Clickable Cockpit? + Lots Of Pics

[Nesher 629]

clickable pics, the real deal or just an ugly rumour ?

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/6/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=...606&m=168108164

 

some pics from my online games i've started lately

 

Air Combat with the Sim Section admin in Gamer.co.il

he is stupid :D

i'm with the MiG , he had the Su-27

http://members.lycos.co.uk/vfsds/LockOn/ScreenShot_015.jpg

http://members.lycos.co.uk/vfsds/LockOn/ScreenShot_016.jpg

http://members.lycos.co.uk/vfsds/LockOn/ScreenShot_017.jpg

http://members.lycos.co.uk/vfsds/LockOn/ScreenShot_018.jpg

http://members.lycos.co.uk/vfsds/LockOn/ScreenShot_020.jpg

http://members.lycos.co.uk/vfsds/LockOn/ScreenShot_021.jpg

 

Bad executed aerobatics

u wanna guess what we tried to do ?

same guy as before, both had MiG-29's, i had 29A he had 29S

http://members.lycos.co.uk/vfsds/LockOn/ScreenShot_022.jpg

http://members.lycos.co.uk/vfsds/LockOn/ScreenShot_023.jpg

http://members.lycos.co.uk/vfsds/LockOn/ScreenShot_024.jpg

http://members.lycos.co.uk/vfsds/LockOn/ScreenShot_025.jpg

http://members.lycos.co.uk/vfsds/LockOn/ScreenShot_026.jpg

http://members.lycos.co.uk/vfsds/LockOn/ScreenShot_027.jpg

http://members.lycos.co.uk/vfsds/LockOn/ScreenShot_028.jpg

http://members.lycos.co.uk/vfsds/LockOn/ScreenShot_029.jpg

http://members.lycos.co.uk/vfsds/LockOn/ScreenShot_030.jpg

http://members.lycos.co.uk/vfsds/LockOn/ScreenShot_031.jpg

 

and we all love physics ;)

 

up

http://members.lycos.co.uk/vfsds/LockOn/ScreenShot_005.jpg

http://members.lycos.co.uk/vfsds/LockOn/ScreenShot_006.jpg

http://members.lycos.co.uk/vfsds/LockOn/ScreenShot_007.jpg

http://members.lycos.co.uk/vfsds/LockOn/ScreenShot_008.jpg

http://members.lycos.co.uk/vfsds/LockOn/ScreenShot_009.jpg

down

http://members.lycos.co.uk/vfsds/LockOn/ScreenShot_010.jpg

http://members.lycos.co.uk/vfsds/LockOn/ScreenShot_011.jpg

http://members.lycos.co.uk/vfsds/LockOn/ScreenShot_012.jpg

http://members.lycos.co.uk/vfsds/LockOn/ScreenShot_013.jpg

result

http://members.lycos.co.uk/vfsds/LockOn/ScreenShot_014.jpg

if you didn't notice, i ejected before the climb LOLOLOLOL

Edited June 12, 2004 by Nesher

[GhostDog 0]

so far its only an ugly rumor. This has not been been confirmed in any way.

I find it very unlikely. It has never AFAIK been the ambition of ED to implement clickable pit. If it was something they had tried to implement but had to drop because ofdeadlines etc.. i might believe it as a part of a possible addon. That isn't the case ASFAIK.

 

That should of course in no way stop us from having a friendly discussion about the virtues of clickable pits... if there is any

[Nesher 629]

yes, for now it's a rumor but maybe in the future it would be done...

so we have to wait and see

 

they might give it as an add-on to purchase for the game

[Snacky 0]

There will be no clickable cockpits in Lomac.

 

 

The only chance for a clickable pit is if it is a design goal in a future product.

[GhostDog 0]

Thats what i thought... not that it matters to me anyways. I dont plan on taking my hands off my HOTAS

[Snacky 0]

Same boat here. Too much to do and with TIR I would never find the button anyway.lol

In all honesty I know it's a feature some folks really like and whether or not it is realistic is a whole other debate, but it would take a huge amount of work to add clickable pits to Lomac so if (big if) it did happen it would be in a new product. This came from ED to the beta team when we placed clickable pits in our wish list.lol

[GhostDog 0]

:D ... if they did however contemplate any additions to the cockpit i would wish that all functions you could use would give you some visual feedback in the pit - at least when you can see the switches right in fromt of you i think its too bad that they dont move.

 

The landing-lights is good example. I can see that little thing starring right back at me and saying "i move for no one!".

 

Allso things like altitude hold would be nice to have and RWR modes would be nice to have indicators for. If you loose HUD then alt hold can really give you a headache.

[Bard 0]

actually there is a chance for one if i understand something ch users may be getting.

 

i might be a bit confused on it, but something is being worked on for the CH control manager software - it can detect where your mousecursor is and if you click, it can peform commands based on it.

 

this means that if an "image map" (for those familiar with using them in webpages) is made of the inside of the cockpit and suitably programmed, we can actually have "clickable pits" in sims that don't support them natively.

 

of course , you would need to be at a certain angle etc, but i am sure that with control manager you could program the view to go to default and the correct zoom and allow it to be done.

 

this might be a little way away - was speaking to bob church about it today.

[GhostDog 0]

interesting.. but it doesnt sound like it would be much good with trackIr

[Bard 0]

not sure what you mean by that - in what way?

 

trackir is used as a seperate device than the mouse. so you use the mouse for the clickable pit and you use the trackir for looking about.

[lexicon 0]

That would be a good thing. But to think a sim that good is just good wishful thinking. :) That's what I expected from the beginning from the start of this program. Did not happen because of s**tty programmers. And or makers :ph34r:

Edited June 13, 2004 by lexicon

[lexicon 0]

yes, for now it's a rumor but maybe in the future it would be done...

so we have to wait and see

 

they might give it as an add-on to purchase for the game

I will download it because that game is a marvel of crap as it is now. It's also a example of crap of coding also. :ph34r:

[lexicon 0]

There will be no clickable cockpits in Lomac.

 

 

The only chance for a clickable pit is if it is a design goal in a future product.

That’s because lock-on is a coding mess and an example of what not to do and any program. Great job UB. :)

[Ruggbutt 45]

And you're the coding guru, right? I love the "I can do it better mentality". Come back when you can give us something we can use.

[Nesher 629]

i know for now ot's a rumor

but even IAF and USAF have clickable pits (part of the pit anyway)

i'm sure if they think about getting more money out of people

they would do it, much like the IL-2 (IL-2,IL-2 FB,IL-2FB-AEP)

if you think about, they have nothing to lose trying to do the clickable pits

 

lexicon, the game is fine...

every game has bugs...

about downloding stuff, half the world does it

[*BtS*$y$t£M=M= 0]

Here here ruggbutt, i program and Ill tell u this what they have done is a marvel, clickable cockpits would give the game a bit more sense of realism even if it is not used, It would make a good addon too.

[GhostDog 0]

not sure what you mean by that - in what way?

 

trackir is used as a seperate device than the mouse. so you use the mouse for the clickable pit and you use the trackir for looking about.

 

You would have to allign the clickable overlay with the view. And the view tends to be a bit more shaky trackIr. You could ofcourse hit "centre" and then disable the trackIr but i'm just trying to picture myself doing that just to press a button with my mouse - i dont think so.

Maybe some would. I'm not saggin the idea at all. I think it sounds very good for those who really like clickable pits. But i think that it would be more usefull to people who uses a joystick hat to look around.

[*BtS*$y$t£M=M= 0]

I would find Clickable Pits ok for me as i do not use Track Ir I found the 3d galsses better and a clickable pit would be kool 4 me that is...

[Bard 0]

And  you're the coding guru, right?  I love the "I can do it better mentality".  Come back when you can give us something we can use.

ruggbutt, you really need to stop the snide remarks when someone with expertise you know nothing about makes comments that you don't like.

 

the "if you can do better" argument is well.. not even an argument, it's not even a justification - in fact it's nothing.

Edited June 13, 2004 by Bard

[MadJeff 3]

That would be a good thing. But to think a sim that good is just good wishful thinking. :) That's what I expected from the beginning from the start of this program. Did not happen because of s**tty programmers. And or makers :ph34r:

Lex, chill out. I'm getting tired of reading the same post from you over and over again. Calling the programmers names accomplishes nothing and goes against our "No Personal attacks" rule. You have been warned.

[Bard 0]

not sure what you mean by that - in what way?

 

trackir is used as a seperate device than the mouse. so you use the mouse for the clickable pit and you use the trackir for looking about.

 

You would have to allign the clickable overlay with the view. And the view tends to be a bit more shaky trackIr. You could ofcourse hit "centre" and then disable the trackIr but i'm just trying to picture myself doing that just to press a button with my mouse - i dont think so.

Maybe some would. I'm not saggin the idea at all. I think it sounds very good for those who really like clickable pits. But i think that it would be more usefull to people who uses a joystick hat to look around.

yep, you are right there, but a dead zone in trackir suffices (that is what i use since i hate view moving about when i am on an attack run) or you could even program a centre view/disable toggle key in control manager.

 

i wonder - wouldn't it be great if the overlay could know the pitch and yaw values of the pit ingame through LUA or shared memory queries and apply them to the overlay.

 

hmm.. i don't think you'd need to know how far away the panel was from where the view is pivoting, though doing so would prevent zoom level being a factor.

[Ruggbutt 45]

ruggbutt, you really need to stop the snide remarks when someone with expertise you know nothing about makes comments that you don't like.

Bard, it has nothing to do w/what I like or dislike. It's that these people come on the forums and talk smack, and then cannot back up what they say. They have no proof of their background but they're experts.

 

Here's a for instance: I was a concealed weapons instructor for the State of Arizona, I had a Federal Firearms License for almost a decade, I shot semi-professionally in sanctioned combat matches, my team placed 4th in the world in the SOF 3 Gun World Championships. I can back all of that up. If called on it I can post copies of my Licenses, my instructor status and score sheets from SOF.

 

Let this guy at least back what he says, cuz all I've heard from him is lip service. I'm sick of seeing people who act like they can do better but don't have anything but the anonymoty of the internet to back them up. If anyone has any questions about "facts" that I have stated, I can give you proof of background or at least where I found the information at.

 

Lexicon should at least show where he's developed game software or something comparable to game software to back up his suppositions. He's the one making the statements that the coding is a mess. He's the one making the statements that he could do better. Anyone w/an internet connection can say that.

 

Guys that are real fighter pilots (or maintenance crew) are always answering questions on several of the FS forums we all visit. They have already shown that they really have those occupations. It helps to lend credibility to their posts. Frankly, every post I've ever seen from this guy is negative. Sounds more like a disgruntled customer or someone using a different login to stir up the shiznit.

[Bard 0]

but here's the mistake you are making...

 

He doesn't need to have developed a game to be able to recognise where there are programmatical problems - the "you haven't made a game so you know jack" is incorrect regardless of whether he has done so or not.

 

It doesn't take a firearms instructor to know enough firearms safety to be safe - same thing here.

 

All it takes is someone who has had some basic formal schooling in programming and design to spot and know there are problems. What's being commented on are BASIC fundamentals of programming and design. I can tell from what lexicon is saying that he does have a fundamental understanding. I can also tell that he has more than a fundamental understanding since he understands the kind of problems you get from debugging ambiguous code, something not appreciated by people who haven't done it - this indicates experience.

 

You might have noticed that he made no claim as to whether he is an uberprogrammer with 20 years experience, he just made an analysis and posted it and has let IT talk for him. To me what he said made complete sense and indicates he does actually know what he is talking about. Just because he's talking about stuff beyond your field of expertise doesn't mean you should be insulting him (and that is exactly what you were doing) and then trying to invalidate his analysis.

 

I appreciate that you can't just "take him at his word" without proof, but it doesn't mean you can just write off what they say.

 

People making bogus claims are pretty quickly shown to be the liars they are, because there are always going to be people out there who DO know what they are talking about who will be all too happy to jump on them.

Edited June 13, 2004 by Bard

[*BtS*$y$t£M=M= 0]

ok throwing away those comments on experience, He could of just said plainly, the code is awful, not to mouth off like some whining teen of which he sounds like, i like talkign in these servers cos ur all polite and civilised lexicon is not. Yes i program, no i have not developed a game, yes some of the code in lock on is not too good, No need for all the fanciful language though.

[Ruggbutt 45]

I gotta go w/System on this. Stating that the code is a mess is pretty much a generic explanation. Take a look at Windows, would you have done things different?

 

Lexicon may have a point w/his understanding of code and such but just because someone did it different doesn't mean it's wrong. My way of organizing files on my computer is the right way for me. I organize them the same way you would organize a real filing cabinet, fundamentals of which were taught to me in school. Is my way the correct way? Can it be done several ways and still be right? Or course it can.

 

All I see is negative from this guy, w/no solutions. I understand having something to say but w/everything negative being posted he sounds more like a troll than anything else.