Jump to content

FastCargo

ADMINISTRATOR
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    8,142

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

Posts posted by FastCargo

  2. Posted

    Okay, for once I can say this:

     

    I WAS THERE BITCHES!!!

     

    Now I've got that out of my system...

     

    Gearbox was present in a big way at PAX South 2015.  Makes sense, being that they are based in Plano TX.

     

    The one panel I wanted, nay, HAD to attend was the Homeworld: Behind The Scenes panel.  This is where Gearbox showed off the HW Remastered collection.

     

    They showed the difference between the original and remastered editions of HW and HW2 (all of which are included), plus actual gameplay from several Player vs CPU matches.  I emphasize, it was actual, real time gameplay, not recordings of such.  As a scene demo, they showed the intro of HW mission 7...The Garden of Kadesh.  I recorded video of it...but frankly, it doesn't come close to doing it justice.  Not even a little.

     

    What made me very hopeful about this is the original designers of HW were there, the guys who were once Relic Entertainment, who eventually formed Blackbird Interactive, working on Hardware: Shipbreakers...which is now Homeworld:Shipbreakers.  Yep, they have been folded back into the HW universe (which, apparently, was the 'bones' of Shipbreakers...).  And you could tell the affection they had for their original product.  And how much they wanted to work to get the remastered version right.

     

    Dynamic shadows, damage textures with bump/spec maps, weapons with dynamic lighting, all sorts of other graphical advancements.  The music, voices, background 'sky boxes', etc, have all been redone.  Most of the original voice actors were rehired to record dialogue.  The UI for both Remastered editions looks like a hybrid between HW and HW2, but seems to be thinner and sleeker.

     

    I haven't been this hopeful for any 'new' game in a long time.

     

    Having said that, Gearbox's record recently is uneven.  They've had some great ups (expansion packs for the original Half Life, Brothers In Arms franchise, Borderlands) with some downs (Duke Nukem Forever and the Aliens: Colonal Marines debacle).  They really can't afford to screw this up.  In some ways, this represents an experiment.  Taking an old game, and simply bringing it into the modern age, while leaving the original gameplay intact.  Most other times, it's been a reboot (Doom3), or remake (Black Mesa), or remastering of titles that weren't that great in the first place (Rise of the Triad and Shadow Warrior).  How many of us love the idea of a modern X-Wing, or Strike Commander.  Keep the gameplay and story, but bring it into a modern engine.  Time will tell if what we say we wanted will translate into sales.

     

    As far as opinions on Steam goes, it is like anything else.  Steam is DRM, and it can have its own issues.  In practical terms, it's pretty non-intrusive, and there is something to be said for the convenience factor.  I don't mind Steam, but if I can get a game DRM free (like GOG.com), I do prefer that option.

     

    FC 

    • Like 1

  3. Posted

    That wasn't quite what I was getting at. My concern was seeing the lack of ANY aircraft based games. FPS, RTS, MMOs, adventures, turn based, space, cars. Okay, no water based ships as far as I could see...

     

    Logitech and Saitek HOTAS sets. Several of them. None connected to a flight sim. But instead, to Elite: Dangerous, other space combat games.

     

    FC

  4. Posted

    Just got done spending 2 days at PAX South 2015. For those who don't know, PAX (in this case) stands for Penny Arcade Expo and is a convention dedicated to gaming...mostly video and tabletop gaming. It is an outgrowth of PAX Prime, which was started in Seattle a few years ago and has rapidly grown in popularity (which is why there are now 4 PAX events per year instead of one).

     

    As you might imagine, hardware and software vendors show their wares with new and upcoming stuff. This is not a report about PAX...I was there as a fan of games, not as a reporter.

     

    There were all sorts of genres there...with one exception.

     

    In atmosphere flying games...combat or otherwise. Not a single one, arcade, sim or whatever. There were several space combat games...I got to try out Eve Valkyrie with the Oculus Rift.

     

    It was beautiful. The first VR set I have ever used that seemed to show absolutely no lag, loss of calibration, tracking errors, etc. Flying with it felt convincing...to the point that I actually got slightly queasy because my body wasn't feeling the familiar pull of G's that I was used to when flying 'head on a swivel' style...and there were absolutely no visual cues telling me I was just sitting in a stationary chair.

     

    And not one air combat sim there to take advantage of the technology.

     

    I really am not sure what that says about the state of air combat games/sims. But I know I was disappointed.

     

    FC

  6. Posted

    Okay, maybe we need a 'essential mods' thread for the SW flight series.

     

    I know the original X-Wing and Tie Fighter can't (or weren't) modded.  I also know the versions GOG has are not the collector CD-ROM versions which in some ways are better.

     

    Anyway...so that leaves XvT, XvT with BOP, and Alliance.  So, what are the essential mods for these?

     

    FC

    • Like 1

  7. Posted

    Okay, if the author has issues, then I'll take his article with a grain of salt.  However, by the CF-105 article, the proposal is for 100 CF-105s at 9 billion total dollars...that's $90 million per aircraft when you roll R&D costs into it.

     

    Does anyone REALLY think you can build that class of aircraft for that little money?

     

    FC

  8. Posted

    I was having a discussion with a Canadian politician about the issue of the F-35 just last week.

     

    Though the concept of a CF-105 reborn is interesting, like the article pointed out, you are basically building a new aircraft from the ground up...it is hopelessly naive to think you can build a triple-sonic fighter with advanced 5th generation avionics, thrust vectoring, internal and external weapons points, for 90 million dollars per aircraft (which includes the R&D cost).

     

    Check this article out:

     

    http://defenseissues.wordpress.com/2013/10/05/modern-aircraft-flyaway-costs/

     

     

     

    F-22 - 273 million USD
    F-35C - 236 million USD
    F-35B - 292 million USD
    F-35A -184 million USD
    F-15C - 126 million USD
    F-15A - 43 million USD
    EF2000 T2 - 138 million USD
    Rafale M - 83 million USD
    Rafale C - 75 million USD
    F-16C - 70 million USD
    F-16A - 30 million USD
    Gripen E - 85 million USD
    Gripen C - 44 million USD
    Harrier II Plus - 50 million USD
    Gripen A - 36 million USD

     

    Note the author doesn't include VAT on some aircraft which causes the cost to significantly jump.  Also note that pretty much the only large twin-engine aircraft that make it under the 100 million dollar mark is the old F-15A.  That's important to note...the CF-105 would be a large fighter, similar in size and weight to the F-22, F-15, EF2000, etc.

     

    My personal opinion is that when Canada is ready to replace their Hornets, they should get a version of the Super Hornet.  Transition training would be minimal, some logistics are already in place, and the R&D is already paid for.  Pretty much they could get it at the per airframe cost to make.

     

    FC

    • Like 1

  9. Posted

    Theoretically it should be possible. But I don't know if it's beneficial to the community. Not everybody wants that his 3D work is converted and used/altered by others. But I don't know how the community thinks about it. I'm only guessing here.

    I think more beneficial would be exporter for free/cheaper 3d designer applications like blender. But for writing an exporter one has to know the complete lod format. And I still don't understand parts of the header and the material description :-(

     

     

    Mue, you are exactly right here...please don't attempt to create a LOD converter/reverse engineering program...like others have said, it can result in legal issues (for payware) and general discontent among 3d modders.  3d modders can (and have) released 3d models in MAX format for modification by others if they wanted to.

     

    I think a LOD exporter for something like Blender would be fantastic on the other hand.  But I suspect that would be a soul crushing amount of work.

     

    If you are having problems finding a hosting site, consider something like Google Drive, which is free, has much, much higher uploading limits...and no attempts at malware or spam for downloaders.  You can set the individual permissions for any files you upload (download only, public, private, etc).

     

    FC

    • Like 2

  10. Posted

    Okay, I've tested out the new, attached file and it comes out clean using several AV programs.

     

    The viewer is an awesome first start.  I've been wanting a light, fast viewer for texturing, because even 3D max is clunky with updating textures as you change them and of course booting into SF2 takes forever.

     

    Nice job mue.  Texture gurus I think will find this program VERY useful.

     

    FC

  15. Posted

    Ewwww!  And Dillion, welcome to the community.  We do look forward to your contributions.  The fact that you were in Hornets at one time does help.  As a first step, I'd recommend hitting up our Knowledge Base.  It will give you a LOT of information on how the sim works...there are a lot of changes you can make with simple text editing.  Most modders tended to get their start in doing that before moving on to other things.

     

    FC

  16. Posted

    Its real simple.  The SH was done that way because that's the way it was done.  The amount of effort was dictated by my ability, interest, and time available.  Personal motivations as to why someone approached a project in that way are really not your concern.  You asked your question - Why do you get a performance hit?  You got your answer - Lots of reasons.  You asked a question - What can you do?  You got your answer - Have the sim switch over to the less detailed models at a closer distance.

     

    Why people like nice, detailed, poly heavy external models and criticizing them for doing so is not relevant to the discussion.  Fellow modders are excepted from this suggestion because they've shown they are willing to put in the skull sweat and time to make their mark on the sim and contributing to the community.  And some are good enough to share their techniques and/or projects with others so that we all get better.

     

    Understand yet?  I am not critiquing your question about why you are getting a performance hit and how you can fix it on your end.  I am critiquing your judgment on other people motivations on what they like, why they do it that way and how they like it.  That somehow your considerations are superior to theirs, even though you have contributed very little to no content to the community.  That you haven't even bothered to learn how the sim basically works...that half your answers to your 'issues' could be solved by just reading the inis, most of which are in plain English.

     

    In other words, most of your posts have come off as 'It's all about me'.  I'm sure that's not the intent...but it comes off that way.

    Finally, understand this.  This sim has been around for more than a decade.  It has gone through 2 generations, 3 engine upgrades, several releases, expansion packs, and shitloads of patches.  The modding community has been around almost as long, modders moving in, moving out, moving on, dying (literally), having major real life crisis, contributing tons of their own content, time and money to offer a spectrum of stuff from simple text edits to full blown packages that can damn near rival any payware addon.  

     

    Modders taking it personally?  

     

    You fucking betcha.

     

    FC

    • Like 2

  20. Posted

    Where do I even begin...

     

    Dillon,

     

    First, the Super Hornet model that you see in game was purchased by EricJ for the purpose of bringing it into the SF engine back in late 2008. He asked me as a favor to bring it into game. The model as originally built if I remember correctly was darn near 100k polygons. You cannot simply run it through a poly reducer algorithm in the 3d modeling program...odd things happen that can change the shape, or cause odd deformations. This goes double if nothing has been done to bring it into the game engine yet. Pieces have to be 'cut' and shaped or animated, then texture mapped. This mostly has to be done by hand, sometimes vertex by vertex. It is also personal choice as to how many polygons a modeler wants on his model. If he's got a decent rig, he may accept more detail for less performance. Or, he can make multiple models of varying resolutions so that the farther away the aircraft is, the lower amount of polys it shows. In addition, the Super Hornet was an experiment to try various new modeling features that had not been tried before in SF...and so things were added that aren't on other models, such as the ALE-50, and the 'buddy' A/R pod. And lets not forget the Growler with all it's pods that needed to be modeled.

     

    Secondly, most of the other programs you mentioned were so old that performance isn't an issue, or the models themselves aren't that detailed. Some of them use pay addons, where there is financial motivation to reduce polys to have playability to the widest amount of machines out there. And SF2:NA uses a different terrain engine that has significant frame rate hit compared to other terrains because of certain ways it handles land, ocean effects, etc. All of these contribute to frame rate drag.

     

    Third, the SH package in all its forms was done for a cost to you of zero. People put a lot of time, effort, and even some money to get this out there for others to enjoy. Understand that to an extent, these projects are not made for you. They are given to you to share and enjoy, but they are not perfect, nor will they necessarily ever be so. Sometimes, they are done to the extent of the modeler's ability, interest, and time. And sometimes, that is all you will get.

     

    If you want to improve upon what is available, why not get your hands dirty and start figuring out how the sim works. A lot of those ini edits you can make yourself with nothing but Notepad. Considering you were a backseater in Hornets at one point, this should not be below your abilities to figure out.

     

    FC

    • Like 2

  21. Posted

    I copied the whole 'A' model data.ini file into the 'B' model.  The problem went away but the rear pilot went missing.  I tried everything to restore the rear pilot and seat but nothing worked.  So all in all the problem is located somewhere in the data.ini file.

    This is why I told you to compare the files, not do a wholesale copy and paste.

     

    Restore your F/A-18B data.ini and do what Romflyer says...that will at least completely remove the ability of the rudders to toe at all.

     

    FC

  25. Posted

    100% historical RAAF Meteor decals already exist

     

    http://combatace.com/files/file/12212-raaf-meteor-f8-77-squadron/

     

    it WOULD be great to have this airplane, it would mean that those without Expansion Pak 1 would now have the Meteor

    Exactly what I was thinking Wrench...with this, our F-51 and RF-51, folks shouldn't need SF2I:Exp 1 at all.

     

    In fact, Do335, is there a way you can break down what from which version of SF2 is needed? Or have you specified this in the readme already?

     

    FC

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..

  I accept