View Full Version : Graphics Engine
Wondering what kind of engine you plan on using or has it already been developed? Also are there any screenshots avaialble? Wish you all good luck too :D I'll be keeping any eye on the progress
Wish I could answer those questions for you but I honestly don't know! :( Hopefully Claude or Tejay can comment on this. But remember, this project is no where near complete so things might be kind of boring around here for a while. But don't worry, when we get updates we'll put them up asap and keep you all informed. Hope you understand! :)
I too am interested to know more about the graphics engine and what it is going to offer.
Although my primary focus is on the "realism" behind the actual simulator and the tasks involved in operating the jet, weapons systems, avionics, etc., Im also a big believer in having great graphics. Since we have no physical sense of movement and inertia (biggest missing aspect of flight simulation IMO), it is up to the grahpics and the visuals to trick our mind into feeling like we are really up there flying the big blue sky. And you sipmly can't do that with out-dated graphics.
For those who like to believe that graphics are not important, then why don't we just go back to using monochrome monitors with block graphics to display the virtual world for us and simply focus on the simulation realism. Im willing to bet not a single hard-core simmer would want to go back to that.
For me, both are important, and IMO, striking a good balance between the two is the key to a truly unbelievable sim. Dare I say we need the realism of Falcon and the graphic beauty of Lo-Mac bundled into one killer sim....
cheers and great job on the new site.
o
Well, they have their options open for graphics engines.
They can use the latest DirectX stuff, rather than trying to shoe-horn new features into an old DX 7 or 8 engine.
Also they can decide on things like how to do things, like the terrain, based on what is best, not what the original source code did.
Sometimes it is easier to start from scratch than to modify existing code.
F-16Simbuilder
03-03-2004, 06:29
Guys !
Pls don't forget to add MFD's and HUD's external Suppot !
We're waiting them for a long time !!!!!
Davide
But remember, this project is no where near complete so things might be kind of boring around here for a while.
Don't let it become boring. There is always NEWS and believe me we are interested in even the slightest details :D
Well, they have their options open for graphics engines.
They can use the latest DirectX stuff, rather than trying to shoe-horn new features into an old DX 7 or 8 engine.
Also they can decide on things like how to do things, like the terrain, based on what is best, not what the original source code did.
Sometimes it is easier to start from scratch than to modify existing code.
Im totally with you stuntie.
I don't think anyone here is suggesting that they use some old archaic graphics engine. if they have the opportunity to start a new beginning, then hell yea, of course it makes sense to build a new grahpics engine and model that bring us the visual reality that is really needed, as well as keeping the actual simulation as real as possible. there is no sim yet that has provided both aspects in the highest possible form.
We all know F4 is the king of simulation realism. And it's obvious that Lo-Mac has the crown on the graphics side. Now if we can just get a sim that achieves both, then I think we are on the right path to the next generation of modern jet-fighter combat simulation.
cheers.
o
Bladehawk
03-03-2004, 13:49
My question is simple...
Graphics and sensation of speed better or equal to Ace Combat 5 series (on PS2) (see for yourself...)
And your "so called" HYPER REALISM ! Can you deliver ????
PS2 and realism come on man :roll: :roll:
McHighlander
03-03-2004, 16:42
I too am interested to know more about the graphics engine and what it is going to offer.
Although my primary focus is on the "realism" behind the actual simulator and the tasks involved in operating the jet, weapons systems, avionics, etc., Im also a big believer in having great graphics. Since we have no physical sense of movement and inertia (biggest missing aspect of flight simulation IMO), it is up to the grahpics and the visuals to trick our mind into feeling like we are really up there flying the big blue sky. And you sipmly can't do that with out-dated graphics.
For those who like to believe that graphics are not important, then why don't we just go back to using monochrome monitors with block graphics to display the virtual world for us and simply focus on the simulation realism. Im willing to bet not a single hard-core simmer would want to go back to that.
For me, both are important, and IMO, striking a good balance between the two is the key to a truly unbelievable sim. Dare I say we need the realism of Falcon and the graphic beauty of Lo-Mac bundled into one killer sim....
cheers and great job on the new site.
o
HOLY WORDS :!:
Actually, I think graphics are very important. From a purely marketing point of view, it sells sims. And like it or not, a sim has to look pretty to sell most of the time. In fact, good graphics help my suspension of belief and draw me in along with all the button pushing, realistic FMs and missile modelling.
If this is starting from the ground up, the graphics engine should be at least DX9 compliant and really this is probably the best route. I know Open GL is also good, but DX is what most game programs are run on today and I believe most vid cards run this better than Open GL.
I hope we know soon what graphics engine they are using. I hope JAM has a say in it or some other noted DX guru.
Zimluura
03-04-2004, 01:28
i like opengl better, cross platform, and in my experiences ogl apps have been more stable than d3d ones. (just to clairify, i'm aware that many people have the opposite experience, and i'm not interested in api wars.)
but i'd be interested to see some commercial game/sim developers comments on using the ogre engine (or something similar) to make a game.
http://www.ogre3d.org/
it's LGPL (not normal GPL), which basically means that you can use it to make a closed_source commercial game with a cd checks and whatever else. the only practical thing it seems to rule out is video game consoles (which probably doesn't matter as far as flight sims are concearned).
a 3d click pit would be sweet
Actually, I think graphics are very important. From a purely marketing point of view, it sells sims.
I agree they are important, but they shouldn't be the be all and end all in a sim. Anyone rememeber a sim called Su-27 Flanker by a certain Eagle Dynamics. Even today, version 1.5 must be considered as an excellent example of the genre.
IMHO, that's where version 2.x of the Flanker series went wrong. It tried to hard to replicate the immersion/feel of 1.5 but wanted to be the best-looking sim available at the same time.
I enjoy 2.x and now LoMAC with very limited graphics turned on (not a spec thing either, my PC is well capable) but I far prefer smooth frame-rates.
Remember, form is nothing without function.
Bladehawk
03-04-2004, 08:36
PS2 and realism come on man :roll: :roll:
:shock: READING PROBLEMS ????
WHAT I MEAN = PS2 GRAPHICS + G2I/GENAV HYPER REALISM !!!
GOT IT ! :evil:
Actually, I think graphics are very important. From a purely marketing point of view, it sells sims.
I agree they are important, but they shouldn't be the be all and end all in a sim.
Absolutely not. I agree. They should not be the end all to end all in a sim. The gameplay and in my case personally, the realism is what is important, but having said I do enjoy a puurrrty sim. :D I think it does help with the simulation experience and to the novice it can draw people in. I know LO-MAC is quite beautiful and hopefully they can fix the gameplay but that has been the downfall of ED, pretty sims and unbalanced gameplay. I am confident that this time they will fix it with subsequent patches. Anyhow, I hope G2I/GenAv find that balanced that is needed. I wish I knew programming so I could help but I don't.
Actually, I think graphics are very important. From a purely marketing point of view, it sells sims. And like it or not, a sim has to look pretty to sell most of the time. In fact, good graphics help my suspension of belief and draw me in along with all the button pushing, realistic FMs and missile modelling.
If this is starting from the ground up, the graphics engine should be at least DX9 compliant and really this is probably the best route. I know Open GL is also good, but DX is what most game programs are run on today and I believe most vid cards run this better than Open GL.
I hope we know soon what graphics engine they are using. I hope JAM has a say in it or some other noted DX guru.
:thumbsup:
Hey Maestro long time no see. I have run across Swampfox and Nomad in these forums as well.
True very true I am a bit concerned as I use a Voodoo 5 5500 which works fine with DX9 and most of the older sims. And my hopes are that it will work with Fighter OPS. If it doesn't no doubt I will find out the hard way. Do have a Nvidia Gforce TI 3 200 which for the most part is alright but doesn't match the stability of my Voodoo card. It (the Nvidia) is a piece of crap in other words for Falcon and SP3. Like most I don't want to have the disappointment of having to buy another video card just to add another sim to my collection. I think I have wasted my fair share of money on hardware. Well no doubt if the same wizardry that was used in past sims could be used and improved on so as to cover a larger range of Computers it would make our lives a bit easier and be less of a burden on the pocket book.
Hey Maestro long time no see. I have run across Swampfox and Nomad in these forums as well.
Well, unless I am losing it, I think you have me confused with someone else. I used to be Overkill over at Frug's, see my low bandwidth sig. :D
However, nice to have you hear. And when are you finally going to upgrade that vid card? :wink:
Remember the new Doom is GL and not DX. There is a reason for that and they say it's graphics are supposed to set the bar. As for cards, easily fixed with the right driver most of the time.
Hey Maestro long time no see. I have run across Swampfox and Nomad in these forums as well.
Well, unless I am losing it, I think you have me confused with someone else. I used to be Overkill over at Frug's, see my low bandwidth sig. :D
However, nice to have you hear. And when are you finally going to upgrade that vid card? :wink:
Yes I guess this is true as Maestro was part of the Mac Falcon community. :)
Ok, I've stated this already, but I feel the discussion needs refreshing. First of all DX9 is a graphics to operating system interface and is not a graphics engine. DX interfaces sound, processing power and ram to hard drive info. A graphics engine is what the game designer (such as G2I and Gen Av) uses to comunicate the graphical interface (engine) through the operating system (DX#). Open GL (or advanced glide) uses better instructions for things like vertex shading, alpha blending and my "fave" FSAA! :mrgreen: D3D is also a graphics engine that is most common because without the advance instructions, the FPS can easily go higher. That's not to say that open gl can't go fast either. That depends on how the data edits are constructed for the interface platform of the game. I'm dizzy now, see what you've done. :shock:
Powered by vBulletin™ Version 4.0.7 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.