3D Cities for Falcon…
-
Hi guys,
I don’t want F4 to be just another nice looking “pacifistic” flight sim (what is the benefit of such 3D cities, besides eye candy?).
In a real world conflict almost every building on the ground can have a strategical meaning for the war progress (even if it is “only” Collateral Damage).They way I want to go is pretty much the opposite of this.
I want to have targets if military priority inside a civilian objective, challenging they player (and AI) to be more cautious on tgt selection and weapon release.Cheers
BikerStef what would be the difference from what we have these days? The cities these days are full with houses, just they are painted over the tile texture instead of pop-up like real 3D objects, is that not right?
Also, Autogen doesn’t mean necessarily no bounding boxes, BTW, I think a solution can be found for what you are looking for. e.g a group of small buildings packed close together in a street may have a simple rectangular bounding box to represent damage, and we can set fires where weapon hits.
But practically, if we want real looking cities, Autogen is the only possible solution. Even leave GFX alone (Say we can handle rendering), I don’t think it’s practical for the CPU to manage so many real objects (You know better than me, loops are running over those lists many times every frame…)
-
, BTW, I think a solution can be found for what you are looking for. e.g a group of small buildings packed close together in a street may have a simple rectangular bounding box to represent damage, and we can set fires where weapon hits.
Or……a better bounding box could be looked into……[Pumpy runs and hides…]
-
Just throwing this out there - city lights would look pretty odd in a city that was under attack. Generally, a mandatory blackout happens in cities when air raid sirens are blaring. Adding lights without a script to turn them off during an air raid would detract from simulating realism of a war in Korea, and I just wanted to make sure this concept has been noted alongside the goals of this project. Great work, btw - I’d be very impressed to see this become a reality!!
**also, if this is something you’d do, remember that cities power comes on and off in grids or sections, just like the sections of buildings that make up your city models. If they were to switch, they should not do so all at once, but section by section the way it happens IRL. -
-
Or……a better bounding box could be looked into……[Pumpy runs and hides…]
Not my department, talk to Stef…
/Me runs after Pumpy and hides along…
-
Stef what would be the difference from what we have these days? The cities these days are full with houses, just they are painted over the tile texture instead of pop-up like real 3D objects, is that not right?
Also, Autogen doesn’t mean necessarily no bounding boxes, BTW, I think a solution can be found for what you are looking for. e.g a group of small buildings packed close together in a street may have a simple rectangular bounding box to represent damage, and we can set fires where weapon hits.
But practically, if we want real looking cities, Autogen is the only possible solution. Even leave GFX alone (Say we can handle rendering), I don’t think it’s practical for the CPU to manage so many real objects (You know better than me, loops are running over those lists many times every frame…)
I have seen destroyable autogen buildings and trees at “BIRDS of STEEL”(2012 Gaijin Entertainment/PS3 and XBOX360) which became “WarThunder” later.
They corappse and melt into ground after they were hit by a bomb or an aircraft.Combining existing destroyable buildings(which you can RECON on 2D UI and should affect campaign situation) and auto gen small buildings would be good I think.
As current weapons like SDB becoming precise so that they can attack enemy without coraterall damage, auto gen buildings are not only for eyecandy but should also increase realism I believe. -
auto gen buildings are not only for eyecandy but should also increase realism I believe.
I think that these days the problem is that eyecandy and realism get mixed in many areas… if we look around what people are working on, we can find many working on creating “eyecandy” tom populate cities and ABs. I guess it’s the way how new engines evolved so people see DCS Nevada and X-Plane stuff and they want to do the same here, This is a natural evolution process I guess
Since day 1 that I started to work on Falcon, there was this debate about realism and eye candy. I started development of Falcon as a Particle system dev in RV team, and I ended up in BMS with 4.33 as a pure realism and avionics bitch. And now I’m back to eye candy, in a way
What is more important? I don’t know to tell and I don’t even believe anymore that there is really a difference, eye candy is realism and realism is eye candy, in a way. When your Airbase is full of objects, then it naturally gives you a more realistic feeling when you take off and land, even though it’s mainly eye candy, because eventually it’s all about the feeling of the simulation.
I’m sure that a city full of buildings, roads, power poles and power lines will give the virtual pilot a more realistic feeling, even if not everything will be as “destroyable” as every single “real” object.
-
From my POV there are 2 words that describe what are you referring as “realism” in a simulator: “functionality” & “eye-candy”. Each one is different in its area.
“Functionality” is avionics, FM, systems & weapons behaviors, so bottom line a proper (code-wise) modeling of all those small details that the player interacts and (most possible) has control over them.
“Eye-candy” are all the graphical details on the virtual world the player is “in”, but (most probably) the user has no control over them. Than might be from static ground vehicles and crew models in an airfield, up to power lines and cities.
IMHO, in order for a product simulator (in our area of interest) to be mentioned as “realistic” product, it HAS to sum up to the maximum extend both these 2 words. You cannot have a full cockpit switches working 95% and crappy terrain / engine graphics, nor an Pr3par terrain level with FreeFalcon cockpits…
I’ve flown the F-16V sim recently. External world = beautiful. Internal cockpit functionality = extremely limited (as it is a “demonstrator” remember? ). FM = SUCKS. Its pilot instructor believed I am a Viper driver too since referring that “this is not a Viper”… So, can it be described as realistic?: NO.
I’ve been flown an old Block 50, FLIR’s and all in there, in real HUD optics, everything working in the pit, just great. FM seemed ok too. External world remind me Falcon 3. Can it be described as realistic?: NO
We are in 2017, computers & systems are here to help gain the best possible in each aspect. There is a need (not referring to bms strictly) to continue pushing forward evolution to each area of science in a product in order to describe it as realistic simulator and gain the crown.
Again, my POV.
-
-
And next to power grid lines… don’t forget railways.
Still remember DI Tornado, how it added so much to the realism, because like in a real world, it has a big strategic value.
You could cripple supply lines, by attacking stations, railway bridges and even the trains itself with laser guided for example.Cheers Obi1.
-
Ok we are starting to take it elsewhere. This goes to the new terrain engine.
Railways yes it’s easy the prob is the moving trains. Needs roads code in parallel.
Hmmm and following terrain? Not going through or sink etc….My effort is work with what u have. Right now I don’t have procedural engine for buildings in falcon so… Take the hard way or the highway. Which :lol: in my case is a circle.
-
why couldn’t you use the information available in openstreetmap ?
I know they did that for X-Plane : http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/X-Plane
Cheers
-
… When your Airbase is full of objects, then it naturally gives you a more realistic feeling when you take off and land, even though it’s mainly eye candy, because eventually it’s all about the feeling of the simulation.
I’m sure that a city full of buildings, roads, power poles and power lines will give the virtual pilot a more realistic feeling…
This nails down this subject matter. Given this context, it’s clear that the term ‘eye candy’ deserves a less negative vibe so often felt in this forum. In my opinion, when BMS introduced auto-gen’d trees & grass, it did more than anything else before it to create a sense of a realistic 3-D world terrain, especially when flying NoE. There’s no doubt in my mind that auto-gen’d building, roads, etc. will create yet another similar jump in realism. If we want to call that ‘eye-candy’, then let’s realize that ‘eye-candy’ is a good thing for realism and immersion.
Just my 2 cents worth.
-
Will love to see 3d buildings on towns and villages. Please keep up the good work guys!
-
why couldn’t you use the information available in openstreetmap ?
I know they did that for X-Plane : http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/X-Plane
Cheers
If u r asking me. I already do. What u see derived from OSM.
-
I read you are talking about autogen, ok it’s the future or the present like in xplane11, but what about Kimpo airport we have now, or Kunsan?
I mean, autogen will be ok for towns and villages, but for airports buildings, shouldn’t be set in database as objects, as we have now in those 2 airports?GO Ahead , Arty!
-
-
@Cloud:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! That’s a given!!!
C9
patience needs encourage
-
Even airports can be done like that.
If not Ingame for creating them more easily instead of auto cad or 3ds max.
U create a library of 3d objects and textures then create the airport inside cityengine.
It’s way easier and faster. -
Future for “real” cities is autogen and autogen only
See, this kind of stuff should be implemented to draw a huge number of simple 3D models with great efficiency:
Also another crazy example here (Even older and with GTX-460!):
Eventually, Autogen structures are mainly simple models with how many? 8, 12, 16, 32, 64 vertices? so this is nothing for a modern card, using the correct method for batching and instancing with minimum number of draw calls may generate a huge amount of such simple models in 1 scene.
Bah
DX11