A Little Wish For Moddability

[Phlerp 0]

As I understand it this sim will be very moddable. May I request a little feature for the modding comunity. Many moddable sims gives the oportunity to add new planes, objects and terrain, but you're rarely able to really mod the sim 100%. I'd really like to be able to add my own menu interface, so I could make my own campaign system, carreer system and so on. This would require that the sim is possible to start without going throught the default menus and also to get some sort of feedback (mission results etc). Will it be possible with this sim?

[Nesher 628]

as a "programmer" I'd say you are basicly asking

to realse the source code (about the menus and carreer stuff)

about adding planes and terrain etc.. this can be done

but if they developers didn't thought about it before, it may cause problems now

and there is other problem like Multiplayer games (if 1 person adds a plane and another don't - will they both be able to fly together? and if he flyed the added plane, will the other person see it as the same plane or another plane like in FS)

 

everything is possible, its all about the developers will and $ issues i believe :D

maybe Dante or one of the other developers will answer it better ;)

 

Cheers

[PG_Raptor 0]

Why don't you just program your own sim? lol

 

But really, releasing the source code is not a good idea. as a matter of fact, its a very BAD idea. Writing a sim from scratch just takes too much effort to just give it away. I see what you're trying say, though, but the only real way of doing that is to create your own sim.

[+Dante-JT 6]

and there is other problem like Multiplayer games (if 1 person adds a plane and another don't - will they both be able to fly together? and if he flyed the added plane, will the other person see it as the same plane or another plane like in FS)

 

Correct Nesher, this issue is getting very sensitive inside our development group - in our FAQ, I just said that moddability is expected, because the way the flight sim is now, it's just rather easy to change camos, plane models, even entire featured operations theater (by changing its heightmap for another). And at the moment, announcing a new flight sim about a certain theater and being 100% sure that it will be completely closed for mods from the start, is like shooting our own foot, IMO.

 

Well, this is completely single player related, at this point. But then the Multiplayer issue was rised, and members of our staff strongly believe that the strenght of IL-2 in multiplayer is its closedness. I have to agree, because if there's a flight sim I play online the most, it's IL-2... It has very good online capabilities compared to other flight sims of the same class.

 

So, we're still pondering the best way to procceed - at the moment, seems very hard to find a balance point between these two extremes. I'll be glad with community help and advice in this sensitive issue, too. After all, this is a flight sim being made by flightsimmers for flightsimmers. :)

 

Why don't you just program your own sim? lol

 

:) That's why we did it from scratch - because making it a Mod for SF:P1 or F4 for example, certain key features will be unavailable or will end as plain 'hacks'.

[+Armourdave 0]

Phlerp gets everywhere. :D

 

A DLL entry point is what you need.

 

Half Life has one and it allows all manor of creativity and moddability.

 

because making it a Mod for SF:P1 or F4 for example, certain key features will be unavailable or will end as plain 'hacks'.

 

That's quite true, for some theatres atleast. There would be no way to create a realistic Falklands campaign on the SFP1 engine with the current feature list, but perhaps in the future things will change. ;)

 

Cheers

[Phlerp 0]

Phlerp gets everywhere.  :D

I'm kind of like a sticky thread, you can't get rid of me. :D

 

I'm not really asking for the source code. You could actually manage what I'd like to have through commands passed to the sim when starting it combined with external files (mission files an debriefing files). It's a bit crude but it works and it allows people with very low programming experience to mod the sim extensively.

DLLs is an even better solution with the drawback that it requires more from the modder but in the same time it allows more freedom.

 

Th reason I'm asking is because ever since Domark released FST back in 1993 (a program with the sole purpose of making mods. I did a Gripen sim that i supposedly still available to download somewhere out there on the web) I've been dreaming of a sim with a swedish scenario (not far from the idea of this sim, to do a sim around a conflict that has rarely or even never been done in a sim). That is why I'm doing swedish vehicles for SFP1, but it has it's limitations so I was only wondering if this sim might be the answer to my prayers ;)

Edited December 19, 2003 by Phlerp

[Nesher 628]

Correct Nesher....

:D

i thought of other sims with the same problem (IE USAF)

i hope from this topic you will able to do "fixes" for this common problems

or you will mod the game yourselves (the developers) and charge money for each add-on ;)

and that why I said I'm a "Programmer"

 

any road you go, good luck and be successful

Dante, thank you for the Interview, people loved it but it was too long for some of them :P

 

Cheers

Edited December 19, 2003 by Nesher

[ChrisDNT 0]

At first, hi all, as this is my first post on this board.

 

Seriously, I think that the Thunder-Works team choosed the best concept for modability with this:

 

" Fully mod-enabled, aircraft paints can be customized, and tools will be available to create new terrains and campaigns"

 

 

 

Because if a modder can simply add his own aircraft in the game, you will get the "Strike Fighters" mess:

 

- Irrealistic or non-validated FM's.

- Possibility of online cheating.

- irregularity in the 3d models, some can be very good, some can have very wrong shapes.

 

In my opinion, a third-party aircraft has to be valided by the dev team for its 3d model accuracy and the making of its FM and DM

must stay with the dev team and be locked (the way TW team is searching for accurate docs about aircrafts real FM's is very encouraging)

 

The menu interfaces should also stay under the responsability of the dev team. Simply to keep a own graphical line to the product. I'm not a fan of the "too personal"

menu interfaces which can be simply ugly!

 

Also if a new terrain and a campaign are developed by a modder, it would be good that the dev team would check it and propose it,

with the new terrains, campaign and aircraft with the correct skins, in a complete downloadable file, also to avoid the SF mess!

 

Because the concept of a game based on a single conflict, with the right aircrafts for this theater, is simply really good: I'm not so interested in flying a Mirage III over Vietnam

or a Crusader for instance over the Malvinas! There's already Strike Fighters for that kind of simming and what I'm really looking for in the sim developed by ThunderWorks are seriousness of the FM's and seriousness of the tactical situations.

 

Cheers,

[+Dante-JT 6]

In my opinion, a third-party aircraft has to be valided by the dev team for its 3d model accuracy and the making of its FM and DM

must stay with the dev team and be locked.

 

Good post, ChrisDNT! And thanks for the feedback!

 

This way you describe, is Oleg's/IL-2 way. In my opinion, is what makes that sim so strong in the multiplayer feature. And also, all third-party models developed are great looking and have good, tested FMs.

 

In the Thunderworks dev team, the balance now is clearly pending to the side of this kind of approach. But some in the team, who came from the modding communities, are interested in moddability in the SFP1-style.

 

Personaly, I'd go for the IL-2 style, with third-party aircraft having to be validated by the dev team. My intention, as creator of the project's concept, was to have for the Falklands what IL-2 is for the WWII Eastern Front, so, the approach fits very well here. ;) But, lets see the result of some upcoming community polls about this subject and see democracy in action

[Dagger 21]

Dante...I must say I really the way you and your team are approaching this sim.I would love to see a very mod friendly sim BUT...I like the IL-2 approach.As this is based on a small scale conflict and having a dynamic campain you could play it a hundred times and it'd never be the same...also if you leave it very moddable then you'll ahve the problem of compatability and aircraft FMs and DMs being"tweaked"look at CFS series and you'll see what I mean.

[ChrisDNT 0]

Hi Dante,

 

Glad you liked my modest point of view :D

 

You wrote:

 

"This way you describe, is Oleg's/IL-2 way. In my opinion, is what makes that sim so strong in the multiplayer feature. And also, all third-party models developed are great looking and have good, tested FMs."

 

 

I perfectly agree, I think the Oleg's way is the good way, because it's a coherent way.

 

And that's the first thing I noticed about the Jet Thunder project when I looked at it, it is its coherence.

 

Cheers,

[scary_pigeon 0]

I'm slightly interested in a modmode...

 

...IL2 lets you play like 32 aircraft flying around shooting each other - it would be an utter farce if any of these could be changed to behave anyway the player wanted:

 

But perhaps also to have a mod mode to encourage user development? I would envisage a mode of restricted online play, say just 2 players to maintain the pre-eminance of the restricted authorised mode - but for the mod mode - where anything goes. just 2 players online. This would lets the mods develop their bits and bobs ready for conversion to the encrypted mode.

[Phlerp 0]

I'm not so interested in flying a Mirage III over Vietnam

or a Crusader for instance over the Malvinas!

I don't really see the problem. While I do appreciate the closed system of IL2 that guarantee a high quality, and while I see the compatability problems with CFS and SFP1, I think it can be solved. For instance, OpFlashpoint is very moddable and there is a myriad of mods with varying quality, but I've never really experienced any problems with that. And as someone mentioned before, a closed project doesn't guarantee historical correctness. Most MP server for IL2 mix planes from 1939 to 1945 and from russia, germany and even japan. It's up to who runs the server to asure historical correctness.

[+Dante-JT 6]

It's up to who runs the server to asure historical correctness.

 

Good point. As an example, many people will run Full Real Jet Thunder servers. In these servers, Port Stanley airfield (in the islands) has a runway with only about 1300 meters long. Only Pucaras and MB-339s operated from there. An armed Mirage III needs at least 2000 meters of runway space to operate, so in this scenario, we have Mirage players flying from the continent - a 45+ minutes flight - operating at the limit of their ranges - just like in real life. I don't mind this scenario, as I'm a Full Real guy and will enjoy to see the difficulties that these Mirage pilots suffered in the historical setting.

 

But I was advised to create a 'what if' multiplayer map, optional, with an enlarged Port Stanley runway - it was on the plans of the argentinians to extend the runway but they didn't achieved, in time, the means to get the materials on the islands. Lets suppose they succeed in extending the runway to 3 kilometers, and Mirages are able to operate from there - an interesting situation, as players will be able to CAP over the islands and have fuel left for afterburner usage - enabling then to use the full potential of their supersonic fighters.

 

Regarding aircraft mods, as I said, it'll probably have to be validated by the team for the model accuracy, and FM adjust, IL-2 style. Also the cockpits at the moment, are a bit tricky to do and program the instruments - another task better be made 'in house' by TW as well. But maps/scenarios for multiplayer, this could be freely made, as long as the server host describes if it's a historical or 'hypothetical' scenario, and what planeset is used (historical 1982 campaign, or not).

[ChrisDNT 0]

"Most MP server for IL2 mix planes from 1939 to 1945 and from russia, germany and even japan. It's up to who runs the server to asure historical correctness."

 

 

That's exactly the problem. I do hate to see over a Normandy map Italian Ki-84's fighting against Finish Mustangs for instance. It simply ruins my immersion, but I agree, it's a matter of personal taste. The big difficulty is that the servers with historical correctness are extremely rare. For me, playing like that is like having a Ferrari and riding at 50 km/h ;)

 

 

 

"An armed Mirage III needs at least 2000 meters of runway space to operate, so in this scenario, we have Mirage players flying from the continent - a 45+ minutes flight - operating at the limit of their ranges - just like in real life. I don't mind this scenario, as I'm a Full Real guy and will enjoy to see the difficulties that these Mirage pilots suffered in the historical setting."

 

That's also the kind of playing I like and I'm dreaming of a game mode for online dogfights which would allow realistic tactical situations. In fact, the game would begin a little bit like a Counter-Strike game: someone lauches a server, the players take their slots, starting with aircrafts already in the air (with the correct fuel quantity of course) , but in a realistic formation (perhaps documented from historical datas), in the combat zone, for instance five minutes far from the target (still enough time to choose among some different target attack options). To succeed in the mission, the attackers would have to destroy the target and land back to their home airbases. This way, historical missions could be played with acuracy, without the long "ferry" flight to the target.

 

I know "air start" is not a realistic feature, but I think it's about the only solution to have aircrafts flying in a constituted formation and coming over a target together in a manner which looks to the real situation. I've played many times on scripted servers with FB and I've for instance never seen a squad of He-111 flying together and attacking a target in a realistic way!

 

Cheers,

[Phlerp 0]

That's exactly the problem. I do hate to see over a Normandy map Italian Ki-84's fighting against Finish Mustangs for instance. It simply ruins my immersion, but I agree, it's a matter of personal taste. The big difficulty is that the servers with historical correctness are extremely rare. For me, playing like that is like having a Ferrari and riding at 50 km/h  ;)

So you want to force this on everyone? <_<

As you said it's a matter of personal taste and if historically correct servers are so rare maybe there is a reason for it. Why don't you set up your own server if those available isn't what you wish for? Or at least join a squadron that runs historically correct servers. I did some time ago and I enjoyed it imensly, but I don't want to force it on everyone else because of that. B)

 

I think it would be regretable if this sim would limit it's potential in that way, but after all it's up to the developers. :)

[Guest Shadowcat]

Perhaps the game could include some checksum code to determine whether each player is using the same version of their selected plane that the host has on his/her machine.

 

When the game loads the aircraft data, it generates the checksum from it and sends it to the server which compares it with the local version.

 

This way the sim could support user-made aircraft, but (hopefully) avoid any cheating by people creating their own 'enhanced' versions of the planes. At the same time if people wanted to try out a new plane online, then they still could, so as long as the host had enabled it for the mission, and had a copy of it (or at least an official checksum for it; or perhaps had just selected an "anything goes" option to ignore checksums altogether for that mission...)

 

I do think that 'modability' can massively extend the lifespan of a sim (the OpenPlane-based "Fighter Squadron" is 5 years old and still has dedicated modders working on it, for instance) and it should be seriously considered. For all the risks of cheating and 'inaccurate' mods, I suspect that the way to get the community excited about making add-ons for a sim is to make it as easy as possible to do so, so that people will experiment. If it's hard to make new planes and share them, people may not become encouraged to do the hard work necessary to make a fully-realistic version of their mod.

 

If it were easy for them to experiment, however, but measures were taken to ensure that the host of a multiplayer game has control over what is allowed, then along with all the experimental unrealistic mods, we might see more realistic and fully-realised add-ons than we would have otherwise. And perhaps people would take advantage of the unique opportunity provided by this flight sim engine to create other vectored-thrust aircraft for people to fly, even if they have nothing to do with the Falklands/Malvinas campaign. (Whether or not that's a good thing depends on your perspective, but it's worth thinking about.)

 

I expect we'd see most variants of the Harrier appear eventually, which I think would be nice. Maybe some keen folk would even try modelling the early prototypes, and we'd end up with an entire flyable history of the series!

 

This is all pure speculation on my part, mind -- I've never made a flight sim mod in my life. And of course, if you try to implement all of our suggestions, you'll probably never finish the sim!

 

I guess I'm pro-mod then, but in all honesty I don't mind too much either way -- I was over the moon when I thought I was going to get a new Harrier sim at long last, and now there are six flyable planes planned for inclusion! :) Even if there are no new aircraft ever released, I've still got a better deal than I was expecting.

[+Dante-JT 6]

This way the sim could support user-made aircraft, but (hopefully) avoid any cheating by people creating their own 'enhanced' versions of the planes. At the same time if people wanted to try out a new plane online, then they still could, so as long as the host had enabled it for the mission, and had a copy of it (or at least an official checksum for it; or perhaps had just selected an "anything goes" option to ignore checksums altogether for that mission...).

 

We already have tought of the 'historical' servers and the "anything goes" servers - more or less the case I see in IL-2 FB, there was sometimes the "jet servers" in HL with people flying Me-262 vs. Berezniak-Isaev BI-1 Soviet rocket planes - I can't think in something more "anything goes" than that! :) The checksum idea applies and is good, my example: the guy has in his HD a modded Kfir plane he did based in JT's Mirage (let's suppose he modded the 3d model for the canards and other details, and altered the FM for more engine thrust and better turn performance of the Kfir and even altered radar/fire-control system specs) . He wants to test it against the Sea Harriers online - of course he will not be allowed in most servers, his uber-israeli-mirage will be blocked by the checksum system, but he can join an "anything goes" server and voilá, we have an IAI Kfir over the Falklands ready to kick Harrier butt. Is that feasible? Only scary_pigeon can answer, as he is at this moment coding the bare-bones of the multiplayer system.

 

For all the risks of cheating and 'inaccurate' mods, I suspect that the way to get the community excited about making add-ons for a sim is to make it as easy as possible to do so, so that people will experiment. If it's hard to make new planes and share them, people may not become encouraged to do the hard work necessary to make a fully-realistic version of their mod.

 

At the moment, in current system, it is convoluted and discouraging to mod JT with new planes and all - for example, the 3d engine works with the plane models in two separated files - one for the mesh, the other for the uv-mapping information - it's terrible because it doesn't reads smoothing groups information and material attributes correctly - this is all hardcoded at the moment, or in hated manually generated .txt files. Animation of external parts is crude also - a simple pivot system that is hardcoded also by the programmer individually for each moving part - very unpractical - that's the reason you always see our A-4 with slats in deployed position in the screenies - they doesn't move at the moment, because with current system it will be impossible to reproduce the correct motion of the A-4 slats! lol.

 

But don't be scared by all this! :D The new OSG system in the works is being tested and a plugin that reads .MAX planes is already working and proved successful, reading correctly the smoothing groups and material information of the Sea Harrier model - the next step will be to read keyframed moving parts information - but this will be done too and this way, we'll have a very powerfull and easy to use way to import complete aircrafts or any other objects into the sim without any hassle - perfect for modders.

 

And perhaps people would take advantage of the unique opportunity provided by this flight sim engine to create other vectored-thrust aircraft for people to fly, even if they have nothing to do with the Falklands/Malvinas campaign. (Whether or not that's a good thing depends on your perspective, but it's worth thinking about.)

 

A thing that came to mind suddenly now is the Yak-38 :D Well, this is the only Harrier-like thing I can think at the moment, somebody else has other suggestions? F-35 JSF? ermm... too avionics-heavy that one to be worth a mod, isn't? Both planes I mentionated use vectored thrust like the Harrier but (the Yak) has jets pointing down just behind the cockpit, and the F-35 has that ducted fan system pointing down together with the vectored nozzle in the tail...not so easy to do...

 

I expect we'd see most variants of the Harrier appear eventually, which I think would be nice. Maybe some keen folk would even try modelling the early prototypes, and we'd end up with an entire flyable history of the series!

 

Yes this will be great! P.1127, Kestrel, AV-8 and all. But I would like really to see the uber-Harrier itself, the hyphotetical P.1154!!!!!

[McHighlander 0]

Hi all Guys!

I've just posted a similar theme in another thread...

 

I totally agree with ChrisDNT and Dante's philosophy.

 

Make this sim totally moddable, but let's take care of the modifications!

I mean that the development team shoud check the mod and than release it so to keep the quality warranty!!!