EXPANSION OF DEVELOPMENT BASE PERSONNEL THROUGH EDUCATION
-
A few questions towards anyone knowledgeable enough to provide me with answers:
CONCERNING MAN-MADE OBJECTS (buildings, factories, bridges, etc)
5. How is a collision detected with such an object?
Collisions are governed by a “hitbox” and “radius” that are defined in the Parent file of the object. (e.g. Dimensions = 45.5 -21.0 18.0 -3.6 3.6 -3.5 3.0 - This line defines the radius XMin XMax YMin YMax ZMin ZMax)
-
Can someone kindly remind me why Terraforming [*1] (not my term) was not an option in improving the fidelity of the rather crude 1000m edges of the terrain model?
[*1] Instead of making smaller than 1km tiles, superposition “objects” (hills, mountains, valleys) of a smaller resolution (e.g. 100m) on top of those 1km tiles. While heightmap isn’t improved, the eye of the user is deceived in that it is flying over 100x100m “objects” that make up the terrain.
Thank you Pumpyhead and Arty for replying!
-
spitballing here… this is the approach DCS uses, is it not? BMS does not require 44 GB of RAM to function.
-
Collisions are governed by a “hitbox” and “radius” that are defined in the Parent file of the object. (e.g. Dimensions = 45.5 -21.0 18.0 -3.6 3.6 -3.5 3.0 - This line defines the radius XMin XMax YMin YMax ZMin ZMax)
Correct me if I am wrong Pumpy, but collision is only governed by the hitbox, radius is only for display.
-
Hopefully the code-savvy will know…
Would it be possible to TEMPORARILY increase the geometric fidelity of the tiles in an area underneath and immediately around the aircraft?
What I am asking essentially, is if areas of interest for the developer (for the sake of a simple example lets imagine a 3x3 square of 9 tiles total) could be enhanced visually… enough so to allow for higher fidelity than a 1000x1000m single slab of geometry which does little to fool the eye.
Also… Would it be possible to create “building blocks” of tile geometry that can be used to substitute a single 1000x1000m single slab? In this case, I am suggesting a variety of “building blocks” categorized by edge slope, which could be brought together to function seamlessly when brought together.
This “bubble approach” would allow for higher geometry resolution, while keeping far tiles crude and near tiles refined. It would certainly overcome memory considerations that were pointed out earlier in the conversation.
Just throwing ideas on the table, so don’t shoot me if its all been proposed before.
Thanks for reading.
-
spitballing here… this is the approach DCS uses, is it not? BMS does not require 44 GB of RAM to function.
If you are talking to me blu3wolf the answer is “I would never know”.
I am just wondering if JUST ONE (or, eventually 9) tiles can be enhanced to an improvement of order of magnitude (geometry resolution of 100x100m). That would be a huge improvement over the existing situation.
-
Well an open beta for one year and a half i believe its their due time.
In the meantime how many products where released only for the open beta?
10+? Terrain campaigns aircraft…Obvious that the focus is lost… one more year for beta… then what? Beta for how long?
Since they add new things they must patch the core.
This is an endless loop.
Don’t forget they announced amd the f-16… amd new map and some vr addition. Lol i forgot dc which is the mother of all.So for the next 2 3 years still with open beta and the excuse… hey don’t complain it’s an open beta.
Open beta has become their mainstream and its returning hard on them like a boomerang.
They compromise stability seriously even though they try the exact opposite at the dames time.
Remarks and reports state that there is no consistency on the product and they disrupt it by them self.Just facts.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T818A using Tapatalk
-
Here is another idea, I would like the dev. team to consider:
How about “terraforming” just 9, 16, 25 tiles around the aircraft?
The 100 “wedges” of each tile would be loaded as “Terrain objects” and would each have its own collision box to work with. Over the 1000m of edge of the original tile, variation could be added, hiding completely even the edges of the original tile. Radius might need to be pushed out because of zoom, or other reasons.
WE are talking about:
1 tiles… 100 wedges
4 tiles… 400 wedges
9 tiles… 900 wedges
16 tiles… 1600 wedges
25 tiles… 2500 wedgesEach one of the wedges would carry its own texture, but to offset some of the workload, the original tile wouldn’t need to be textures AND these being added objects, it would probably work with the already implemented bubble routine.
Just food for thought.
-
Well an open beta for one year and a half i believe its their due time.
In the meantime how many products where released only for the open beta?
10+? Terrain campaigns aircraft…Obvious that the focus is lost… one more year for beta… then what? Beta for how long?
Since they add new things they must patch the core.
This is an endless loop.
Don’t forget they announced amd the f-16… amd new map and some vr addition. Lol i forgot dc which is the mother of all.So for the next 2 3 years still with open beta and the excuse… hey don’t complain it’s an open beta.
Open beta has become their mainstream and its returning hard on them like a boomerang.
They compromise stability seriously even though they try the exact opposite at the dames time.
Remarks and reports state that there is no consistency on the product and they disrupt it by them self.Just facts.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T818A using Tapatalk
Just a question…
Do you think that the project would be better off if they focused on maintaining pipelines?
Its obvious that the tip of the spear [so to speak] needs to be those that are able to code. They would need to lay down the “infrastructure” of what each version of a pipeline would be capable of doing. And since they would be the people providing the rest of us [which would only have an auxiliary role] with said infrastructure, their design goals and vision would permeate through to each level of input where they left off.
Message to the dev. team:
Is it possible to introduce a “middle-man” portion of software, between the current planes/cars/trucks/tanks/boats and a possible future terrain?
Just thoughts… neither demands, nor criticism.
-
I don’t understand the question. They are focused on the pipelines, the product to money pipelines.
Coders code but company management must maintain a profit or survival of the company. On that cause everything is sacrificed. Simple as that. Coders and users never know that as long as the establishment is there.Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T818A using Tapatalk