SpaceSimCentral

potsmoke66 wrote:
i nnoticed since a while a empty model folder (in the mac build at least) named apollo
Opps.. my fault - that must have been left behind when I was experimenting with my apollo eagle luna lander ship. It is on a personal branch of mine, but the folder structure looks like it is still there (it is definately not in the main repo).I'll clean that up when I get home. It is safe to delete it, as it shouldn't be there.

i thought so besides, i would like to see it.is it a scriptet geometry?how do you launch the lunar lander, with a saturn? (decoupling, i think would be a problem)even when i feel personally that pioneer isn't ment to do realistic spaceflights, but as a sidetrip it's a cool idea.i have watched a clip of orbiter and i must say, no i wouldn't like it, it's to sophisticated for me.you could do a favor for me, i can't compile pioneer on my mac, due to the fact that my machine refuses to install the needed libraries and i havn't the patience to hunt that error.but i would appreciate the modelviewer in the mac build (next release) if that is possible, but i also remember that i couldn't compile the MV since a while in the windows build, perhaps you got the same problem?and please forget the issue i posted last night, i'm a idiot, i have missed the changes to the adverts* and further i took the wrong version for comparison.this has produced a big confusion. sober i'm good for nothing i guess** it's running fine now*only curiosity, no criticism, what's the purpose of the tagging for the adverts?**even a reason for my actual agression level, i hope it will change soon, because i start to dislike myself. but i will keep on staying sober it's better.yes me, the "40 year old hippie" starts to lock away his pipe - perhaps a fruit of pioneer and all of thee.

potsmoke66 wrote:
you could do a favor for me, i can't compile pioneer on my mac, due to the fact that my machine refuses to install the needed libraries and i havn't the patience to hunt that error.
It is on my list of 'things to do' with the OSX port. I need to have a rethink on how I package up the binary distro. Currently it is packaged up as a nice single .app folder, but adding the modelviewer as an .app it also needs access to the same data directory as pioneer.app.I might have to seperate the data directory out of the .app folder but that just makes it 'messy' IMHO. (I like keeping things simple).I'm currently away on business (hence why I'm quiet) but I'll have a closer look when I get back.

yet another question from "stupid" me,i've read a while ago on the issue tracker (i guess) that you don't like to get sub-models from the "sub_models" directory called for building.actually this is the case now.what i wonder now what is the reason for it?personally i feel it's a bit stupid (for me) to have models doubled, if i wan't to attach i.e. a scanner sub-model to a building.well, i can tell you why i did that, i simply copied the behave of FE2, means the little scanner build from three bezier flats you see on the ships is a scalable sub-model and appears even as the terrestrial radar in cities.as well as the buildings on the LRC are the industrial park you see in the cities, personally i think that's a clever thing.keep it short and simple, though a idiot like me can understand it [/hr]don't get angry, but i feel it all heads into a direction that in the end only "shoe-boxes" will work in pioneer.really i feel it heads to solid meshes like ".X", with matrix animations and no more dynamic use of submodels.i think, like some other changes that has happened, it's all based on the unwill of some to get comfortable with the LUA model system.a promise, if it ever comes to that point, you finally get rid of me and i will never disturb you anymore.that fear is also based on things like the absolut needless change of the UV for .obj*, this has lead (i repeat myself) that many of my models still look disranged.actually the "viper x" is destroyed and it's hull is completely transparent (if it's still there at all) th adder is still textured wrong and i can't say what else to. to me it's like someone likes to destroy all i've contributed to pioneer, please understand that such makes me a bit angry.you can tell me FACE TO FACE if you dislike me and my models, that would be far better, i don't like sly things!*well actually it is wrong now for righthanded models, but even if it would have been wrong before (which is not the case), it would have been better to left it "wrong".as example, in the very beginning of electrical engineering the current flow has been set to a given direction (assumed from positve to negative) decades later it has been made proof that the current flow is vice versa, but to avoid complications it has been left "wrong". it doesn't matteres and our computers work fine even when the layout didn't reflects the true physical situation.farther, i've been told that i have a low bus factor and that my models are unmaintainable for others, i still wait for a tangible explanation to what exactly is so complicated or unmaintainable, a reason why i opened the "let's point it out" thread here (no, it didn't belongs to the issue tracker).if no one can tell me what exactly is "wrong", sorry, then i feel this is a raid against me and nothing else.i've been also told that i'm, let's say excluded, from contributing because i don't fully participate via github or because i have no presence on the IRC channel.well, many here know me as a kind guy who likes to help beginners, i don't mind much how experienced one is in a certain thing, i'm willing to help.what i don't understand, why no one of you is interested to back up me?

potsmoke66 wrote:
i've read a while ago on the issue tracker (i guess) that you don't like to get sub-models from the "sub_models" directory called for building.
I don't recall the specifics, but I probably just didn't like its ad-hoc nature. The general concept (a library of reusable parts) is fine.
Quote:
don't get angry, but i feel it all heads into a direction that in the end only "shoe-boxes" will work in pioneer.
You continue to say that without any data to substantiate it. If you could explain why you think that perhaps I could do a better job of allaying your fears.
Quote:
really i feel it heads to solid meshes like ".X", with matrix animations and no more dynamic use of submodels.
Every other game out there manages to have beautiful models with great animations without the need to generate new geometry every frame. Why do you think a traditional pipeline won't work for Pioneer?
Quote:
i think, like some other changes that has happened, it's all based on the unwill of some to get comfortable with the LUA model system.
As I've stated repeatedly, the internals of the Lua model system is a mess. In its current form it relies on leaky GL state which makes it impossible to refactor to use the new renderer system (I spent three weeks on it; I know). The complex state transitions also make it very difficult to optimally batch geometry on the GPU, so there will always be a limitation to how much performance we can get out of the systems.If there was something truly compelling in the Lua model system we could perhaps work to keep the changes to a minimum, but so far nothing particularly unusual has been done with it and as you say, no one is willing to get comfortable with the system. Without exaggeration I can say that I turn away an interested artist every few weeks. They come in with solid knowledge of 3DS or Blender, often with experience with modelling pipelines used in common 3D engines (eg UDK or Source), and some great ideas. The moment they're told that they have to write a script to get anything done, they leave because its outside of their comfort zone.I don't want to turn these people away. They're keen, and we have an entire universe to fill - we need them. If we have a more traditional system, something that the entire games industry is familiar with, then we have a much better chance of attracting and retaining this kind of talent.
Quote:
a promise, if it ever comes to that point, you finally get rid of me and i will never disturb you anymore.
I have no desire to see you gone, but if that's what you end up choosing I would not try to persuade you otherwise.

Quote:
Without exaggeration I can say that I turn away an interested artist every few weeks. They come in with solid knowledge of 3DS or Blender, often with experience with modelling pipelines used in common 3D engines (eg UDK or Source), and some great ideas. The moment they're told that they have to write a script to get anything done, they leave because its outside of their comfort zone.
not without egoism, i would say, it let's mine look odd perhaps i know and i remember that i've said a long time ago that i'm perhaps not the best choice, therefore i loved TomM's decision for the LUA modelling system from the very start. mainly because of the closeness to FE2 and i feel personally that it offers much more as what is possible with "industrial standards".i remember TomM feared to find any modeler at all who get comfortable with it and he was more then happy to find at least one like i said before, i know it has limitations and it's true it limits the range of modelers contributing to pioneer.but on the other hand, i would say let them contribute to whatever they like, there are masses of games under development, some of the comrades of FFED3D doing actually commercial models, they have evolved a lot (compared to me, i got stuck with LUA, but i LOVE it).perhaps i'm only angry because i will vanish from the scene without pioneers LUA modeling system besides of that, if that's a fact (...turn away an interested artist every few weeks...), why don't you pipeline them to me? i could help, i would like to help.i mean if a beginner like me can handle it, what will close out a more experienced modeler? i'm pretty sure they are able at least what i'm able to.i really would like a close coop with some more experienced modelers, i could learn a lot in this way.of course i understand to, that some do professional work, freelancing or on the staff and have no interest to waist their time with LUA.i remember coolhand told me once that he isn't able to do what i do with the LUA system, i don't believe that , but for above reason it's obvious.

Quote:
i feel personally that it offers much more as what is possible with "industrial standards".
I have nothing to support and much to refute that. If you know something that that is both a) useful and b) possible with LMR that is not with a traditional pipeline, please do share!
Quote:
i remember TomM feared to find any modeler at all who get comfortable with it and he was more then happy to find at least one
At this point there's a lot more people involved than tomm, and we're all trying to build Pioneer into a real game. Having something deliberately designed to make life difficult for people just isn't going to work in the long run.
Quote:
but on the other hand, i would say let them contribute to whatever they like, there are masses of games under development, some of the comrades of FFED3D doing actually commercial models, they have evolved a lot (compared to me, i got stuck with LUA, but i LOVE it).
Sure we could say that, but they come here wanting to contribute to Pioneer. This game is the fulfilment of a dream for so many people that for years have wanted to relive their memories of Frontier. If someone has the skill and the desire to add a little bit of themselves to our game, why should they be denied?
Quote:
besides of that, if that's a fact (...turn away an interested artist every few weeks...), why don't you pipeline them to me? i could help, i would like to help.
I have directed some to your tutorials in the past. Its hard though - surely you must see that if you're used to working in a highly visual environment, having to start thinking in code could seem daunting? It doesn't matter if it actually is or not, it looks complicated, and that's enough to turn a newcomer away.
Quote:
i mean if a beginner like me can handle it, what will close out a more experienced modeler?
You underestimate your own skill. You are the person most experienced with the use of Pioneer's model system by a very large margin. The difficulty is that the skills required to drive LMR effectively aren't quite the same as those that are needed to drive a modelling package.

I'm personally a big fan of moving away from having Lua be the up-front system.Ideally you don't want to have anything outside of Max/Blender/Maya to get between an artist and the game. Having worked with quite the gamut of artists I've seen some who not only got used to our build pipelines, but then extended them with their own scripts/suggestions/tools... I've also had an artist who couldn't use our build system even after we simplified it to the point where all he had to do was double click on a ".bat" file on his desktop The simple fact is that most artists will be familiar with exporting meshes; I.e. solid meshes, with texture mapping (diffuse, normal, specular, etc) and it would be good to make it easier for them to get up and running so we can get more peoples ideas into the game.This doesn't mean that we lose the use of sub-models, there are plenty of games that manage ok with those, but even if it did it would be a minor sacrifice to get more people aboard in my opinion. I know, I know, controversial.What we could do with for models even if we stuck with the existing LMR/Lua system is a tool that makes creating, verifying and getting them into the game a LOT easier. Possibly even generates the Lua for you, lets you select models and sub-models from a list - positioning and all. What you eventually end up with though is going to look a lot like a full 3D editor.The way forward, and I bet it's what the people on FFED3D found as well, is that meshes are better from just about every possible viewpoint. They can be better animated, textured, are easier to create and so open up that creation to more people and you can still have sub-models, plus there are massive performance benefits. Even better than that though, those sub-models aren't there because of a script which decides if they're attached or not, but are instead added as sub-objects in the game - that means you could blow the antenna off if we wanted! Visually as well as in the game logic.Gernot, I find these arguments against moving towards meshes to be weird. Whenever I've given an artist bigger textures, a higher polygon budget, easier animations and simplifed getting their work into a game... they're generally really happy rather than threaten to quit

ok, that's a argumentstill i would miss it it's not that i'm completly against solid meshes, i only FEEL it will limit things a bit.because, certain things like real dynamic changes of a mesh arn't easy possible, as example the wiggling tail of the "Turner Class".yes, it can be done i know, you can animate a vertex group of course to do such, but 1st you need a fitting game engine, 2nd a fitting file format, 3rd i'm not sure if this is really better as a animated bezier in a scripted geometry.besides all of that, making models with 4LOD's with meshes needs to make 4 meshes, while the scripted geometry has it's divisions set by the LOD and you don't have to care for such.nostalgic? certainly yes i guess i can get comfortable with whatever modeling system, i mean i've hacked them as example for FFED3D to make some stuff appear in the way i like or to work around some limits given by XNA (dx6 or 7 i guess) dreamzz used to create his wrapper.and i said that before, i really feel i'm not good enough to compete with guys like coolhand or solcommand. perhaps i shouldn't idolise them that much but....i know its egoism of me, because i know as long as we have the LUA models i havn't much competitors. btw, underestimating isn't a bad thing, no?at least better rather the opposite (yes, it can be a handicap, no one has to tell me that, that's why i'm only a construction worker, only helper often and perhaps one reason why i'm still unemployed, or why i never made a cent with my artworks at all, i'm not good in selling myself. sometimes this simply lets me think i'm not good enough, i can't help, it's me. i remeber i presented some of my paintings to a artist in the netherlands and he enforced me to do more and that he can see i could get some out of it, but i'm still not convinced. i guess i'm cowardice one could say. farther every "i don't like it", which is common and i have to expect such, tears me down ten times more rather a compliment could upright me).argh, it's shitty to have a inferiority complex, you get nowhere and often useless agressive...

ok, i found out why i couldn't get it running properly now.yes, i remember i've read such on the issue tracker (i guess), you removed the .mtl parameter.very rarely used and never fully supported anyway.i know that i'm by myself often recommended not to use it, but actually i don't know if it's good or not i guess good, since it never was fully supported, i only stumbled over that.on the other hand...it's not that bad, i mean perhaps i would have liked it if it would have been fully supported.of course this means that the same texture will get used for all LOD's, but anyway you have to restrict them from LOD1 and make a different mesh for LOD1 at least, else you get a remarkable performance hit. farther i stopped since a long time to use different sized textures, this since we have mip-mapping and i have been told that it's as good as to use different sized textures (right?).still a voice in the back of my head is telling me that it perhaps might be still clever to use a very basic small texture for LOD2 instead of the full sized sheet.e.g. like what you've got in many games, a little "box" on which you plaster a "lookalike" texture (like a shot from each side of the model).though i'm a little torn... was it good or not anyway it's fact now and i'm happy that i found the reason at all. [/hr]not without to squeeze a little tear out of the corner of my eye, i think it's not a complete bad idea to give up the scripted geometry.but if you do so, do it quick and painless :mrgreen:that would mean some models won't work anymore, actually since my PC isn't running yet i'm not able to make quick conversions of the scripted models, else it would be no problem to snapshot them with OGLE.

potsmoke66 wrote:
yes, i remember i've read such on the issue tracker (i guess), you removed the .mtl parameter.very rarely used and never fully supported anyway.
Not sure exactly what you're referring to, but nothing has been deliberately removed from LMR for a long time (if ever). If you could point me to the issue or post where you read that this was changed I can investigate it and see if a bug has been introduced somewhere.

Quote:
since my PC isn't running yet i'm not able to make quick conversions of the scripted models, else it would be no problem to snapshot them with OGLE.
Potsmoke, would you please elaborate a bit on this? A Google search didn't turn up anything useful.As you know, I'm trying to detail Philby's pad station. Your help with the lod and collision mesh has been invaluable. I had to put it aside for a while, and now that I've started to work on it again my mind is a bit boggled. I look at it and think, "What the hell was I doing?" I've got a collision mesh for the tower that's a little bit simpler than the one you did for me, but trying to do a simple mesh for the pad has been slow going. I'm not a programmer, so I guess that's my problem. I've never really gotten into a CAD program either. I can draw and paint fairly well but doing things on a computer is a major learning curve for me whichever way I'm going to do it. I'm inferring that OGLE is a way to convert a scripted model to CAD, am I right? That could be very useful. I'm planning to download Blender once I get my newer computer, probably early next week. I don't know whether I'll be using lua or CAD in the future, but I do want to continue contributing to Pioneer. Both forms of modeling can coexist within the game, I think.

OGLE is a tool to capture geometry from an OpenGL program by intercepting it on its way to the graphics card and saving the data out. Its very much a reverse-engineering technique, so you'll need to do some cleaning and fixing of the data you get this way.[url]http://ogle.eyebeamresearch.org/[/url] appears to be down, so I'm not sure where to get it from. There's a little bit more information here though: [url]http://eyebeam.org/projects/ogle[/url] think it unlikely that Pioneer will have both a scripted and a traditional model system at the same time. It might have been a possibility if LMR wasn't such a damn mess, but as I keep saying, it needs something approximating a rewrite. There's no interest in doing that, so it will likely be removed once the new system is done.We may still keep some kind of scripted model system around to support things like procedurally-generated geometry (eg buildings), but if it does happen it will likely have quite a limited/focused scope. It most certainly will not have the ability to regenerate geometry each frame (ie the dynamic function).We of course won't be replacing the current system until we have converted or replaced enough models. It would be rather foolish to release a space game with no ships in it Its also worth noting that its likely going to take months before this is ready for use, so the existing system will be a part of our lives for a good while yet.

@robni guess it's no bug, it's only that i had a sub-model (unreleased you ca say) which still used the .mtl lib, i thought really you (or else of the dev.) must have removed the support for it completely. that's also because (i don't quite remember which issue, but i think it was in conjunction with the new buildings) i have read that you will remove it, or at least that it isn't wise to use it because you can't restrict textures from the collision mesh then if there is no special collision mesh. anyway i also recommended always not to use it, because of the above described problem and that if you can't specify a material in the .mtl lib it din't makes much sense only for textures (yes you could once specify a material, two years ago, but i recognized a problem with that, the material appeared inconsistant, means in different colors from different angles, tomm or j.j. must have removed it then).@marceli think as a precaution i uploaded at least the handy GLXtractor to SSC, which is a frontend to OGLE (ogle is hard to setup if you don't know exactly what's behind. i see it as little risk for copyright infringement* if you can snapshot a mesh from any Open GL program),anyway if you once have downloaded and installed OGLE, you can use GLXtractor to let it do the job for you.*but we don't like to rip for sure i will search for the link(s)further OGLE is also available on the page from ETH zürich (eigenössische technische hochschule, zürich)it's a cool tool imo, i extracted once a whole scene from pioneer, you can later watch or render the scene in blender from any angle or position.on the other hand, i cant tell you what OGLE will change on your OS, it's at least a violation of Open GL.

and marcel, in the case for the groundstation "beam" it to me, i will throw a eye on it and this time comment what and why i did this or that.

"was'n das?" (what is that good for? not ment as criticism)[attachment=1169:Bildschirmfoto 2012-04-20 um 17.44.23.png]well, i have some idea, but shouldn't there be a 100% too?

"well, i have some idea, but shouldn't there be a 100% too?"Read manual. Explains it well.Now that's a criticism.

potsmoke66 wrote:
shouldn't there be a 100% too?
Wouldn't be a low thrust power level if it was full thrust, would it? (-:

oh yes, manuals.i guess the last manual i have read was SimEarth's, 300 pages and the author stated that he didn't know why he wrote it, it won't get read anyway. that's not true.i must have read a lot of them, but usually i play and if i encounter a problem then i start to read.that was a bit different for FE2, but it was fun to read (and even simearth's manual was fun to read and a source of knowledge).without RRT2's manual i wouldn't have been able to make the missions of course (else i played the original many years before, so i knew the game).i had books filled with "manuals", from my daddy, such as "ich sag dir alles", or "wie funktioniert das", back from the 50's.there was manuals in it how to plaster a street, or how a lathe works, how a orchestra is scored, what size a soccerfield is, ... and, and, and.and sometimes on the throne i read manuals of all kind, this since childhood do we have a lecture which i can take to the throne?and if you ever think i have confusion in mind, now you know why
Quote:
Wouldn't be a low thrust power level if it was full thrust, would it? (-:
still i don't know what's the purpose of it.ok, perhaps i can't imagine why i should use 50% power, i mean i never drove my motorcycle at 50%, vice versa i would say, at 150% [/hr]to sad not all of you can read german i found a "manual" for "Staats- Stadt- Haus- und Landwirthschaft" from the 18th/19th century.when i start to read it i knew where "old shatterhand" has it's knowledge from.anyway here's the linkhttp://kruenitz1.uni-trier.de/it's a must read imo.and for those who can't read german, well they can have at least a good laugh from the pictures in ithttp://kruenitz1.uni-trier.de/postkarten/kruenitz_pk.htmli like this one especiallythis ones of special interest for us