking about the campaign designer being able to do it. Otherwise it could completely screw up 3D cockpits.
In-Game gamma-control Press F2. Play about with the brightness controll. See! :D
In-Mission jumpdrive that doesn't end the mission Kazan's already working on this IIRC
Personalized textures (like I am flying a Herc Mk II and the game would look for _fighter2T-03*.* textures, read the thread (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,23255.0.html) for more details) Sounds good
separate on/off toggles for various HUD elements. Can't you already do this?
-
Self shadowing is a waste of time, in my opinion. My three big graphical 'wants' are The ORB, 2d/3d cockpit support (with a change to the HUD code to allow HUD panels to be placed with pixel-level precision) and on-demand overexposure (ie, you can have windows on a hull overexposed and nothing else).
In the realm of non-graphical improvements, I'd like to see a revamp of the physics system (I can dream. I want a rules-based pluggable physics system), a full on scripting layer (which would replace, and implement as a subset of its functionality, all SEXPs and have access to all systems and objects inside the engine), user modifiable subsystems, and hot-pluggable mods.
I don't ask for much, honest. ;)
-
you forgot The Örb™
-
I think it would be nice if the OpenGL support would be completed.
-
Originally posted by PhReAk
you forgot The Örb™
I'd be willing to wait on the orb, if it meant I could have my non-graphical wishlist fulfilled. :D
-
Well, big features wise, I'm mainly interested in
Improving the HUD - allowing us to shift/resize hud elements, and add simple, sexp controlled guages (eg. distance from, timers etc., or more of those messages (collision, Engine wash etc.). Also, huds definable on a per species or even per ship basis - this would be especially important if we added cockpits, but I'm not in favour of that just yet, so, well, it's a compromise :)
Tertiary Weapons - opens up so much more potential for mission designers and standard gaming, as well as adding another degree of customization to your fighter, something FS2 lacks in many respects - beyond changing the loadout and fiddling with your energy you're very much locked in to your fighters specs. Tertiary weapons would be the first step towards fixing this.
As for three, well the blooming looked nice, but I'd much rather more gameplay and mission design related stuff was implemented than fancy new graphics to be honest.
-
1 : More subsytem controls, definable sounds, definable shockwave explosions etc.
2 : an option to set energy cannons with a charge time :)
3 : Turret damage sensitive AI on capships, so the ship brings it's most powerful turrets to bear on it's most powerful opponent?
-
Damage to craft affecting craft maneuverability beyond failing subsystems.
-
Originally posted by JarC
speed slowdown from drag
mmh, the fighters are already too slow for my tastes, so I'd hate that :p
-
Oh yeah, I forgot to add atmospheric flight capabilities to my list (as in an actual flight model and gravity, none of this hovering in mid air with engines off stuff) And if possible, atmospheric entry. AKA maybe have a short cutscene play as the cpu loads the atmospheric environment (like a ship crashing trough the planets atmosphere)
-
3D (and animated) cockpits.
Self-shadowing models (LOMAC, Doom3, Homeworld 2, and Half Life 2 all do it, Venom ;))
Blooming effect for bright lights.
-
The thing I would most like to see is that whole repeat/chain problem understood and fixed; since it's a bug it will probably get high priority. :D
-
Originally posted by ionia23
Damage to craft affecting craft maneuverability beyond failing subsystems.
I asked for that, and they called me a massochist. :nod:
-
Originally posted by Nico
You're dreaming, even the latest games like doom3 won't do that.
Hes right only Halo 2 can do that and it's Bungies software so thats outa the question.
And no the other games don't do real self shadowing it's a trick to look like they do only Halo 2 has the real thing.
-
well the algorithm is out there, but its all a matter of programming it and making sure you have a good enough machine to test and run it.
-
actually, JKA has volumetric shading as well, but it eats FPS like a mofo!
-
GEO MODDDING!!!!111oneoneone
-
Originally posted by Starfighter
Hes right only Halo 2 can do that and it's Bungies software so thats outa the question.
And no the other games don't do real self shadowing it's a trick to look like they do only Halo 2 has the real thing.
(http://www.penny-arcade.com/images/2002/20021011l.gif)
Anyway, it looks real enough. Why can't we try that fake technique, then?
-
The game can't do it we would have to rewright the hole game engene to do the Geo moding, or even fake it right.
-
Starfighter, please read the comic in my above post :p
-
Originally posted by Unknown Target
Starfighter, please read the comic in my above post :p
I did funny:lol:
-
i want to see dynamic glow (i suppose its like overexposure and light blooming) and i want something to make the engine effects not overlap and clip with the hull and i want vasudan ships to not reflect on the clay-looking parts
-
[list=1]
- Fixed thruster/hull intersection bug (priority #1 IMHO)
- Volumetric nebulae
- Better damage and 'fire' effect support ('specially on badly hurt capships)
[/list=1]
-
Originally posted by Starfighter
The game can't do it we would have to rewright the hole game engene to do the Geo moding, or even fake it right.
I know. The whole thing about geo modding a joke that's been around since the SCP's inception :p
-
What is a self shadowing model?
-
a model that casts shadows on itself, say, you have the deathstar, with that tower thinguy where the emperor hangs around. If you put that in FS2, you'll get the basic shading, but you'll never see the actual shadow of the tower projected on the deathstar. with self shadowing, you'd have the shadow. But that's highly complicated. We don't even have projected shadows ( you can see the shadow of your ship projected on the ship next to it - if positioned so you should see it, of course ), which are probably easier to do ( shadowmap system, for exemple ), in Freespace, so that...
-
I think someone mentioned a projected shadow system before? It would at least mean that ships cast shadows on bigger ships etc. Self shadowing is available in X2 as well, but, as with all Self Shadow systems, eats CPU like a good 'un.
-
using .avis for lasers and missiles.
-
I would be happy with ANIs right now, as even ANIs dont work properly as laser, trail or beam graphics.
-
New star background render!!! :D
-
Even a User Defineable laser/beam POF might be handy ;)
Edit : LS iirc I think the ANI's work if you make sure that all textures are animated, if you have a non-animated texture with an animated glow it won't work, or vice-versa or something ;)
Edit : Forget that, I remember, I ended up using a missile to get that effect ;)
-
now its the coders turn: How much of alll this beautiful stuff might actually someday be implemented?
-
3/4 sounds about right to me
but just imagining what ya'll would have to go through to get there, is just... :blah:
-
Flipside: Or use the particle spew system to fool it - but it isn't quite the same as a laser bitmap, unfortunately.
New star background render!!!
You know, RT wanted to do something after 3.6.
So...... ;7 :D
-
Yes, You have told me before and I've been anxious ever since. :)
Yay!!!... I'm a Fenris now
-
Ok, this is probably a stupid question, but just humor me.
What's overexposure? Geomodding?
-
Originally posted by karajorma
In-Game resolution switching (from options screen) Pain in the neck to implement from what I've heard and considering how easy it is to do it using the launcher I hardly see the point.
true, but you must exit the game first, and then relaunch it again...
In-Game gamma-control Press F2. Play about with the brightness controll. See! :D
:o
separate on/off toggles for various HUD elements. Can't you already do this?
in-flight ?
-
Originally posted by Jetmech Jr.
Ok, this is probably a stupid question, but just humor me.
What's overexposure? Geomodding?
Overexposure - you know how now, if you have a square light, the light only seems to stay in that square? Overexposure would make the light spoof out of the square...it's hard to explain, do a search for it in this forum, you'll turn up some pics.
Geomodding means that when you shoot something, it will be deformed where you shot it. So you could shoot a hole through a Fenris, for example.
-
It's close enough to in-flight that it really doesn't matter. You shouldn't have to change the gamma on-the-fly anyways.
If it's only effects we're allowed to pipe up about then here are the stuff I want.
1) 3Dc support. It might be ATi-only right now, but I'll bet that DirectX is going to pick this one up. This way, we'll have texture compression with less blocks (the biggest problem with DXT5).
But more importantly, we can have normal maps (that don't take up too much space) that can be used increase the details in models without actually having to have more complex models.
2) Shaders support. Skip 1.x and go directly to 2.0. 3.0 support is easy to implement once 2.0 is in place so that's still good. With this, we'll have some really nice effects; environment mapping and fake reflections will be cheaper to do. We may be able to do better fake transparencies as well. And glowpoints re-done using shaders should look way better. In fact all the glows would look cooler if re-done properly with shaders.
If we get 3.0 support we'll get the cool object instanciation and displacement mapping. Object instanciation means we can have Homeworld numbers of fighters without as much slowdown. Displacement mapping is a suped-up version of bump-mapping that doesn't suck (i.e. we can look at it from a low-angle and it'll still appear to be a bump).
3) High dynamic range lighting. Want to know why renders can look like real-life, but in-game engines never looks quite as good? This is one reason why. Once HDR lighting is used, we'll start seeing really nice graphics. Unfortunately, I'm not sure if the current hardware supports this yet. I'm fairly sure that it's either in the current new generation (r420, nv40) or in the next generation (nv50, r500) only.
3Dc should be possible. Shaders is a dream most likely. HDR is out of the question until quite a bit later.
-
Originally posted by WMCoolmon
hard to explain, do a search for it in this forum, you'll turn up some pics.
You do not have access to this page:confused:
Is it in the SCP Internal
-
yes, i get that message too, s' why i never searched the forums for overexposure. thanks for the info :)
-
Unfortunately it was moved into the internal when the internal was made :mad:
Think of it as a somehazy glow glow around anything that's supposed to be glowing. It's quite a nice effect. The old links are dead so I'll wait for someone else to put up new ones.
-
All the screenshots and the build were taken down, but here's an example of what it would look like:
http://www.ati.com/developer/sdk/RADEONSDK/Html/Samples/Direct3D/RADEONLightGlare.html
In 3.6, the window would just show as 6 almost-square shapes, note how the light seems to overflow where its coming in.
-
Originally posted by WMCoolmon
All the screenshots and the build were taken down, but here's an example of what it would look like:
http://www.ati.com/developer/sdk/RADEONSDK/Html/Samples/Direct3D/RADEONLightGlare.html
In 3.6, the window would just show as 6 almost-square shapes, note how the light seems to overflow where its coming in.
'Would'? It will still be implemented, right?
-
1. Overexposure effects
2. Bump/Normal mapping
Wishful thinking suggestions:
3. Pixel shaders
4. Volumetric effects
5. Self-shadowing
-
Sticks is planning on doing OX. from what i gathered, its only going to be applied to glowmaps.
-
once again, that's called blooming when it spreads like that, NOT overexposure. while overexposure CAN cause blooming, it is not in itself blooming... overexposure in and of itself is the same thing that happens facing the sun in FS2... blooming is a side effect
anyway, back on topic... my wishlist:
1) more/better particle effects
2) displacement mapping
3) better loading times
4) stop screwing up pilot files just cause something changed
-
Whatever you want to call it, over-exposure or light-blooming, just put it in the game and make it look good. :cool:
-
and make sure it only effects glow maps.
-
I think there should be options for that, I realy would like it to be applyed to specmaps as well (though to a lesser extent)
-
Originally posted by ShadowDrakken
once again, that's called blooming when it spreads like that, NOT overexposure. while overexposure CAN cause blooming, it is not in itself blooming... overexposure in and of itself is the same thing that happens facing the sun in FS2... blooming is a side effect
Actually, that's not called blooming either, that's a glow. A stupid glow.
What I'd want? Right Now? That transparent maps don't stop the parts of the same ship from being rendered if they're in front :mad:
-
about shadows.. maybe something..uh more "simple", used only with capships? Something like using lod2 or lod3 to calculate a shadow created by a capship between the shadowed object and a sun. Dunno if it's possible, but it could be nice...a planet or a moon projecting a shadow on a big capship.. a Supestardestroyer hiding smaller stardestroyers...
btw my list is
-shield hit effect for capships with non modelled shields, maybe using decals
-decals
-some stuff on persistent variables, like the possibility to show the value of a PV during the game, the variables affecting loadout(honestly I don't even know if it is already :nervous: ) and maybe PV in multiplayer
-multiple docking objects :lol:
-geomod!! :drevil:
-
Well, shadows casted onto another object isn't impossibly hard or slow. However, if you think about it, even in FS2 the chances of two capitals shadowing each other are pretty tiny anyways.
Self-shadowing, however would look cool, but would also eat up the FPS. Unless some quaint way of doing it (or faking it) is figured out.
-
Originally posted by ChronoReverse
Well, shadows casted onto another object isn't impossibly hard or slow. However, if you think about it, even in FS2 the chances of two capitals shadowing each other are pretty tiny anyways.
One would assume fredders would take this into account and place the ships so it loks cool, and shadows are definitively a mood enhancer ( think The Empire Strikes Back, the first thing of the SSD you see is its shadow on the nearby SD )
-
Hmm, could the subobjects be treated as different objects and then the shadow effect applied? This could look good for something like the Fenris' radar dish, at least.
-
well if it isn't hard to have different ships shadowing each other, then we could use as shadow source all the "big" objects (capships, planets, stations, maybe some asteroids), and as shadowed objects all the others...
imagine during action a fighter that goes in the dark side of a capship: it is irrealistic if it continue to reflect light, it'd be cool to see it becoming dark as it enters in the shadow
-
Sure would, even more with the self illu maps we have now :)
-
Here's my wish list. All related to turrets...
1) Turrets not firing though own ship (there was a test build around, still buugy AFAIK):doubt:
2) Unlimited no. of turrets shooting at a singel target (Currently only about 3-4 turrets can shoot at a single ship, might depend on type):confused:
3) 'Savlo' firing (All barrels firing at once). Would remove need for multiple versions of the smae weapon for the diffrent configurations. Possibly default, with chain fire inposed by a weapon flag?
4) Smarter targeting. I posted an idea for this a while ago, but no one seemed to care...:(
5) more firepoints for turrets (currently max of 4, more causes CTD)
6) Multi-part turrets aligning themselfs with their target BEFORE firing.:mad2:
7) Turrets firing when target IS in range, not when they are just OUT of range.:mad:
8) Multi-part turrets not shooting at 90 degrees to barrel (Having the 'swarm' flag attached by default sorta thing):hopping:
9) Multi-parts on vertical faces.:nod:
10) (not quite turret related) plasma shots dissapating after reaching max range, rather than simply disappearing?
That's all I ask for. I know that the turret code is a mess, but at some point it needs to be sorted, so...
Please, please, PLEASE focus on these ideas?;7
-
Er... Doom 3 does have self shadowing (At least it does if I know what you're talking about), it has a unified lighting engine which means everything projects a dynamic shadow.
- Bumpmapping
- Overexposure
- Shader support (ChronoReverse's post)
-
we might be able to pull of shadows with stencil shadowing.
if we do have shadows, however, either everything gets shadowed, nothing at all. it doesn't make sense to have just cap ships cast shadows on just fighters, or have it cast a shadow on it's self but not on other things, or any of the other ideas people have for dumbing down shadows.
-
Shadows on everything then. It'd look fantastic... and IIRC its not been done before.
-
1. Sexy shinemaps. See what LS is doing.
2. New plasma weaponry - dissipating, more powerful.
3. Enhanced beam effects.
4. Does friendly fire - primaries - work? Haven't paid attention, but do AI fighters damage each other?
-
Originally posted by Raptor
7) Turrets firing when target IS in range, not when they are just OUT of range.:mad:
Why? if the turret shoots at a bomber coming in its direction, the time it takes for the shot to reach its limit range, the bomber might have come to range, and would be hit, which makes turrets more efficient.
-
Janos: friendly fire is already part of FS, check your pilot stats :)
-
No no no, not talking about me, Alpha 1. I know I always hit them wingmate bastards as they try to take my kills. I was talking about AI friendly fire: two Myrms chasing a Herc and dealing damage to each other. This may seem dumb, but if alcohol has not yet devastated my memory, there were issues with this in vanilla FS. AI fire was dealt with somehow differently as player fire, which resulted AI never ever hitting a friendly fighter - capships were a different issue. I guess it's no longer a case.
And a small add to my wishlist, which may be a bit off-topic:
Reducing the memory print.
-
Originally posted by ShadowDrakken
2) displacement mapping
real displacement mapping isnt somthing the typical cards here could do. Its pretty impossible to get displacment running ingame without a axing of fps.
so it goes
1. Bump\environment mapping
2. 1.4 Pixle shader
3. Particlesssss
4. Volume lighting
5. .pof update
6. better real time dammage system
7. Submodels that do stuff, like flaps n stuff.
8. Scripted environment system thingy, so you can fly in the atmosferee....
-
Better AI.
That's all I ask.
Even a simple command as 'face side' which would make an AI automatically keep one side facing the enemy will do........
-
I. Graphics
A - Some version was already seen
1. Enviromental Mapping
2. Overexposure
3. Decals
B. Possible Developments
3. Volumetric Fog
4. Shadows
II. Gameplay
1. Revamped Turret Targeting code: - solve issues with turrets ROF, as well as their stupid targeting code (also shooting through their own ship's hull)
2. Stop fighters from bumping each other/capships
My own mania
3. Extended capship damage system
(read some of my posts, I already suggested a multi-stage development process that could be the basis for some kind of development if anyone ever wants to start it)
a. Damage Treshold / Damage Resistant - armor simulation
b. Section Simulation
c. Extended Subsystem interaction - subsystems act as individual parts of a ship, not as just statistics.
d. Internal Explosion simulation.
e-1. Introduction of Frame - only vital component for ship integrity - elimination of hull/hull percentage
e-2. Hull plate simulation
-
the latest version of the decals code is very nice, it's in the asorted env builds I've been posting. you need a modifyed table though
-
Originally posted by Nico
Why? if the turret shoots at a bomber coming in its direction, the time it takes for the shot to reach its limit range, the bomber might have come to range, and would be hit, which makes turrets more efficient.
It's okay against fighters/bombers, but the number of times I've seen shots disappear just a few 10's of metres from the target warships hull...:hopping:
-
Drew: oh, I know most cards can't handle displacement maps atm, but with as lightweight as FS is, a well written software displacement routine could be managed using a low resolution map. Once the model is mapped in memory (and thus created as polys with the modifications), all the work is done, so preloading the models at mission start would save the hard work :)
-
This is probably more a Ferrium thing, but I'd love to see something like the Unreal technique employed for glowpoints, thrusters etc, where 2 ship textures are pre-rendered, one for the light on, shadows and all, and one for the light off. That way blinking glowpoints, thrusters etc would illuminate the ship beautifully, but take up almost no CPU time, though I'm not sure how they cope with more than one light flashing at different intervals ;) Unreal makes it a little better by using a higher quality than in-game rendering engine to render the texture in UnrealEd though :(