o.k, ready to download for all ye pilots 😉

pioneerspacesim-alpha10_btb.7z.001

pioneerspacesim-alpha10_btb.7z.002

pioneerspacesim-alpha10_btb.7z.003

pioneerspacesim-alpha10_btb.7z.004

pioneerspacesim-alpha10_btb.7z.005

pioneerspacesim-alpha10_btb.7z.006

pioneerspacesim-alpha10_btb.7z.007

pioneerspacesim-alpha10_btb.7z.008

pioneerspacesim-alpha10_btb.7z.009

pioneerspacesim-alpha10_btb.7z.010

pioneerspacesim-alpha10_btb.7z.011

small dislike, Tombogandhi (morton's landing) both cities are in the ocean 😥 (i have spent "hours" to put them on the coast line 😉 ) , i haven't checked it and was assuming it will be more or less the same as before, but i will post soon a fixed script for this system.

the game starts on Airfield Mollis, i told you Brasilia is much to dangerous for a gringo like me... and the surrounding of brasilia is boring imo compared to the glarus alps*.

* they are geologically really named that way, the alps are split into bernese alps (west) and glarus alps (east), not vallis, not grisun nor else. geologic i said because that's different, it refers to the way how / from what (which stones) they are build. the alps are rather young and you can see on the glarus alps very well how the sediments of of former oceans was lifted out of the ground by the constant pressure of the african shell on the eurasian shell (continent). btw, the alps are still growing.

the airfield how it looks in reality,

http://www.ecoflight.ch/webcam_flugplatz_mollis_sud.php

if you are lucky you can catch today a sight to some biplanes and other old timers, they should have left already yesterday but...

i have noticed some evil misbehaves that still persist, especially that a running delivery can't be reloaded.

i'm already thinking of starting to do builds from on a save point before this has all been changed, even it looks like no ones interested in such.

the issue list & GitHub is a mess imo, and has produced a mess. important things have been delayed while cosmetics stand in the foreground.

i really dislike it. this kills the fun in pioneer and i wonder what the intention is behind (killing the game?).

things should be done more slow, we are not in a hurry, but it should stable each and every alpha imo.

some small misbehaves & bugs, ok such can happen and you can't check all i understand, that's why it is still alpha and why we need the community to help.

but not each and every release should be less good as the previous. things that didn't work should be removed or delayed until a proper solution is found and bugs and misbehaves that exist should be removed before coding another bug. else i swear you find never a way out of this mess.

i feel it's very unprofessional what is going on, sorry. we had such never until starting of this year.

progress was slow that's true, but better slow and reliable then fast and ending up into a chaos that can't be reverted later.

rome wasn't build in one day

i will take up this task from my pov and will do it myself or perhaps i get some reliable help, but i can't stand such.

i love this game like many here and i don't like to see it coded to bits.

i can't understand when vital changes been made why they haven't been tested out and why put such into a alpha release that is presented to the community.

some know that i'm a service personnel in a nuclear power plant, what do you think where we would get with such a attitude?

from my pov, it's like i would present here a model and when you use this model in the game your machine halts.

such has been build in to the last alpha, fortunately i was able to remove this nasty bug.

to describe what has happened, i noticed, while checking the seeds for the gas giants that neptune and jupiter, by using ctrl F10 to view the object, caused a freezing of my OS, such is in my eyes rude. fortunately i found out where that came from and it is removed from my build.

but the non loading savegames are another thing i can't stand, that's no more a game it's a mess, it's broken down, sorry if i have to say such but that's the truth.

i can only hope i find a partner who is interested in the same way like me to make it shine again.

perhaps that will mean we have to start from a earlier, much earlier release on new, to avoid all the bugs that already exist.

nobody's perfect that's the truth, but exactly that's the reason why it should be done more careful.

What are you trying to achieve here? I mean really think about what is your goal here... If it is to come across as a condescending, arrogant man, then you have done just that.

Why act this way? You yourself are in a unique position to actually help us instead of standing on your bloody sop-box preaching to nobody. Your one of the few who actually understand the modelling system, so get stuck in and help us make this game better.

As stated before if you quantify in understandable terms what it is you have a problem with then things can begin to get resolved.

Wildly stating unfounded accusations and random derogatory comments will never get you anywhere, with anything.

Please remember these direct quotes taken from your own post before making another wildly inaccurate post:

Who on Earth is supposed to test them then? Its an ALPHA release that means it's experimental. An alpha has one purpose and one purpose only. To test that which has been created.

I have one pc so I can only test on that one pc with that one set of equipment. The same is also true for the other devs, some who only have linux or mac boxes.

Please elaborate...

?? That must be it.

Agreed, but remember :

And we thought alpha 10 was stable... It runs well on all the computers we were able to test it on.... Which is where the Alpha release into the community comes into play.

That is generally the rule, but sometimes things slip through the cracks like my balls-up of the Earth-like colours for that release.

Thats fine if thats the way you want to go, but its far more productive if we all work together.

Please step down off that high horse and commit these changes to github.

I thought that you would understand why this happens. Would you rather have a version of pioneer without any new features? Because that is what you would have to have if you want to use your old saves. New features generally break the save compatibility. Eventually we will hopefully reach a point where even new features won't break save compatibility but that requires lots of rewriting to how saves are handled.

EG: A few months ago there was a major rewrite on system generation and terrain generation so that new planets and terrains would not break save compatibility.

So to sum it up, why don't you actually help us in fixing this stuff. You could be a tester like Brian (Who is away at the moment), that way none of these annoying bugs would even make their way into an alpha.

In fact anyone can, all that is required is to grab a copy of a daily build and make some reports on how it performs.

i know that i've spoken hard words, but i guess there's a need for

i guess if you read the disclaimer, credits, i wrote to my build you can see that i respect the work anybody has put in.

more specific to the savegames,

i doesn't mean old savestates, i know that they can't be compatible, else i would be really blind.

it's that you can't load games from the actual version itself, e.g. when you started to do a delivery save your game and like to load it, i guess you know that yourself.

sorry if you feel i'm arrogant, surely not, but i know also that it might look like.

how can i, i'm not in the position to be arrogant.

i don't mind what i'm named by, i only dislike some what has been going down and can only repeat

i love this game, i would do anything to keep it alive.

i know that i'm a loud mouth, i was ever.

but i guess it has showed some effect, your reply is the evidence for.

to get more constructive,

i guess things should be sorted out better, tasks should have different priorities, i mean there are things that must be fixed, others could be easy delayed.

we shouldn't pick up 5 ideas at once, else we get struck, it becomes a unsolvable knot, one should be done after the other, imo.

that doesn't mean that different interests can be put in and work together.

see this as a warning, and warnings have to be loud.

if it's my job to alert, o.k i will take that on my back to and accept being disliked by some.

i'm aware that i have made a lot of foes now, but i did only because no one else picks up the task to warn.

the issue list, is a good example, i guess we loose overview to what is really important this way, that's what i think, you don't have to agree with me.

we have new players moving to pioneer, i know only users (first i see my self even only as a user), they might like the game like we do, but get repelled by such weird behave of the game (i feel that to) especially when not very experienced as commanders (in the game).

so first before doing anything, think always of the user as a nube, think if he can handle such or not and if you would keep interest in pioneer.

i guess i have tested the each and every alpha enough, i have to, else i can't make models or keep them on the latest stand, which was hard enough, believe me.

i can hardly follow the progress and steady changes.

but i also feel that my voice didn't count's much, i have brought up some problems from time to time, but it looks there is no interest for.

i guess from now on i shut my mouth and stop complaining, i leave it up to you and the devs, to accept what i've said or not.

finally, you have now this build and can pick my models from it if you like them, or leave it if not.

a offer,

if you like i will update your models to my new pilots, so it will be possible to remove another unused sub-model, but only if you like it.

for the models part,

take the build really as example what is needed and what not. i left away the standard buildings, but not because of eager or something, only because actually they don't fit well, imo. i mean i left away some of mine to, just to have a more or less "one fits all" city, another good example, the answer was we haven't yet different building sets...

o.k if that is so...

One thing to note is that this is a volunteer project. As such, people cannot be compelled to work on anything, so priorities are fairly meaningless a lot of the time. Its well understood that open-source software works best when the individuals involved are "scratching an itch" - doing the thing that interests them. Its hard to find people interested in testing, fixing bugs, etc, and the ones that are can't do it all the time.

Even if you are the type that likes to squish bugs some of the time (I am) its still the case that sometimes you don't want to simply paper over a bug but fix an underlying issue which will take significantly more time. For example, right now there is a 100% reproducable memory leak and eventual crash related to the station services menus. Its something that's caused by the way the menu code is structured, and can't be fixed without a huge refactor. Its not worth doing anything else so it sits there until someone else gets around it.

And that's fundamentally what the issue tracker is for - to keep all the known defects in one place so they aren't forgotten, even if nobody cares right now.

I can understand why that might make it seem that Pioneer is more unstable than it has been in the past. Previously, bugs went either unreported or were mentioned in passing in a forum post and were then forgotten, like whispers on the wind. Now they're all collected and exposed in all their dirty glory and we're actively encouraging people to tell us all about it. If we don't do this we will never get to a fully stable and complete release - we'll have no confidence that we've uncovered all the problems. With the issue tracker in place however we can know that once the game has all the features we all want and the issue tracker is empty, we can release a Pioneer 1.0 and be confident that it is stable.

Edit: Its also worth mentioning that since alpha 10 we're operating on a formal development process that has a deliberate focus on quality. Nothing can go into Pioneer without being checked by another developer. Its still early days for this process but the hope is that it will become close to impossible to commit anything with serious bugs or stability issues.

System: Morton's Landing (i left this, but personally i wouldn't name systems this way, instead of the simple Ross154, but it's done by choice)

a custom system which i set up from "Arisata" (modificated Ross154 for FE2, i fear already to speak that out loud)

Planet: Tombogandhi, a moon to "Caesar"

[attachment=708:2011-05-22_132012.jpg]

[attachment=709:2011-05-22_132133.jpg]

just to post something positive for once

[/hr]

i don't know, i fear some wouldn't like that...

edit:

i guess i would have, if it would work out for me, like i said thick head...

i will see to manage that in future.

once i tried to, but ended as own master branch, well i guess that wasn't right done.

i have posted this as issue https://github.com/pioneerspacesim/pioneer/issues/122

satisfied?

[/hr]

a horse would do me good i think... 😉

small dislike i produced myself, the pilot of the eagle vanishes much to early, but i have constant problems to find the right LOD since it's changed.

- first a radius is no diameter, means we have now the diameter that counts, but still it's named bounding_radius, a bit confusing.

(something that has me made also a bit angry, is it hard to know the difference between radius and diameter?) it was proper before imo, and i could take the models radius (really the radius) and use it for the LOD and we haven't had any information in the modelviewer about that, but wasn't needed for me, i guess i should know the size of my models, i made them 😉 i won't say that i dislike the info now, but it's named also wrong radius i.e. 14 for the eagle, but that's the diameter of the eagle i can tell this with eyes closed.

- second i can't find a proper setting, to me it looks whatever i do it's always the same and refers now only to the diameter (bounding_radius), lod_pixels hasn't much influence now. but i can be wrong, i said it looks like.

the problem i have, i had it easy to imagine how large a ship (or a part of) is in pixels before, now i'm not quite sure what lod_pixels is, i mean i know or thought i knew what it is. but now it's simplified in a kind of way i don't understand proper, i'm still assuming it represents visible pixels, but i doesn't looks like that. it looks like, i don't know, meters or something else more relative.

- third and i already posted this, i find it not very good to have the lod from the main model for the sub-model, i know it was complicated before and some might have found it hard to set the proper lod for the sub-models, but now i'm the one who can't get warm with it.

for static models (wavefront .obj) it doesn't matter much as long as you don't exchange models for each lod, but for dynamic (scripted) it matters much.

finally and something i will post to the issue list to even if it's only a small dislike but has confused me and has cost me some 1 or 2 hours, the modelviewer sometimes shows a strange framerate.

example for this is the "Gelios" (former named Gul, but i liked to avoid confusion with SC's Ghoul) the large bird of prey i made, i was checking the model in the modelviewer and had a horrible low framerate attested, i was (again) punishing my head to find out what's wrong with it, until i couldn't find no reason.

so i checked the model in the game and... voila, everything was o.k, framerate when docked to earth (means including city at level high and texture animation of adverts), was above 40fps, including pilots and rotating bridge (which i removed both while looking for the reason). i know dynamic (made from bezier stuff) models never lower the framerate that drastically, no matter if it has 50'000 polys. now i wonder a bit where that comes from (low attested framerate in modelviewer) and will of course never believe that again, before i didn't tested the model in the game.

small dislike i produced myself, the pilot of the eagle vanishes much to early, but i have constant problems to find the right LOD since it's changed.

- first a radius is no diameter, means we have now the diameter that counts, but still it's named bounding_radius, a bit confusing.

(something that has me made also a bit angry, is it hard to know the difference between radius and diameter?) it was proper before imo, and i could take the models radius (really the radius) and use it for the LOD and we haven't had any information in the modelviewer about that, but wasn't needed for me, i guess i should know the size of my models, i made them 😉 i won't say that i dislike the info now, but it's named also wrong radius i.e. 14 for the eagle, but that's the diameter of the eagle i can tell this with eyes closed.

- second i can't find a proper setting, to me it looks whatever i do it's always the same and refers now only to the diameter (bounding_radius), lod_pixels hasn't much influence now. but i can be wrong, i said it looks like.

the problem i have, i had it easy to imagine how large a ship (or a part of) is in pixels before, now i'm not quite sure what lod_pixels is, i mean i know or thought i knew what it is. but now it's simplified in a kind of way i don't understand proper, i'm still assuming it represents visible pixels, but i doesn't looks like that. it looks like, i don't know, meters or something else more relative.

- third and i already posted this, i find it not very good to have the lod from the main model for the sub-model, i know it was complicated before and some might have found it hard to set the proper lod for the sub-models, but now i'm the one who can't get warm with it.

for static models (wavefront .obj) it doesn't matter much as long as you don't exchange models for each lod, but for dynamic (scripted) it matters much.

finally and something i will post to the issue list to even if it's only a small dislike but has confused me and has cost me some 1 or 2 hours, the modelviewer sometimes shows a strange framerate.

example for this is the "Gelios" (former named Gul, but i liked to avoid confusion with SC's Ghoul) the large bird of prey i made, i was checking the model in the modelviewer and had a horrible low framerate attested, i was (again) punishing my head to find out what's wrong with it, until i couldn't find no reason.

so i checked the model in the game and... voila, everything was o.k, framerate when docked to earth (means including city at level high and texture animation of adverts), was above 40fps, including pilots and rotating bridge (which i removed both while looking for the reason). i know dynamic (made from bezier stuff) models never lower the framerate that drastically, no matter if it has 50'000 polys. now i wonder a bit where that comes from (low attested framerate in modelviewer) and will of course never believe that again, before i didn't tested the model in the game.

hehe I change it to "Torvalds Spaceport" in my builds 😉 How about using OS detection . . . ? Just a thought.

nasty weather, bad WLAN connectivity, doubled posts... 😡

Its only a hommage to the creator.. 😉 There's one named after almost everyone who has helped make something. There's even one named after you 😉 But I won't tell you where it is hehe you need to get out and explore....

Ideally stars should have the original name in the description, but most of the time it was only unknown stars that were changed, theres litterally only a couple of known(famous) stars that have had their name changed.

Obviously to do it right you'd need more than that to detect the OS properly - protected calls to uname on Unix or ver on Windows, perhaps. It can be done though 🙂

of course i noticed it... it's o.k no problem, just that i would have named perhaps only a planet or such like this, but like i said, by choice, it doesn't really matters.

guess that i already think about a complete "Perry Rhodan" galaxy, perhaps in a complete german version, i would love it (a old wish of mine since FE2).

Pioneer gives me the possibility to realize such, even if i know "Moewig" publishers wouldn't like it. they stated many years ago to give no licence no more for computer games.

i don't know that's more then 20 years ago, a lot has changed since then and computergames aren't no stupid shoot 'em ups no more, maybe they would like a truthful "Perryverse", containing all historical places of the long story of perry rhodan (1964 until...). the technical level of pioneer with rather "old" hyperdrive technology fits perfect.

the places can be gathered from fansites i guess, there are many perry rhodan addicted in germany, who collected such data since the start of the series.

the difference to other such stories is that they have a straight plot since the beginning, no story that's been written under the name perry rhodan can leave this plot, past or future.

the promised update for morton's landing, to use with or without my build.

cities are placed on a continent and i'm satisfied with that so far.

[attachment=710:mortons_landing_v2.zip]

be aware that previous savegames in "morton's landing" won't show this right and will terminate the game.

still the systems seed needs some changes, i don't like "thriving outdoor world", it should be "ice and water world" or similar. but perhaps not possible in this region of the sector.

that's something i noticed to sometimes you can't get around that, no matter what seeding you use, it also depends foremost to the planet itself (life and amount of any other specified).

but i'm satisfied so far with it and it's a nice place to visit, compared to what came out in alpha9 (stupid icy rock).

That reminds me.. I should go about making my own. 🙂

custom systems are like a virus, hm?

i know it's big fun and i guess everybody of us sci-fi fanatics has loads of ideas.

sniff, can't run pioneer on a amiga...

total commander sehz n05n03...

Now that would be something to behold Gernot, but I fear at the very least, a heavily accelerated PPC equipped RTG Amiga would be needed and even then it would struggle. The poor old Motorola 68k I fear would just melt faced with such a task 🙁 It would be awesome to see a miggy run Pioneer, it would send the Amiga community nuts to see such a thing! We can still dream though! 😉

GL support in AROS is constantly improving, I wonder if it could do it...

-- robn, AROS developer 2006-2008 😉

I'm somewhat seriously considering running Pioneer on one of these...

http://www.commodoreusa.net/CUSA_Home.aspx

Everest Mountain, Himalaya...

Pioneer Alpha 10 Potsmoke66 Version.

everest good graphic shot there

i guess credits therefore goes to s20dan (?)

at least no to me 😉

a bit pointed, but NICE (i wish the alps was less eroded) looks a bit like oversized dolomite region

but yes, himalaya is as "young" as the alps, compared to flattened down old atlas.

i really liked to post a picture where you had to guess if this is himalaya or alps, because of the prayer flags in the fore and the mountains in the background, but i can't find one actually. looks like i have to make one myself 😉

start at Lhasa? or the desert Gobi? any wishes?

some slight fixes and overseen things to my build

mainly forgotten proper use of my missiles and dummy-missiles 😳

when i watched my conny clip i recognized wrong depth for the thrusters, i fixed that now