FastCargo

Russ, by the way, you do not need to assign the hook to an animation slot. If the pivot point is at the correct location, the game engine will do it for you just fine.

FC

And really folks, this isn't a zero sum game. One can have both on their hard drive. Along with the SF2 series, I have DCS World, BS2, and A-10C. Far as I can tell, my hard drive hasn't self destructed yet...

FC

Maybe you could predict that future flight sims will all be based on a few flight sim engines - like all Operating systems are today.

Actually, that's not a bad idea. FPSes have done this sort of thing for years, licensing out their engines for other games.

Unity offers their engine for free (which TW and other games have used for mobile devices).

That could be something that could spark a flight sim renaissance...prime creators license their engines and rake in money that way. Smaller niche developers could make product for specific markets...which could cut down on costs if an engine doesn't need to be developed in house.

Of course, I have NO idea if something that is standard in the FPS world would work in the flight sim world.

FC

If he stops developing SF2 on the plus side I will be building mega modded installs - safe in the knowledge that every mod will finally be staying in there for good :)

Yea buddy!

FC

I personally don't think even TK knows for sure where he is going.

Here are some of my personal observations:

1) The tech world is changing...constantly. Who would have thought just 5 years ago when the iPhone was introduced that Apple would become the dominant player in the mobile space (or computing in general)? Or that Palm, RIM, Nokia would all be on life support (or already dead)? 5 years...that's all it took to completely change the computing landscape.

2) Who also saw the PC having a resurgence in gaming relevance? In 2005/6, when the XBox 360 and PS3 were released, PC gaming was considered to be on a downhill slide. But 2 things around the same time contributed to the PC's resurgence - MMOs gained more traction, and digital distribution (ie Steam). And now with Free to Play titles like WOT and Minecraft raking in millions of dollars, PC gaming is as strong or stronger than ever.

I could name other examples of how advancing tech has disrupted traditional business models within a short time frame.

Here's my take away opinion: This all works against complex combat flight simulations.

The reasons include:

1) Graphics - We all like our eye candy.

2) The office - Unlike something like an FPS, where your near modeling is a forearm and an gun, a complex flight sim requires an entire office, plus all the stuff has to work in the office correctly.

3) Physics - Fluid dynamics...enough said.

4) Avionics - Yours, your wingmans', your weapons, their weapons.

5) AI - Takes advantage of their strengths but has real world limitations. Uses the avionics and physics in proper context.

In my opinion, modern air combat simulation (ie anything that uses the EM spectrum as a significant part of gameplay) is the most difficult programming that can be done for a commercial, publicly available product. It takes money, energy, and time...a lot of time the more detailed you get. Which works against the pressures of a modern, publishing timetable.

I think that unless something radically changes to make such things as a modern air combat simulation a lot easier and faster to program, that we have reached the zenith of the 10/10ths detail flight sim. I think the only way you will see future products like the level of DCS in terms of fidelity and AFM, will be only if the developers are willing to take a loss.

I personally think TK is experimenting with trying to keep his business agile and adapting to the changing market. I don't worry about length of time between releases for DLC. Unlike things like FPSes, where there are a thousand different alternatives...how many places allow you to fly a Mirage F-1 in a combat flight sim?

Hopefully I'm wrong. Hopefully there are enough people interested in something like DCS (due to so many other developers abandoning the market) that ED and 3rd party developers can create a wide variety of offerings to satisfy everyone.

FC

Hey, I'd like some too. Realistically, there probably isn't much right now.

Based on what I've observed, I'd imagine TW is establishing a 'beachhead' in the mobile space. Once those revenue streams are established, only then I suspect you'll start seeing progress on the PC front.

Again, no special information is available to me...I merely observe and make suppositions as to the direction things are going.

Based on SFA and SFA:I, I suspect a SFA:V and SFA:E are coming. Though I don't know how much either could offer...SFA:V might give us the A-4(a curious omission from SFA), and SFA:E would give us the Harrier(again, another curious omission from SFA). There could be surprise visits from an A-7, A-10, and even the F-1 (they all have guns and at least self defense Sidewinders).

FC

I wouldn't say Exp3 is dead yet.

And remember, most of the coding initially went into SFA. I'd say SFA:I probably had very little additional coding...the hard part was already done.

Here's the thing I'm thinking. First, SFA obviously made money. Second, advertising.

Think about it...SFA has had over 100,000 installs. At least 100,000 people have looked at the app and now know the name Strike Fighters, and the company, ThirdWire.

Does anybody think Eagle Dynamics would kill for those kind of numbers?

As an example of market size...Eagle Dynamics has 1400 'Likes' on Facebook. ThirdWire has 19000...nearly 14 times as many. You can argue the audiences may be different or the margins aren't as high for each company. But each company still has to make a profit to hang around. The numbers on Facebook may not reflect the actual numbers of folks who buy from these companies. But I'll put money that the relative size of the audiences are pretty accurate.

I honestly find the whole process fascinating from an academic point of view. I think times are going to be interesting. I have my own theories as to the current and future state of flight sims.

FC

PS And I have to chuckle at folks who find the whole advancement of tech disconcerting. Considering you're posting on an internet forum, to chat with people from around the planet. Or that a cell phone should just be used for calling...when 25 years ago, only rich folks could have a cell phone, that only worked in limited locations, and was the size of a literal brick.

You are not the target audience.

FC

There are civilian Hunters in existence...could have been one of those.

FC

Well, I was lucky and bought the student edition for a lot cheaper.

But if I was using this program to make a living and had to pay for the full priced commercial edition, I'd be PISSED using a program that acted like this.

FC

I hate 3DS Max sometimes...

Besides the general bugginess while doing something, it decided to pork up a model I had been working on.

Last night, I saved a model that I had been building with nothing wrong with it.

I open it today to find it completely shredded. Mesh is distorted, normals wacked, cutouts gone...

And there was no AutoBackup because I had been working on the MiG-29...so all the backups were for that.

The only good thing was that I hadn't done a 'Collapse All' function, so I was able to go backward in the list and restore it back to a usable state. Couple of hours work...poof!

POS program....

FC

Two things:

1) Check the mesh Properties, specifically the User Defined tab, and make sure of the following flags:

AllowDecals = True

CastShadow = True

CatchShadow = True

UseFlatNormal = False

2) In the Materials Editor, make sure not to use 2-sided...I've noticed that this causes more problems then it solves (this method worked for the MiG-29K).

FC

I checked the pivot point in MAX for the fuselage after the XForm/Center To Object/Transform shuffle and it isn't centered.

So the solution overall is to do the unlink/XForm/Center To Object/Transform/relink shuffle on all related meshes.

Animate the particular meshes you need to.

For the pivot points on the pylons themselves, you will need to rotate them to the proper alignment you need for the weapon if it is other than 0,0,0 (this is important for wingtip rails).

CGPosition should either be commented out or be at 0,0,0. If you can't do that for ground handling, then offset the position numbers in the data.ini for the weapons the appropriate amount.

FC

Okay, solved the issue...but you're not going to believe how.

First, like I talked about eariler, I went through the hierarchy and did the unlink, ResetXForm, pivot point Center to Object and Transform for all meshes related to the weapon pylon. I reanimated the wing fold, and simplified the pylons (they were asymetrical on the wings...I assume they were for testing). Didn't have to rotate the pivot points since the missiles are mounted with 0,0,0 rotation.

Result...missiles hanging forward and below the pylons. Proper alignment, proper distance from the centerline, and symmetrical (both outer missiles were incorrect in the same direction). Also, they followed the wing fold properly.

So...everything worked, but the missile were in an odd place...and it was specific. Went back to the MAX file, redid the pylon pivot points (disregarding the positions of the pivot points...just Center to Object instead)...same result. No change at all.

Then on a hunch...I commented out one line in the data.ini...and immediately everything was fixed. Mounted properly, rotated properly with the wingfold, both outer stations.

Here's the line: CGPosition=0.00,-1.20,0.15

WTF....

FC

morteza1374, the reason I don't answer is that I tend to be select in who I respond to and what I respond about.

I normally respond to folks via PM who are my friends, fellow modders, moderators, and admins, and people who have been part of the CA community for a long time. I will also respond to folks if they are having very specific issues with the website that shouldn't be brought up in public. Most other things, I prefer the request or issue be posted publicly in the appropriate part of the forum...that way all can benefit. If I don't respond there, it usually means I don't have the time, or I'm not interested, or both. If I don't respond in public, then it's a virtual certainty I am not going to respond via private message on the same topic.

Now, back to the topic at hand....I believe the squadron has to remain the same when a base gets an upgrade. I'm not sure though.

FC

is it ok to re-upload the YF-12 taking ZERO credit and private message?

We do not condone such things on this website.

FC

Couple of things:

First, I verified that this works from the Oct 08 patch for SF1 all the way to the Ju1 2012 patch for SF2.

Second, my theory is that the RotatingPylon parameter was meant for aircraft with vertical pylons on swing wings. The critical thing is that it ignores ALL rotational inputs in the data.ini for that weapon station. It assumes the weapon is hanging straight down, parallel to the centerline of the aircraft.

Lack of ResetXForm has caused all sorts of issues, which are multiplied in a hierarchy. Because the game looks at the pivot points and their relationship to each other, that's why missiles don't seem to mount where they should.

It doesn't help that 3ds MAX is notoriously buggy sometimes with positional and rotational data. Half the time I input rotational data in one axis, only for it to apply the rotation in a different axis...

FC

Okay, I think I have figured this out. I actually fixed this for the Super Hornet (which means the legacy Hornets can be fixed too).

First, unlink and Reset XForm EVERYTHING in the hierarchy from the Fuselage to the weapon pylon. For example, the Super Hornet:

Fuselage

--LeftInnerWing

---LeftOuterWing

----LeftWingtipRail

-----LeftWingtipRailMount

I had to unlink all those meshes, do a ResetXForm, then for the pivot points, I did a Center to Object and Transform.

I then moved the pivot point and reanimated the appropriate part (in this case, the LeftOuterWing).

Then, for the specific mesh mentioned in the Weapon Station (in this case, LeftWingtipRailMount), put the pivot point for that mesh in the exact location and alignment as you wrote in the data.ini (ie if the weapon is 1.0,1.0,1.0 position with 0.0,-3.0,-90.0 rotation, do the exact same thing with the pivot point of the pylon).

Then relink, verify everything looks correct in MAX, and export.

FC

I'd assume it has something to do with the squadron.

FC

JDAMs work fine. Check the thread IanH referenced. Did my own testing with verified GPS guided JDAMs. 4 out of 6 targets destroyed (including one by an AI wingman). I wasn't even trying very hard to duplicate parameters.

IanH did much more extensive testing and found even better results. The 'basket' is tighter and steeper now.

FC

Yep, the Su-33 appears to work correctly...though the actual positions are all jacked....

Hmph.

FC

Damn it...too slow.

Okay, I see it...yep, that looks correct.

Well, hell...now I'm stumped.

Ed, can you send me the latest data.ini and I'll see if there is something I'm missing.

Actually, can you send the OUT file too?

FC

Wanna bet?

Maybe. The SF1 version of the Super Hornet has roughly the same issue Russ is seeing on the MiG-29K.

Yet, the F-111E has no such problem.

Ed, what I need is an aircraft that the wing rotates in the Y axis, and the weapon stays in the same relative location...AND the weapon rotates properly. For instance, it took a while for us to notice the missile was not rotating. Because it was staying in the same proper location (on the wingtip).

Russ, try the entry like before (with the user controlled animation), but comment out the RotatingPylon=TRUE line. See if the missile at least mounts properly.

FC

I keep trying to tell folks...USER CONTROLLED (manual) animations not tied to things like flight controls, hooks, wing sweep, landing gear, etc, have, as far as I know, NEVER worked with weapons hanging off the mesh in question. The code for pure user control wasn't even in the original game, and was added after people wanted to control the canopy opening manually.

FC

PS Hmmmm...now I'm not so sure...I tried with the F-111 in the Oct 08 version of WOE, and the weapons mounted fine. However, I could swear we had problems with the Super Hornet for SF1 and so didn't end up using it...

Russ, remove the wingfold animation entry in the data.ini, put the weapons where you think they should go.

If that fixes the problem visually, then having the animation for the wing fold being user controlled is the problem...and there is no solution.

FC