Author Topic: Requested Changes to Existing FS2 Source  (Read 41004 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline EdrickV

  • Valued
  • 29
    • http://members.aol.com/HunterComputers
Requested Changes to Existing FS2 Source
Quote
Originally posted by _argv[-1]


id Software didn't release Quake as public domain; rather, they released it under the terms of the GPL. The GPL is quite restrictive, in that anything you make based on the GPL must also be licensed under the GPL.


Yeah. And they did the same thing with DOOM. :) The FS2 source isn't under an official license but It is, I'm sure, similar to some Open Source licenses. (But much simpler.)
Ground - "Let me help you out, you're clear to taxi any way you can, to any runway you see."

Mesh Gallery/Downloads:
http://members.aol.com/ArisKalzar/Gallery.html
Turreting 101:
http://members.aol.com/EdrickV/FS2/Turreting.html

http://members.aol.com/HunterComputers

 
Requested Changes to Existing FS2 Source
Quote
Originally posted by EdrickV


Yeah. And they did the same thing with DOOM. :) The FS2 source isn't under an official license but It is, I'm sure, similar to some Open Source licenses. (But much simpler.)


Doom was first released with a homebrew 'Doom Source Code License' (or something like that); it was later relicensed under the GPL, presumably after some persuasion by Open Source enthusiasts.

FS2 does have an official license; it's at the top of each source file. The terms are just so simple that it doesn't seem like a license, but it is indeed a license.

 

Offline EdrickV

  • Valued
  • 29
    • http://members.aol.com/HunterComputers
Requested Changes to Existing FS2 Source
I meant as in the OSF approved licenses. (Or whatever they're called, this is from memory.) Like GPL, LGPL, and all the other ones that Sourceforge wants a project on their site to use.
Ground - "Let me help you out, you're clear to taxi any way you can, to any runway you see."

Mesh Gallery/Downloads:
http://members.aol.com/ArisKalzar/Gallery.html
Turreting 101:
http://members.aol.com/EdrickV/FS2/Turreting.html

http://members.aol.com/HunterComputers

 

Offline Turnsky

  • FOXFIRE Artisté
  • 211
  • huh?.. Who?.. hey you kids, git off me lawn!
Requested Changes to Existing FS2 Source
This has probably already been noted already (of the pc for a long period, couldn't be bothered reading the entire  post)

a rather cool feature to include would be the rather small graphical touches like running lights and manuvering jets
(ala I-War)
   //Warning\\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
do not torment the sleep deprived artist, he may be vicious when cornered,
in case of emergency, administer caffeine to the artist,
he will become docile after that,
and less likely to stab you in the eye with a mechanical pencil
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 
Requested Changes to Existing FS2 Source
Quote
Originally posted by EdrickV
I meant as in the OSF approved licenses. (Or whatever they're called, this is from memory.) Like GPL, LGPL, and all the other ones that Sourceforge wants a project on their site to use.


You're thinking of the OSI.

 

Offline JC Denton

  • Node For Me
  • 27
Requested Changes to Existing FS2 Source
I know I'm likely repeating someone here, but I really don't feel like reading through all 7 pages of this thread for a couple simple (and not so simple) things:

First:

Support ship having a limited supply cache onboard.  i.e. if it's rearming a bunch of ships it may not have enough to go around.  If it runs out of stored ammo, it withdraws and Command deploys another support ship.

Second:

A few new flags for the weapons and/or ships, such as "fighters_only" so the weapon only targets ships with the "fighter" or "bomber" flag, or a ship uses a fighter AI but is functionally a capital ship (B5's White Star comes to mind)

Third:

This one involves knowing how the slash beam works.  According to daveb, slashers randomly pick two points on the mesh of a ship and trace along the line between them.  That said, I'd like to see slash beams in an anti-fighter role.  Example:  Fighter is targeted by slash beam.  The beam picks the target points, but continually follows the second target point, so that the beam is vainly following the fighter's wild maneuvering.  And if there's several ships in a close formation, intelligent targeting so that the beam rakes across multiple ships.

And fourth:

Beam Texture Panning (please, read on)

This is a direct rip of one of my posts at the TBP forum. It involves adding texture panning for beam segments and a flag to the tbls to control it. Primary function would be to get the feeder beams of the Excalibur to appear semi-correct (by using a variation on the "rainer" beam someone (I think Thunder) made a while back). Larger scope would be to add additional glitz for the eye-candy enthusiasts during a pitched beam fight that is applicable to ALL mods.

Texture panning is probably going to be the easiest, quickest, and least painful interim fix for the feeder beams that I can think of. Besides, we can adapt the original tables to utilize texture panning as well, meaning that ALL mods that add beams can take advantage of this. Once someone discovers how to tell the engine to do it right, a simple flag addition can make any beam behave as a person wants. Adding something like this to each $Segment: section

+Texture Pan: #

would give users the ability to modify the speed/direction of the panning. The # would be pixels per damage cycle or something moved along the length of the beam. Negative values would mean that the beam would appear to flow backwards (possibly making for a neat "leeching" effect).

Also, simply because there are so many beam mods out there, I also reccommend that if there is no +Texture Pan: flag, that the segment simply behave as if it did have one with a value of 0 (no panning).
"I condemn false prophets, I condemn the effort to take away the power of rational decision, to drain people of their free will -- and a hell of a lot of money in the bargain. Religions vary in their degree of idiocy, but I reject them all. For most people, religion is nothing more than a substitute for a malfunctioning brain."  - Gene Roddenberry

"Democracy substitutes election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few." - George Bernard Shaw

 

Offline LtNarol

  • Biased Banshee
  • 211
    • http://www.3dap.com/hlp/hosted/the158th
Requested Changes to Existing FS2 Source
Here are a few more suggestions:

1. Have capital ships target opposing capital ships' turrets and fire on them (common sense were it real, destroy the weapons and they're no longer dangerous).

2. Very much more complex: the fighters seem far too large, 24 meters in length?  The X-wing in starwars is about 12.5 meters yet based on design it should me far longer than the Ulysses, the Ulysses is 15 meters in length.  The Pegasus should be about as long as an X-wing however is 26 meters in length.  For their cockpit sizes, they're incredably big (unless of course the pilots are uber-big themselves and need cocpits that large).  They also dont seem to match with the capital ships when you compare them in terms of size.

My proposed solution to this one?  Scale all demensions of fighters and bombers down by half, then double the length of a meter in FS2 so that capital ships seem bigger without the fighters seeming smaller.  I realize this will make the speed gauge even further off but the actual scales will be somewhat better.  If you only half the demensions of the fighters they become impossible to hit.

3. My favorite and the one involving the most coding: fighters and bombers like to sit still while attacking capital ships, not ideal if you're being fired at.  What would be really nice is if fighters made passes on their targeted turret or subsystem instead of sitting still pumping lasers into it.  Just the same, for bombers to make passes instead of sitting still putting bombs into their target.  Be really nice if you could have bombers pull away from their bombs after they launch them.




Just a few of my suggestions, hope they were useful.

 

Offline EdrickV

  • Valued
  • 29
    • http://members.aol.com/HunterComputers
Requested Changes to Existing FS2 Source
Number two is really more a mod thing then a source code issue. It would require taking apart every single FS2 ship, scaling all the parts up, reintegrating them, and then remaking all the pof data. For every single ship. And it would probably screw up compatability with the regular campaign so you'd then need new missions for people to play. Not worth it for that. And the ships seems fine to me.
Ground - "Let me help you out, you're clear to taxi any way you can, to any runway you see."

Mesh Gallery/Downloads:
http://members.aol.com/ArisKalzar/Gallery.html
Turreting 101:
http://members.aol.com/EdrickV/FS2/Turreting.html

http://members.aol.com/HunterComputers

 

Offline LtNarol

  • Biased Banshee
  • 211
    • http://www.3dap.com/hlp/hosted/the158th
Requested Changes to Existing FS2 Source
I was thinking more of scaling the fighters down to more acurate sizes and doubling the length of a meter.  Pof data for fighters and bombers isnt that hard to do either.

 

Offline Jake101

  • 26
Requested Changes to Existing FS2 Source
About it being possible to jump to another system within mission - that's possible!  In fact, that'd be easier than the jumping to another part of the same level.

The way you could arrange it, is to offer a new campaign feature with the code.  (You've got training, and loops, right?  Easy.  You've also got stuff coming from one mission to another in FS1, right?)

All you need to do is follow a sequence using 3 missions:
1.  missiona
2.subspacelevel (can last for any wished amount of time.)
3. missionb

Take away the breifing sequences, and possibly arrange a new form of the subspace level(might be harder right here) to where once you reach the end of a tunnel, it would load the next mission.  At the start of the next mission, you'd go through a transparent image of a subspace portal already going at a velocity, and BOOM!  you're there.

You could easily do these effects by removing the briefing screens, and going straight into loading the missions without them.  To create the end of the tunnel subspace effect, simply put a large image(similiar to the nebula effect) that the player can reach.  Once it is reached, load the next mission!  (This can be done through some new SEXP's.)

Okay, so it's rather more complicated than I originally thought, but it can be done.:nod:

I think the things that everyone wants mostly revolve around a lot of the same stuff:

-Enterable planets, ships, stations, etc.
-Player autopilot.
-Able to put the player on any wing wished.
-Improved computer AI.
-No limit on the travel distance.
-Limited nebulaes
-Animated textures
-Lights
-New SEXP's<----I think just some stuff to go with the new features.  The mission design system is great, IMO.)
-Better limits.  Unlimited ships, events, messages, etc in FRED2
-Improved graphics/interface/hardware extensiveness.


We should work toward the stuff that's most critical and would make the biggest impact first.  Then move onto stuff like capital ship missle bays, hatches that open, close, and release weapons, etc.  Those extras can come later.  

But does anyone really truely understand the fact that with this information, we could improve the engine to its full extent, and effectively create an FS3?
-Jake101
Ferrium is Pwnage.

 

Offline LAW ENFORCER

  • Turret Fiend
  • 210
    • http://www.armouredstar.com
Requested Changes to Existing FS2 Source
read the sig
Conflict GRDLA:
Operation Return To Riker
www.ARMOUREDSTAR.com - the latest site is not finished yet!
[What we have here is the source to the Freespace ENGINE, not the Freespace GAME. By allowing the ENGINE to support all kinds of cool stuff, we're allowing the creation of all new GAMES] - TurboNed

 

Offline Grey Wolf

Requested Changes to Existing FS2 Source
Quote
Originally posted by LtNarol
I was thinking more of scaling the fighters down to more acurate sizes and doubling the length of a meter.  Pof data for fighters and bombers isnt that hard to do either.
It's actually a good idea in my opinion. A 60 foot long fighter being on the small side! The X-Wing is a lot better. Also, we'd need to resize the bombs. Maybe some creative use of tags I.E. the fighter and bomber tags divide all the measurements on the POF by two?
You see things; and you say "Why?" But I dream things that never were; and I say "Why not?" -George Bernard Shaw

 

Offline LtNarol

  • Biased Banshee
  • 211
    • http://www.3dap.com/hlp/hosted/the158th
Requested Changes to Existing FS2 Source
well, the actual conversion of the pofs isnt the problem (we're looking at what, 30 or so ships? subsystems are a sinch, as are weapon points, dock paths are somewhat harder, but only turreted bombers are a true pain), the thing is with the engine itself.  A 12meter fighter is damn near impossible to hit if its moving at top speed because they look tiny.  By halfing every demension, we're reducing the target area from any one view to 1/4 the original, with 1/8 the original volume.  Thats why i say we need either fewer meters shown on the screen (half the number horizontally and half the number vertically), or double the length of a meter in fs2.

 

Offline IceFire

  • GTVI Section 3
  • 212
    • http://www.3dap.com/hlp/hosted/ce
This may or may not have been suggested before but the one really cool factor for Wing Commander Prophecy was the whole vectored thrust engines.  That above all else made their ships really cool.

Is that sort of thing mildly possible in the FreeSpace engine with our source code powers?
- IceFire
BlackWater Ops, Cold Element
"Burn the land, boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me..."

 

Offline LtNarol

  • Biased Banshee
  • 211
    • http://www.3dap.com/hlp/hosted/the158th
Requested Changes to Existing FS2 Source
while on that subject, how bout maneuvering jets and other pof subobject manipulations based on player/ai imput?  like when you fire a missile, a door opens, when you stop, a pair of covers cover the engines, when you pull up, small flames fire off on the under side of your nose and on the top of your back?

 

Offline EdrickV

  • Valued
  • 29
    • http://members.aol.com/HunterComputers
Quote
Originally posted by IceFire
This may or may not have been suggested before but the one really cool factor for Wing Commander Prophecy was the whole vectored thrust engines.  That above all else made their ships really cool.

Is that sort of thing mildly possible in the FreeSpace engine with our source code powers?


If you mean what I think you mean, that sort of thing is possible I think. (There are things in there for Descent style physics and the ship data has spots for info about moving backwards at least. Probably sliding too.) How to enable it I'm not really sure of. (Think right now you can use a cheat code, not sure where I heard that though.)
Ground - "Let me help you out, you're clear to taxi any way you can, to any runway you see."

Mesh Gallery/Downloads:
http://members.aol.com/ArisKalzar/Gallery.html
Turreting 101:
http://members.aol.com/EdrickV/FS2/Turreting.html

http://members.aol.com/HunterComputers

  

Offline Alikchi

  • Neo-Terran
  • 210
  • Spooky ghost (RIP)
Requested Changes to Existing FS2 Source
I want to be able to change the names of ships in-mission.
"Going too far and caring too much about a subject is the best way to make friends that I know."
- Sarah Vowell

 

Offline EdrickV

  • Valued
  • 29
    • http://members.aol.com/HunterComputers
Requested Changes to Existing FS2 Source
Quote
Originally posted by Alikchi
I want to be able to change the names of ships in-mission.


Now that sounds doable. But I can't compile FRED2 so can't do that myself.
Ground - "Let me help you out, you're clear to taxi any way you can, to any runway you see."

Mesh Gallery/Downloads:
http://members.aol.com/ArisKalzar/Gallery.html
Turreting 101:
http://members.aol.com/EdrickV/FS2/Turreting.html

http://members.aol.com/HunterComputers

 

Offline Nico

  • Venom
    Parlez-vous Model Magician?
  • 212
Requested Changes to Existing FS2 Source
piossible to make the cockpit view smaller? I mean redeucing the FOV: I have the feeling to fuight remote controled fighters. try that: ram a manticore. if the thing was the right size, you would see, what, a part of the thrurster engine? But no, you still have room to see two others from the same distance. That sux.
SCREW CANON!

 

Offline IceFire

  • GTVI Section 3
  • 212
    • http://www.3dap.com/hlp/hosted/ce
Requested Changes to Existing FS2 Source
Quote
If you mean what I think you mean, that sort of thing is possible I think. (There are things in there for Descent style physics and the ship data has spots for info about moving backwards at least. Probably sliding too.) How to enable it I'm not really sure of. (Think right now you can use a cheat code, not sure where I heard that though.)

Its not the physics, its the swiveling engine mounts (I should have been more specific).

The coolest fighter by far was the Vampire which had these awesome engines which pivoted about 30 degrees up and down giving it amazing pitch and roll abilities.  I'd love to see that in FreeSpace.
- IceFire
BlackWater Ops, Cold Element
"Burn the land, boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me..."