[TopAce]

But bugs may be possible.

[Lynx]

As they are possible with 2d cockpits.

[TopAce]

But 2D cockpits have fewer possible bugs.
*TopAce disconnects and goes to have dinner*

To be continued.

[aldo_14]

*stab in the dark*
I wonder if the chase-cam code (i.e. the positioning of the camera and it's movement) could be adapted to use a 3rd view with a cockpit pof (or even a default modelname specified in code for testing purposes).....

although if it was that easy, I'd imagine someone would have tried it.  Just wish i had the means to  compile the code, then I could at least play around and npot just make half-baked suggestions.

[Lynx]

if we were afraid of bugs, we wouldn't have SCP:D

[aldo_14]

Pong has fewer possible bugs than Doom3

[mikhael]

Flipping a coin has still fewer bugs. If you base your implementation decisions on the number of possible bugs, pack up, go home and don't bloody well bother any more.

Its really very simple: if the coders don't want to code for a 3d cockpit, then they won't do it. Whinging about whether its more realistic or better or immersive or whatever is just stupid and repetitive.

Its going to go exactly the same way as the last three times this was requested and/or asked.

[TrashMan]

Ever played Starlancer? Now that game had excellent cockpits!

[Falcon]

Yeah but at least it worth a try. The coders may have said the same thing when it came to shine mapping or glow maps even hardware T&L saying it would be to buggy or it would take a big performance hit. All it takes is a little experimenting.

Im sure it will not be that much of a performance hit and if it is then they can remove it like the can remove shine or glow maps if it makes their game slow. While our faster systems enjoy the goodness of cockpit huds.

[Bobboau]

the diference is we (well I, those were all my things) wanted to do glow mapping and shine mapping and HT&L, I'm telling you there would be no visable perfomence hit, and it probly wouldn't be all that hard, but I simply don't want to do it, but worse for you nobody else in the SCP wants to, if it's realy that big of a deal you learn to code and do it yourself, in spite of what others say, it realy isn't as hard as it's made out to be.

[Nico]

Please, someone who wants cockpits learn to code
I'd love cockpits, just for the possibility of having a padlock view. I'm the kind who always fly in cockpit view, or play a racer game with the incar view, with the wheel and all, coz you feel more like you're in the real thing that way.

[TopAce]

Originally posted by Lynx
if we were afraid of bugs, we wouldn't have SCP:D

Agreed.

[StratComm]

I know people can have blinders on for things that they really want, but there are about 10 reasons I can think of for no cockpit support at this stage.  I'll list a few:
[list=1]

• no cockpits have been made.  Make one, superimpose it over a screenshot in Photoshop, and make your point and provide a template for at least a testbed rather than just throwing out the same argument over and over.
• The FOV is screwed for a cockpit.  The 45 degree field of view isn't even realistic for one's entire field of view, much less what you'd be seeing on a monitor.  Simply imposing one over the HUD is going to take things more out of proportion than we are already complaining about.
• It would have to be integrated into the FOV in a non-trivial fashion.  Unless, of course, you want your gagues to float away from the hud display they are supposed to be encompassing.
• It involves either moving the HUD components on a per-cockpit basis, or constricting the layout of the cockpit to correctly fit the HUD.  While I firmly believe the HUD element locations should be per-ship definable outside of the code, that's not the issue being debated.
• The cockpit could, in theory, but treated somewhat like a skybox, except rendered to display over everything rather than under.  This, however, means the skybox code should be debugged completely before approaching an adaption for rendering the cockpit.
• THE SCP IS UNDER CODE FREEZE.  IT WILL BE IGNORED.  Save the argument until 3.6 is out and the coders have had a chance to clear the backlog of requests that they already have.

Ok, end rant.  I've just seen this debate too often and it seems like some folks around here have a good bit of cotton in their ears (or in the case of a forum like this one, in their eyes).  Save it, folks.

[freespacer01]

Originally posted by Falcon


What if there was a deaf man playing?  

He is right about that... I play FS 1/2 and I am Deaf! Text plays huge role! One reason why Starlancer pisses me off...

[Deepblue]

Why couldnt we just make cockpits part of in game models (Venoms ezechiel) and have freespace actually draw the model from the players viewpoint. You would have to make it optionable since that would play havoc with most models, but it would look really nice on ships that have modeled cockpits (again Nicos ezechiel)

[StratComm]

Because by doing that you are either devoting WAY too many resources to a portion of the model that you'll only barely notice on other ships, while at the same time not devoting nearly enough resources to the cockpit itself.  There are times when seeing the ship you're in would be appropriate, but then we have to worry about eye placement and back-facing issues.  Better to make the parts of the model you want to show redundant in the cockpit mesh if you want to go that route.  But for the time being, lets just drop the issue.

[Nico]

Originally posted by StratComm

[list=1]

• no cockpits have been made.  Make one, superimpose it over a screenshot in Photoshop, and make your point and provide a template for at least a testbed rather than just throwing out the same argument over and over.
• The FOV is screwed for a cockpit.  The 45 degree field of view isn't even realistic for one's entire field of view, much less what you'd be seeing on a monitor.  Simply imposing one over the HUD is going to take things more out of proportion than we are already complaining about.
• It would have to be integrated into the FOV in a non-trivial fashion.  Unless, of course, you want your gagues to float away from the hud display they are supposed to be encompassing.
• It involves either moving the HUD components on a per-cockpit basis, or constricting the layout of the cockpit to correctly fit the HUD.  While I firmly believe the HUD element locations should be per-ship definable outside of the code, that's not the issue being debated.
• The cockpit could, in theory, but treated somewhat like a skybox, except rendered to display over everything rather than under.  This, however, means the skybox code should be debugged completely before approaching an adaption for rendering the cockpit.
• THE SCP IS UNDER CODE FREEZE.  IT WILL BE IGNORED.  Save the argument until 3.6 is out and the coders have had a chance to clear the backlog of requests that they already have.

Ok, end rant.  I've just seen this debate too often and it seems like some folks around here have a good bit of cotton in their ears (or in the case of a forum like this one, in their eyes).  Save it, folks.

1) that's trivial. If you want, when I'm done with the eze, I can make a cockpit. 2 Days falt to make a complete, fully detailled one, along with the seat and the rest

2) Yeah, that's an issue, but I suppose it can be rigged to another perspective

3)huh?

4)My idea would be to use the HUD anis as maps of the cockpit, or, to be exact, to have them mapped on transparent maps overlayed over the "actual" cockpit screens.

5) isn't the code freeze meant for debugging?

6) good timing ( see above ). 3D cockpits are an old request, I believe they should be high on the priority list

7) some people might force something when they really want it, others, just coz they don't see a need for it, try to completly nulify any possibilities of that happening. Why?

8) I have a very perverse idea, but I'll keep it for later.

[StratComm]

3) refers to the -fov command line flag.  Like it distorts backgrounds, this would play hell with a cockpit model and the hud.  If it doesn't then you've got some non-linear scaling going on (a bad thing, in every instance I've seen it).  It doesn't have to kill the idea, but if you've got a 45 degree FOV and a cockpit meant to be viewed at about 20 degrees FOV, then the whole thing is going to be warped, the hud would be tiny, and you'd have a genuine mess on your hands.

And I don't want it to not happen; if done properly it could be really cool.  But people should have some idea what the proposition that is raised with "it should be easy" actually means, which 99% of the time they don't seem to.  It's a good request, and granted an old one, but all I'm saying is wait until the end of the code freeze before spamming the threads with the requests again.  And Nico, if you want to make a cockpit that's fully fleshed out and able to be inserted in the game, by all means do so.  It's exactly what this request needs to be legit.  If one exists, then there is a much higher probability that the feature will actually be used.

[JarC]

I'll see them appear whenever, if ever, as said, if I really want them I could try my hand at it myself...so I ain't for now...

however there's one thing that is judged wrongly, simply because too much emphasis is placed on simultaneous view...

if you recall, in XWA there's only a very minimal cockpit visbile in regular flightmode...a ring around the hud and a couple of spokes to the corners...only in padlock mode you can turn your view independantly from the flight direction...at which point your FOV also slightly changes in XWA...the difference in FOV could be easily overcome if the HUD would be thought of as projected on the visor of the helmet...which solves the 45 over 20 degrees of vision....but then again, in padlock mode the HUD would be turned off...

mind you, not argumenting for them, just stating that the mindset against them is from being used not having them...performance issues is bullocks....XWA with just about every model replaced with a hi-poly version from XWAU still runs like greased lightning on my 466 PII with GeForce 5200 FX Ultra. And having to build one for each ship...some models come with different, others with similar cockpits, you don't hear the XWA modelers complain about having to do one do you? That's coz they model for the fun of it, and because they can...and prolly smart enough to just use a basic mesh with different textures per model...I only wish I could...

[Eishtmo]

http://descent-freespace.com/goodies/gallery/cockpit/cok19.jpg
http://descent-freespace.com/goodies/gallery/cockpit/cok24.jpg
http://descent-freespace.com/goodies/gallery/cockpit/cok12.jpg

That's it kids, that's all the cockpit there is to render.  AKA:  Not a damn thing!  It isn't worth the time or effort and I guarentee you'll shut the damn thing off after two minutes of novelity.

EDIT:  And here's another:  http://descent-freespace.com/goodies/gallery/cockpit/gtf0119.jpg