Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

On Fri, 11 May 2007, Martin Spott wrote: > Gene Buckle wrote: > > > Horsepucky. Combat in Flight Gear would _never_ be a "shoot-em game". > > Virtual != Real. EVER. If your little linoleum lizard can't understand > > that, it's YOUR fault. Don't nanny-state me because you can't grow a > > pair

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

On Friday 11 May 2007 10:28, Gene Buckle wrote: > Banned? BANNED?! Good luck with that. > > If this wasn't involving a _simulator_, I might be inclined to agree with > you. However, it's a bloody _game_. Things that go *boom* in games are > typically pretty cool. While development over the pas

[Flightgear-devel] More A-10 updates - replace previous broken diff file

hi, Sorry for the previous malformed diff file. Description Cleaning, less properties spawned everywhere, a few bugs corrected, cosmetics. in the attached tarball A-10-diff-20070512.tgz: A-10-20070512.diff (made from $FGROOT/Aircraft/A-10 Nasal/A-10-fuel.nas (new file) to be deleted: $FGR

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Latest OT/OSG/SG/FG unusable

Georg Vollnhals schrieb: > gh.robin schrieb: > >>> >>> >> Hello Georg, >> >> Because, i have a lot of backup (SG/FG/OSG) , i did rebuilt FG with an >> older >> OSG (10-04-2007) i had kept. >> >> Not from a new download >> >> >> The best, i guess, for you is to download from my U

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

On Fri, 11 May 2007 21:58:50 + (UTC) Martin Spott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gene Buckle wrote: > > > Horsepucky. Combat in Flight Gear would _never_ be a "shoot-em game". > > Virtual != Real. EVER. If your little linoleum lizard can't understand > > that, it's YOUR fault. Don't nanny-s

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Fly-by view mode

On 5/11/07, Curtis Olson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: For those that haven't found it yet, the new "fly-by" view in the CVS version of FlightGear is *really* cool! I find it difficult to fly real time using it, but if you are on autopilot it is nice. Also, it is really neat for watching takeoffs

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Latest OT/OSG/SG/FG unusable

gh.robin schrieb: >> > Hello Georg, > > Because, i have a lot of backup (SG/FG/OSG) , i did rebuilt FG with an > older > OSG (10-04-2007) i had kept. > > Not from a new download > > > The best, i guess, for you is to download from my URL the sources. > > I have built a tar.gz file which

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

Gene Buckle wrote: > Horsepucky. Combat in Flight Gear would _never_ be a "shoot-em game". > Virtual != Real. EVER. If your little linoleum lizard can't understand > that, it's YOUR fault. Don't nanny-state me because you can't grow a > pair. Hey, thanks for providing such a nice occasion to

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Latest OT/OSG/SG/FG unusable

On Fri 11 May 2007 22:30, Georg Vollnhals wrote: > gh.robin schrieb: > > Again, > > After many research, i have found an OSG svn/cvs version which suit to > > me, good frame rate close to that one i get with plib (plib with 3D > > clouds and shadow). > > > > That version is dated 10-04-2007. >

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

James Palmer schrieb: > I'm sorry if I've hit a sore spot with some by bringing up dogfighting > development. > I still intend to investigate the possibility more, but I will completely > make the capability an "opt-in" type. > I'm thinking along the lines of a 3 command line option set. (see only

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Fly-by view mode

OpenAL has it's own coordinate system. There are two issues to think about. 1. it makes no sense physically to hear cockpit sounds from the external views, yet we probably want that to happen, but the 3d nature of openal makes this a bit "interesting". 2. openal has a 3d world coordinate system

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Fly-by view mode

* Curtis Olson -- Friday 11 May 2007: > For those that haven't found it yet, the new "fly-by" view [...] Unfortunately, it makes obvious that the OpenAL spatial sound wasn't properly finished. The listener position is just not right, and I assume it is this simplification in main.cxx: // Righ

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Latest OT/OSG/SG/FG unusable

gh.robin schrieb: > Again, > After many research, i have found an OSG svn/cvs version which suit to me, > good frame rate close to that one i get with plib (plib with 3D clouds and > shadow). > > That version is dated 10-04-2007. > > Regards > > Hi Gérard, as my OSG framerate has dropped

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

I'm sorry if I've hit a sore spot with some by bringing up dogfighting development. I still intend to investigate the possibility more, but I will completely make the capability an "opt-in" type. I'm thinking along the lines of a 3 command line option set. (see only non-dogfighters, see only dogf

[Flightgear-devel] FG air combat thoughts

I enjoy air combat sims. Adding air combat functionality to FG multiplayer is an interesting prospect, but it's not everyone's cup of tea. Personally I'd like the option, but I'd also like to exempt myself when not in the mood. I've been thinking about it for the last day or so, and here are a f

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Latest OT/OSG/SG/FG unusable

On Fri 11 May 2007 15:28, Csaba Halász wrote: > On 5/10/07, Nick Warne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I am surprised nobody using CVS/SVN FG/SG/OSG reports this issue (or > > replied to this) - there was a lot of chatter about it in IRC. > > The OSG SVN from last friday works for me as usual (with

[Flightgear-devel] Fly-by view mode

For those that haven't found it yet, the new "fly-by" view in the CVS version of FlightGear is *really* cool! I find it difficult to fly real time using it, but if you are on autopilot it is nice. Also, it is really neat for watching takeoffs, landings, and other maneuvering in replay mode. Defi

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

> > I heavily doubt. The simple fact that already these small kids are so > > much influenced by depiction of war/crime, that they consider taking > > the flute for a rifle (even resp. especially if it's just a game) as > > common practice, should scare us - and certainly this doesn't justify > > t

[Flightgear-devel] More A-10 updates

hi, Another round of cleaning, less properties spawned every where, a few bugs corrected, cosmetics. attached are: A-10-20070511.diff A-10-fuel.nas (goes in A-10/Nasal repertory) to be removed from CVS: A-10/Nasal/aar.nas thanks, Alexis # Properties under /consumables/fuel/tank[n

[Flightgear-devel] Small request about sound in Flightgear

Hi, I deployed huge efforts to simulate an A-10 with stopped engines at start up. The effect is quite good after the execution of all needed Nasal: gauges to zero, no electrical power, no engine sound. But all of this doesn't exist when FG starts up. The consequence is a huge engine noise at

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

On 5/11/07, Martin Spott wrote: As a little add-on we could ask ourselves if associating a flute with "bang, bang" is really something that relies on our genes I heavily doubt. The simple fact that already these small kids are so much influenced by depiction of war/crime, that they conside

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

"Vivian Meazza" wrote: > Well, as the Irish would say, if you want to get there, you don't want to > start here. Good luck. And if you want to see how much work would be > involved, compare that task with the cutover to osg - now 6 months old and > nowhere near completion. Indeed, implementing th

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

Well, as the Irish would say, if you want to get there, you don't want to start here. Good luck. And if you want to see how much work would be involved, compare that task with the cutover to osg - now 6 months old and nowhere near completion. Vivian -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTEC

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

Hi James, but how do I explain to my daughters, that suddenly one of the circling planes disappears? Periodically! And from the other point of view: -A combat-player probably would not like to decide each time, if the aircraft on the radar is in the civilian mode or in the dogfight mode. -Two ca

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Radar improvement

Melchior > > * Vivian Meazza -- Thursday 10 May 2007: > > I discussed the improved radar with Melchior, he is very > reluctant to > > include it because it is plib only. > > Yes, I said that I wouldn't like to commit plib-only > features. It's ok to have new features in fg/osg that aren't >

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

"Curtis Olson" wrote: [... kids saying bang, bang, bang ...] > So I think we can debate nature vs. nurture all day long, but at some level, > wanting to make things explode and enjoying it when they do ... is in our, > uhhh ... genes (sorrry about that Gene) :-) no matter how hard we try to > deny

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

Gene Buckle wrote: [... lots of stuff ...] As I already said in an earlier posting: "I'm not certain if it's really the kids we have to fear. I guess some grown-ups that are going wild are much worse !" I fear there's not much to add :-/ Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

> > Right. Online combat and Chess have two things in common. First, they're > > both forms of one on one combat and secondly, nobody ever dies from > > either. Actually, online combat would be safer than Chess I think. You'd > > never have to worry about playing some nutjob that just might try

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

On 5/11/07, Gene Buckle wrote: Right. Online combat and Chess have two things in common. First, they're both forms of one on one combat and secondly, nobody ever dies from either. Actually, online combat would be safer than Chess I think. You'd never have to worry about playing some nutjob th

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

> thing a 2 year old boy is going to do the first time he sees some longish > rigid toy to play with ... of course he's going to pick it up and point it > an someone and say bang, bang, bang. > Give 'em a P90. They're kid sized. :) (See Gunslinger Girls) > So I think we can debate nature vs. nur

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

On 5/11/07, Gene Buckle wrote: If this wasn't involving a _simulator_, I might be inclined to agree with you. However, it's a bloody _game_. Things that go *boom* in games are typically pretty cool. (unless you're against the unfair exploitation and destruction of things that don't exist) Th

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

> > Suggested Solution #1 - DFMP is server driven and server coordinated: > > The dogfighting MP (DFMP) should be server driven (thanks to Lethe for the > > insight into this direction) and server coordinated. ?Clients should send > > user input information to the server and let the server calculat

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

> I am one of those who are not enthusiastic about adding weapons to > FlightGear. However, if combat capability is added, I think we would > need to limit its scope. > The only limit that should be in place would be a client control that would ignore physical effects and would not display visual

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Latest OT/OSG/SG/FG unusable

On 5/10/07, Nick Warne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I am surprised nobody using CVS/SVN FG/SG/OSG reports this issue (or replied > to this) - there was a lot of chatter about it in IRC. The OSG SVN from last friday works for me as usual (with SG/FG CVS from the same time). I have given the exact

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

_ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of James Palmer Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 8:06 AM To: FlightGear developers discussions Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting Thanks to all for the input... the collaboration of many is what makes FG

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

Thanks to all for the input... the collaboration of many is what makes FG so great in my opinion. I still plan to eventually add some sort of dogfighting capability, HOWEVER,... I plan to start in the area detailed by this document

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Radar improvement

* Vivian Meazza -- Thursday 10 May 2007: > I discussed the improved radar with Melchior, he is very reluctant > to include it because it is plib only. Yes, I said that I wouldn't like to commit plib-only features. It's ok to have new features in fg/osg that aren't backported to fg/plib, but the ot

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

Detlef Faber > > > Am Donnerstag, den 10.05.2007, 23:55 +0200 schrieb Maik Justus: > > Hi, > > > > what's about using separate server(s) (not connected to the > > "classical" servers) for the dogfight mode? If you log on a > > "classical" server, you would have no dogfight capability. > > >

[Flightgear-devel] [BUG] FGplib - Animations - Scale

The scale animation appears to have a bug when applied to submodels. The scaling is applied to a group of submodels, then when the first of the group's life expires, the scale animation is reset and applied to the next group. The tag might be expected to resolve this issue, but doesn't. The scal

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

Am Donnerstag, den 10.05.2007, 23:55 +0200 schrieb Maik Justus: > Hi, > > what's about using separate server(s) (not connected to the > "classical" servers) for the dogfight mode? If you log on a > "classical" server, you would have no dogfight capability. > > Maik I'd agree to seperate the "com

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

Holger Wirtz wrote > after reading this thread I also want to drop some words: > First I thaught dogfight would be nice. Ok, there will ever > be cheaters and people who cannot differentiate between > simple "fun" playing and the real world. But I think this is > not the problem of FlightGear