Amazing Star Engine!

[martin-w 3,372]

 

[HiFlyer 9,502]

Well, you probably won't see that coming to Xbox anytime soon......

[martin-w 3,372]

12 hours ago, HiFlyer said:

Well, you probably won't see that coming to Xbox anytime soon......

 

You will. Not the full scale MMO but the single player squadron 42. Its in the final polishing stage before release. 

[martin-w 3,372]

Squadron 42

 

 

[n4gix 5,003]

Odd how the fighter pilots are "flying" as though they are in atmosphere rather than in empty space. Also odd that the wingman makes a gratuitous barrel roll just as the re-tasking is initiated. 🤔

[martin-w 3,372]

14 hours ago, n4gix said:

Odd how the fighter pilots are "flying" as though they are in atmosphere rather than in empty space.

 

I think that kind of makes sense. Its vey much like that in Elite Dangerous. Banking and pulling onto the target maintains visibility, although some choose to yaw onto the target. The flight model provides a 100% accurate thruster model apparently. 

[DaviiB 104]

16 minutes ago, martin-w said:

 

I think that kind of makes sense. Its vey much like that in Elite Dangerous. Banking and pulling onto the target maintains visibility, although some choose to yaw onto the target. The flight model provides a 100% accurate thruster model apparently. 

Turns out, the "flying" dynamic is more fun than a realistic model.

I'm reminded of a quote from the movie (and book?) Ender's Game, where the instructor is scolding the kids. "Come on guys, this is basic rocket science!"

I doubt anyone will make a game of this scale with "realistic" physics, though it would be hilarious to watch the space battles (or lack thereof) that come out of it.

 

DB

 

[HiFlyer 9,502]

14 minutes ago, DaviiB said:

I doubt anyone will make a game of this scale with "realistic" physics, though it would be hilarious to watch the space battles (or lack thereof) that come out of it.

You could do it, but it would probably seriously limit the audience. My memory of numerous attempts with family and friends, is that even with the most patient coaching, many if not most people untrained by a childhood of Ace Combat, War thunder and etc are able to comprehend how to handle the joystick of an aircraft.

The motions are just too foreign, and the desire to put in the time and effort to learn them is small.

Realistic newtonian physics is even worse!

I have a childhood of playing "realistic" physics space games, when physics was a lower hanging fruit than graphics, to thank for learning how to rotate in three dimensions while applying appropriate force to move and stabilize purposefully.

But I wouldn't even waste my time trying to get any of my nieces and nephews interested in anything like that...

Well.....

Being fair, many space games do still allow you to turn off assists and pilot in a more "realistic" way, but people generally only use that for advantage in battle, and then deactivate the option afterwards. (Battle is one of the strongest incentives to learn something like that)

[martin-w 3,372]

2 hours ago, DaviiB said:

Turns out, the "flying" dynamic is more fun than a realistic model.

I'm reminded of a quote from the movie (and book?) Ender's Game, where the instructor is scolding the kids. "Come on guys, this is basic rocket science!"

I doubt anyone will make a game of this scale with "realistic" physics, though it would be hilarious to watch the space battles (or lack thereof) that come out of it.

 

DB

 

 

I think realistic physics would certainly work. If the thrusters are implemented correctly, it should do. Do you recall the 2004 Batlestar Galactica show? Pretty well implemented dogfights. With enough thrusters you can maneuver how you choose, augmented by the onboard computer.  

Edited November 22, 2023 by martin-w

[DaviiB 104]

6 hours ago, HiFlyer said:

I have a childhood of playing "realistic" physics space games, when physics was a lower hanging fruit than graphics, to thank for learning how to rotate in three dimensions while applying appropriate force to move and stabilize purposefully.

But I wouldn't even waste my time trying to get any of my nieces and nephews interested in anything like that...

Am I the only one who spent a good amount of time playing "Orbiter", back in the day? (It's still around).

I remember blissful hours of launching the Delta Glider into orbit, only to find out my target (usually the ISS) was on the other side of the planet once I got there.....or on a completely different orbital plane.....then figuring out how to intercept (usually days or weeks later in game time).

It was extremely satisfying to finally rendezvous and dock with the ISS, or any other vehicle.......and that was with a fictional vehicle that was very forgiving propellant-wise.

DB