Forum Replies Created

Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 239 total)

  • Author
  • in reply to: FFED3DAJ 1.12beta “gernot” (complete) #111419

    What differs 1.12 from 1.11?

    The scaling of the submodels has changed due to this the scanner or ECM will be displayed in a proper scale to the ship, equal to FFE these submodels are dynamic scalable and will be scaled now by the games internal scaling of the submodels.
    This also allowed me to create the dome for the various needs in the game, this dome will be scaled now proper to the submodel which calls the dome.
    It still has no “windows” if i would use a transparent material it would cutout certain underlaying geometry depending on the rendering which is not to control, some faces are rendered before the underlaying geometry (cuts out) some after (stays on top).
    It has now a collision mesh which is quite bigger as the object (i have no idea why), so take care you can’t fly anymore into the domes, you will crash and you will crash somwhat off from the visible dome.

    Further the handling of the animations has changed, this won’t be verfy obvious except that the “Kestrel” won’t work as intented by me resp. the engines won’t rotate as they should (for my prev. release of the model it will be simply wrong and the engine rotates with the landing gear anim).

    Fanatical - Official PC Game Keys

    in reply to: FFED3D Complete Package #111413

    as usual it was broken this one will work fine:

    if one likes to have some of the old ships:

    in reply to: New FFED3D builds from Ittiz & AndyJ #111426

    The scaleing of the submodels works perfect Andy!

    The Domes have the proper size now after i placed it in the proper directory and after i noticed that i had to size it down very very much.
    The Scanner (i assume ECM as well) appears now proper on the Ships, smaller on small fighters much larger on carriers.

    True yes it’s not ideal and i guess it was never ment to use the time where is no animation as a second channel (i stumbled over this issue), thus it’s really not a big thing if it stays like it is for 1.12. If i really like to rotate the engine of the Kestrel i would still have the option to hack this i guess.
    As far as i remember it’s just rotate over y yes/no, also this would be affected by the stardreamer equal to the rotating engine pods of the courier. For the “StudCity Shuttle” it’s really no problem, i won’t complete a LEGO FFED3D in this life, maybe in my next and the Kestrel will be a Kestrel with or without this little extra. I neither planned it i just thought, “hey i have for this ship so many unused submodels, let’s use at least one and do something with it”.

    I “abused” the animation for certain stations even i didn’t feel really comfortable with them, they are useless imo and as you stated they won’t be affected by the stardreamer (i guess the robot can stay but the shuttles are really not to see if you don’t go close to them).


    I like to place a wish or a thought (or two) here, much more of importance as a second animation will be.

    I noticed that the Domes have now a collision detection or a collision mesh of some sort, personally i wonder where it comes from because the original Dome submodel are only edges and it has no collision detection, everybody knows you can fly through the Domes. The “mesh” (i assume a bounding box) is quite larger as the model itself, i collide with the dome long before i reach it. Now i was always wondering if collision detection is based on the original geometry or if it’s taken from the replacement models. This because i would like to lower or lift certain ships which are positioned wrong now when landed, but this would mean they leave the boundaries of the original geometry, but if it’s a bounding box (or diameter) based on the dimensions of the replacement model it won’t matter.

    I would like to know if it’s safe to reposition the ships even when they leave the boundaries of the original geometry.

    The second is an experiment i made with the shader, i guess i posted this already last year. Recently i “abuse” the texture to influence specularity of the materaial, this works so and so and neither i know if i did that in a proper way, it works that’s all.
    But if i use the texture as specularity map all dark colored areas will be flat shaded, dark windows to.
    Thus obviousely a specularity map would be the right thing, it’s just that i couldn’t get this working, whatever i did (last year) when i used a greyscale the model had no texturing at all afterwards or was lit in a strange way from inside, most probably i have no idea what i’m doing.
    Already the use of the texture as specularity map makes a big difference, buildings i lowered much in specularity using the shader, for the ships i re-used the texture which let’s them look less synthetic with the drawback that i.e. windows will be flat shaded.

    I noticed that i have changed one city groundtile in specularity, this i will have to check out i forgot what i did but it looks quite good almost like a bumpmap, the terrain looks bumped (due to varying specularity).
    Thus maybe i have a solution but forgot it already, i will have to see.

    These two things would make me much more happy as a second animation ever can because they are well to notice and for the specularity it makes a big difference in appearance. i neither would need a bump map, i can replace this well with the effects of the specularity map, a bumpmap i would need if i like to get studs on the LEGO bricks but not to give a surface a certain structure.
    As default the shader could still fallback to use the texture as specularity map, certain models will look alright in this way (buildings or stations).

    I guess that’s all – i will remember what else i thought of when i’m at home where i have no web, as usual.

    in reply to: FFED3D Complete Package #111425

    not bad as i would say.

    i guess yes i will have a little spare time to work again on both projects, mostly because i bought this cute notebook for my mom, which is in fact heavy used by myself (i bought it for myself hm?).
    It’s much more fun to work on something if that something runs fine on your machine.

    in reply to: FFED3DAJ 1.12beta “gernot” (complete) #111424

    the idea i had quite long ago, so i should have asked you quite long ago.
    firm it got when i readed the entries in “FFED3D complete”, yes it’s enough to use only those two mentioned downloads, but whoever will miss at least the the vids. I know we stayed off of publish them together, but imho if i put them in or link to i.e. hoopers page it will be the same.

    However, the files are deleted.

    Probably a moderator can close this thread?

    in reply to: FFED3DAJ 1.12beta “gernot” (complete) #111422

    Sorry, looks like i shouldn’t have done it.

    I’m a bit curious why, but no matter i will delete them.

    Nonetheless thanks for the reply, nice to see your’e still alive (nice to see that i’m still alive) it wasn’t my intention to annoy you.

    What options do i have?
    Of course i can offer the models as mod (no big changes so far since last year), but imho the mods directory is more a full to the rim, it’s to much and i just thought it would be a good idea to implement certain things to the game, i.e. i didn’t expect that someone will use the old “old blackelk” spaceport or similar.
    I also thought it would be a good idea for the textures, it’s nice that we can decide but i feel it’s not really needed to.

    However – my fault 😉

    would you feel comfortable if i republish the things which belong to each other seperate here?
    (link to the sources).
    Or is it because 1.12 is still beta, i couldn’t find it here (but that means nothing) that’s why i took them from my downloads which i transferred to the new machine (i bought my mom a “new” notebook, a used dell which is quite good compared to the junk which i use).

    in reply to: FFED3DAJ 1.12beta “gernot” (complete) #111418

    Here’s the link to the complete bundle containing vids and everything to start FFED3D out of the box.
    It’s not as “flexible” as the other releases, i decided which models and textures and there are no mods except the replaced ships.
    If you like to have different textures or models you would have to take them from the previous releases.

    There isn’t much difference to any else, it’s just a “almost” complete FFED3DAJ1.12beta, almost because it doesn’t contains any optional textures.
    The shader scripts vary a little to the original ones because i liked to get less specularity on the ships and especially on the buildings.
    Recently i used the texture to lower the specualrity of the darker areas with the backdraw that windows which are often almost black will turn out matt (flat shaded). i haven’t managed it to use a second texture for specularity only, when i try everything turns out wrong but that would be the goal.

    in reply to: New FFED3D builds from Ittiz & AndyJ #111416

    Hi Andy, i have a question, you “corrected” the animations for FFED3DAJ 1.12 it seems, due to that there is no second animation possible anymore.
    if it’s vital i won’t mind but it was nice to do things like this:

    First i started ffed3daj1.11 (for this clip) and in this release the “second channel” (in principles when there is no animation) still works and i can use it to rotate the engine (part), unfortunately when i start ffed3daj1.12 this won’t work anymore.

    i’m just asking because if that stays i will have to remove the animations from a few models 🙁 and have to keep in mind that this won’t work anymore. recently only two models use this trick, the stud-city ip-shuttle and the kestrel (as far as i remember).

    I just like to know if you like to keep it or if you will revert it to the previous state, no matter how i will accept it.

    in reply to: New Ship Models for FFED3D AJ by Potsmoke (Gernot) #111415

    Because i expect changes anyday i continue to upload my personal FFED3D here, it contains the recent working models and i decided to add the few original models which i replaced as mod.

    Here’s a (new) clip which will show the difference between mine and what standard FFED3D content,

    i used FFED3DAJ 1.12 for this clip and will use it for my bundle but i like to make certain things proof before i link it.

    in reply to: FFED3D F.A.Q #111414

    for those who wonder where “Hooplatec” is gone to

    in reply to: FFED3D Complete Package #111412
    in reply to: FFED3D Complete Package #111411

    complete but with no mods to enable (it is as it is), so to say a FFED3D starter kit, inclusive videos my latest crap and textures in 8bit to speed up loading. it has some issues i will have to explore them, this is a quick and dirty repack.

    in reply to: “Phoenix” (former Sputnik) #111373

    didn’t know if i lost my last post i was offline for a while, while i was typing.

    i’ve got some good news to share, i bought a “new” computer, actually it’s not mine, i bought it for my mom.
    you know “all electrical devices work with smoke” and the macbook has lost its “smoke” 🙂
    really, one fan was sticked with dust, i fixed that but it was truely damaged due to overheating.
    right today i bought a used dell notebook from a official Windows retailer, overhauled, with new batteries and a win 10 which belongs to us, registered and full support for a lousy 200 bucks. such i neither found on e-bay.

    next month i will buy for me from the same store an office machine for even a lousy 150 bucks, that means in fact i can slowly return to what i was up here on ssc, phoenix and ffed3d, finally.

    i’m euphoric like a little boy at x-mas right now, the cute dell is like a summerbreeze to me compared to the old macbook we used.

    well it takes sometimes a little longer, longer as i expected myself, but in the end it will work out fine.

    nah, almost, my best Buddy, the hool, is again in prison, asshole – he beated a railroad engineer
    “i just gave him a slap in the face, is that my responsability if he’s such a weak guy?”
    (the poor engineer fell down like strucked down by a lightning)
    i love him for such expressions, do you know that?
    they attested him “to much criminal energy” criminal energy – ts – usually criminal energy comes along in a Dress.
    also “brutal” yeah because he’s such a brutal guy the horses (he works with horses in the open prison) follow him without command.
    he’s an asshole – but i love him.
    nah, he’s not, a bit stupid sometimes and can’t control his own power.
    can you imagine a better best Buddy for me as him?
    me not.
    and he couldn’t imagine a better one as me.
    i have no prejudice, of course i had some reservations when i met him first – a hooligan?
    i had to learn a lot about that.
    of course he looks now different at his own past and certainly he’s more as just alright.
    a bit to much alright, he can’t stand injustice and likewise me it doesn’t matters who is handled unfair.
    unlike me he didn’t thinks to much and… well you know what.
    but hey, this is the right stuff.
    with someone like him you can conquer the world – hell even.

    in reply to: “Phoenix” (former Sputnik) #111369

    though, as dramatic simple toms drawing of space and our sun was, it is the right imagination. you know i always liked it. space is sober, brutally sober, hostile like nothing else. and imho the right contrast to fantasy based vessels, and occasionally inhabited worlds, they mark live. something very fragile in this hostile surrounding.

    until we meet again
    live long and prosperous


    in reply to: “Phoenix” (former Sputnik) #111368

    difficult posting from a phone ;(

    ok, what i had in mind was an old debate.
    now it’s not about the conspiracy i like to post which is the intentinal reason for this dementi of nvidia, it’s because about the old debate how space will look in space. the dudes of nvidia turned saddled up the horse from behind and liked to show that the moon landing was reality and prove this with a perfect simulation of the situation. but like i said that’s not the topic here. i like to show off with this that space is simply black in space as long as there is a central star in range. it was toms and my imagination, even knowledge that any else is kitsch. so here’s the clip.
    in reply to: Space Battles and other exotic things from the past #111305

    hyperspace jump to another decade.

    thanks geraldine for the link, i didn’t heard of this burial before, how many copies of E.T.?
    i must say i never played that game and as more bad critics i read about as more i wonder if it really was this bad.

    all the movie franchises doesn’t worked so well those days i guess, tron (all of them) was neither a success, ok the movie itself wasn’t successful.
    but i liked it, i guess i have seen tron once but i haven’t forgot the story, i was fascinated and can’t understand why it was rated so bad.
    while e.t. as movie was a commercial success and i found the movie lame, i couldn’t see it back then as sci-fi for real,
    to me it was a sentimental story, but maybe that was the success of it.

    intentionally i liked to post a clip of “wendetta”.
    but i watched a movie today i like to share with you, most probably you know the movie and will have seen it more then once (?)
    i was very impressed of it and my first thought was of geraldine when i watched “The First of the Few”.
    it’s really a fine movie and to know it was made in ww2 makes it even better if i imagine the conditions under which it has been made.
    david niven plays his role brillant as always with a lot of humor (which was certainly strongly needed)

    so this is totally off topic, it’s rather a historical movie and has nothing to do with space neither with computers (but with aviatics).
    of course one has to watch the movie in the context, it’s entertainment and propaganda and a lot of story and prob. less history.
    but if one likes airplanes one will like it – no, one must like it.

    so here’s the link, even if i assume you will know this movie since childhood.

    next post will be an console space shooter again, i promise, right here it is
    it’s a quite new game under development for the intellivision and for my choice something of the best ever made for it.
    not really new but neither really old.
    the controls suit perfect to the disc controller of this console.
    the dudes work hard to squeeze the last bit out of this old console.
    in reply to: Space Battles and other exotic things from the past #111306

    another thing you will certainly remember is this demo, decle converted it for the intellivision, a whoppy 450kb of program, so nothing which would have ever been released.
    in reply to: Ready Player One #111304

    interesting what can be gained of “stick right, press X, press O, reset” (typical movement to unlock an easter egg).

    thing is just i guess never no one wanted something bad laying such an egg.
    i found that funny.

    of course i noticed the movie it’s also (of course) advertised on atari age.
    strangewisely my interest was very low so i never opened the thread to look what’s inside the “egg”.
    i guess i will wait until it’s broadcasted.

    in reply to: Space Battles and other exotic things from the past #111258

    Truely it is Geraldine, because i guess i was the first who spendet enough attention to it.
    Since “Tower of Doom” exists as published game players didn’t put much attention to its predecessor, especially not collectors because there is nothing to collect except the binary image.
    “IntelligentVision” who provides the image didn’t offers no description to it and what the community knows about this game is based on the few informations on “Intellivision Lives!” resp. on the website of the blue sky rangers as well as on an interview with the developer Daniel Bass.
    Especially in this interview (it was made decades after) he figured out that the game was only to 80% complete and won’t be to finish, that INTV picked up the lose ends and completet it (he claimed, maybe he didn’t liked to belittle the devs of INTV).

    To be honest i never played “Tower of Doom” its very long instructions kept me from exploring this as well brillant game, which differs only in a few things from “tower of Mystery”, it has different missions, different tower depths, fixed or random level layout, fixed or random item colors, it also offers different characters to choose from an unarmed waif to a fully armed warlord. this offers a wider range in skill from easy to very hard and adds “bosses” like to find a grail or to beat a magician. but it’s also more prescripted and leaks completely of the possibility to enter a seed to regenerate a certain build (while i still have no idea how the “magic number” works for this game, i’m sure Daniel Bass intented it to be a part of the game to find a way to decipher it, this is the final mystery of the tower).

    However it was unattendet being a “unfinished” prototype to “Tower of Doom”, everybody assumed it is truely “unfinished” and who would like to play such a long timer just to discover that it will possibly end with a crash.

    Gernot of course, i picked up the unreleased games and took a closer look at them, and as for “SPACE SHUTTLE ?” which is far less complete but also not as incomplete as described.

    It costed me a little to convince them of certain behaves of the games because it isn’t noted in any instruction or wherever.
    As for “Air Strike” for which is stated that this unfinished game has no enemy planes, yes no enemy PLANES, but enemy helicopters which you have to call by pressing of a key, this isn’t officially noted somewhere (additionally there exists a hack with smaller helicopters which attack you steady and i assume most thought i mean this hack).

    Same for “Space Shuttle” which is broken but far more playable as stated.

    “Number Jumble”, was unreleased but has been released by IntellivisionRevolution as a cartridge, this game runs fine and i like it to, it’s a not to underestimate educational game, from easy equations like 0+1 to more advanced like (53×21)-15, it’s basically a shoot ’em up (the developer liked to create a shoot em up but was hired by the educational division, so he made the best out of it) which isn’t easy to play at maximum skill level.

    “Tower of Mystery” was the next i discovered and it’s truely a discovery even if the enthusiasm is in limits except for me.
    Personally i nearly think it’s sad that i broke the spell. It was a sleeping beauty who slept a 100 years to wait for the valiant hero to free her from the spell. Unfortunately i broke that spell and now it’s obvious that it’s playable.

    But like i said to me the real quest has only begun, i have to decrypt the way to get to the “magical number” which will give me the key over the game and which is certainly ment as the final reward and the evidence that you mastered the “Tower of Mystery”.

    “Quest” would be another “D&D” game, it’s basically “AD&D Treasure of Tarmin” (or Minotaur), but with changed gameplay, like “Minotaur” the playfield is quasi 3D (rooms, corridors, doors) but the batteling has changed from round based to action which i think was a good decision because still many find it sad that “Minotaur” has round based battles. Additionally it has limited voice support, which made the game first interesting to me because i inherited a Intellivoice. But “Tower of Mystery” had a more powerful magic and i’m a victim to its secret now.

    It was planned to have voice support for “Tower of Mystery” as well but it seems it didn’t turned out as planned by the devs, what i can read always is that the last two years was a haste to complete games for which the merchandising had bought licenses, they had licenses but no games to offer, for a couple they just changed some graphics (i.e. Scooby Doo’s Maze Chase, the game wasn’t intented to use a dog, but they quickly changed it to say “look we have finished it and it’s even an educational game as promised”) to get away from fines.

    Besides all AD&D are more or less procedural generated but none as consequently as “Tower of Mystery”, even “Cloudy Mountain” (simply AD&D) had already a random scattered map and generated caves. For “Minotaur” they used it to position the items and their varying colors/functions.

    I can only assume, i’m not afiliated to TSR Hobbies, that the “Advanced” prefix was ment exactly for such procedural generated role playing games,
    “Dungeons & Dragons” (which is a trademark of TSR as well) we have many, but only little “Advanced”.

    Certainly all three “AD&D” games are oustanding (if we count “Tower of Doom” as AD&D, which it was but INTV spent no money for licensing), still often played and suggested to be played.

    in reply to: Space Battles and other exotic things from the past #111253

    In this game nothing is prescripted and not much described, you have to find out yourself what the purpose of treasures, magical items and potions is, also this will change from game to game. A flask of a certain color can heal you one time the next time it will kill you. And certainly no “now click here” but ticker messages like “hey, they’re looking good” which meanings you have to discover yourself.

Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 239 total)