plib-devel

[Plib-devel] RE: human perceptual system

[tjones <tj...@is...>]

Steve Wrote:
> The nature of the human perceptual system doesn`t change.  If the =
terrain
> doesn`t have enough visual cue`s for the speed you are travelling - =
then
> your brain will mentally adjust the speed downwards.
>=20
> I absolutely guarantee that you`d find one of our F16 flight sims more
> exciting than any computer game you`ve ever played.  You come out of
> the cab sweating, with wobbly legs - and adrenalin pumping.  Realism
> rocks!
>=20
> We have to *carefully* engineer our scenery to ensure that we have =
enough
> cue`s (rocks, trees, buildings) per square mile to ensure that the =
amount
> of this "optical flow" is sufficient for the speed and altitude of the
> aircraft.
>=20
> This is hard to explain - but have you ever noticed that some cars =
`feel`
> faster than others?  When I`m driving my wife`s miniVan, I continually =
find
> that I`m driving faster than I should...it just `feels slower than it =
is`.
> That`s because it has a high driving position - which puts you higher =
above
> the terrain - which makes the small details of the road seem smaller =
(perspective)
> and hence reduces optical flow.


Well there is 2 things I would like to say, the first being that realism =
is great, but keep in mind real-life is not always that fun.=20

Okey back to the point, I know exacly what steve is saying, I don't play =
space sims for that reason. They always feel slow and borring, nothing =
to compare your speed with. If your in a bus doing 50mps and you throw =
an apple in the air does the apple look like its moving 50mps. If you =
are on the bus no.=20
There has to be something to compare with, I had the chance to fly a =
little airplane and it felt really slow at 4000ft, but only to find out =
that we where moving at 200mps, but if I was doing that speed in my car, =
I can garranty that my passiongers would be crying.=20

There is only one game that I can think of off-hand that give you an =
idea that your moving fast, and thats star-wars (the new nes64 racing =
game), there are lots of queues for your brain, the ground is blurrie =
cause it moving so fast and everyting around you is moving fast. Give =
you that !!!WOW!!! i am moving feeling. Or need for speed, gives you a =
good idea about it too.

Later Ben

Re: [Plib-devel] Mario Kart Like Game

[Brian N. <ze...@on...>]

Incidentally, I think the "scaled down" version that Christian is talking about
is usually called "pitch and putt" in the USA.  Each hole is less than 100 yards
(or 100 meters if that works for you), and you usually only play with a wedge and
a putter.

Miniature golf, a.k.a. Crazy Golf, Adventure Golf, or Putt-Putt, is exactly what
Steve described.

It's funny that this came up, because I had actually considered doing a golf-related
game, but I hadn't decided whether to do something along the lines of mini golf, or
something more similar to real golf, along the lines of Mario Golf.

-Brian

On Sun, 13 Aug 2000, Steve Baker wrote:

> Christian Mayer wrote:
> > 
> > Steve Baker wrote:
> > >
> > > ...MarioGolf - well, my Son (Oliver) has been interested in a 3D minigolf game
> > Hm you called it crazy golf in an other mail, so I'm a bit confused.
> > In Germany we've only got 'Minigolf' (small artificial tracks) that was
> > called crazy golf in England (Brighton). The English minigolf (real golf
> > just scaled down) isn't really known in Germany (at least in the part
> > where I live).
> 
> Crazy-golf - you play with just a putter around short courses that are
> full of silly traps and tubes that you have to hit the ball through.
> For example, on our local course there is a 15 foot tall monkey - you
> have to hit the ball up a ramp and into his mouth - but you have to
> time it just right because his hand is motorized and keeps getting
> in the way.
> 
> No special rules - it's just fun.
> 
> > > ...MarioParty
> > 
> > I've never heard of that. What's it about?
> 
> Imagine a computerised board game where you roll dice to move.
> Landing on certain squares takes you off to play certain *simple*
> 3D games for which you can earn money or collect useful bonuses.
> 
> Mario Party is a collection of perhaps 50 or 60 really simple 3D
> games linked by the board game.
> 
> The games are things like rowing a boat in a race by quickly
> wiggling the joystick left and right - or there is a field
> with about 30 sheep in it that are running around quite
> quickly - and you have to count them (pressing one button
> to increment your count and another to decrement it) - or
> there is a turntable spinning and your character is running
> around trying to pick up coins while fighting the centrifugal
> effect.
> 
> 

[Plib-devel] [Fwd: [FGFS-Devel] DON'T PANIC ?]

[<Va...@t-...>]

Hello PLIB developers!

Perhaps you do know that FGFS (which uses PLIB) has a booth at the San
Jose Linux World Expo.

We need desperately people who can help a bit at the booth. Wouldn't
this be a good chance to show to the world what PLIB is capable of?

So could you please mail Alex (ale...@qm...) if you are interested
in helping a bit - at least for a short time (I understood that you get
free entry).

I'm sure that you can help, even when you aren't *the* FGFS
hardcore-user.

The original message is attached.

CU,
Christian

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [FGFS-Devel] DON'T PANIC ?
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 14:13:46 -0700
From: Alex Perry <ale...@qm...>
Reply-To: fgf...@fl...
To: "'fgf...@fl...'" <fgf...@fl...>
CC: "'cu...@fl...'" <cu...@fl...>

The GOOD NEWS is that we have a booth
at the San Jose Linux World Expo.

The BAD NEWS is that we have the _best_
location of _any_ of the non-profit 
organizations.  Our location is much
better than Debian, or FSF, or LDP, etc...

(1) We desperately need people to man the booth.
Expo show hours are 10am-6pm Tue and Wed,
and 10am-2pm Thu this week.  If you know
anybody who might be able to make it,
please LET THEM KNOW ABOUT THIS.
They need to send me e-mail, so I can
create badges (if they don't have them).

(2) We have a 10 ft wide by 8 ft high
rear wall, which is currently mostly empty.
There is also a side wall of similar area.
All I have, so far, is four color pictures
in "letter" (approx A4) size and a copy
of the handout in double that size.

I also have about a thousand business card
size reminders that people can take away.
Note that this covers 5% of attendees, max.

They expect about 20,000 people to attend.
Based on the show map, I expect about a
quarter of them to walk though the door
which faces directly into our booth.

*** HELP!

Alex.


--
Please visit the FGFS web page:  http://www.flightgear.org
For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message
to
"fgf...@fl..." with a single line of text: "help".

Re: [Plib-devel] Mario Kart Like Game

[Steve B. <sjb...@ai...>]

Christian Mayer wrote:
> 
> Steve Baker wrote:
> >
> > ...MarioGolf - well, my Son (Oliver) has been interested in a 3D minigolf game
> Hm you called it crazy golf in an other mail, so I'm a bit confused.
> In Germany we've only got 'Minigolf' (small artificial tracks) that was
> called crazy golf in England (Brighton). The English minigolf (real golf
> just scaled down) isn't really known in Germany (at least in the part
> where I live).

Crazy-golf - you play with just a putter around short courses that are
full of silly traps and tubes that you have to hit the ball through.
For example, on our local course there is a 15 foot tall monkey - you
have to hit the ball up a ramp and into his mouth - but you have to
time it just right because his hand is motorized and keeps getting
in the way.

No special rules - it's just fun.

> > ...MarioParty
> 
> I've never heard of that. What's it about?

Imagine a computerised board game where you roll dice to move.
Landing on certain squares takes you off to play certain *simple*
3D games for which you can earn money or collect useful bonuses.

Mario Party is a collection of perhaps 50 or 60 really simple 3D
games linked by the board game.

The games are things like rowing a boat in a race by quickly
wiggling the joystick left and right - or there is a field
with about 30 sheep in it that are running around quite
quickly - and you have to count them (pressing one button
to increment your count and another to decrement it) - or
there is a turntable spinning and your character is running
around trying to pick up coins while fighting the centrifugal
effect.

-- 
Steve Baker   HomeEmail: <sjb...@ai...>
              WorkEmail: <sj...@li...>
              HomePage : http://web2.airmail.net/sjbaker1
              Projects : http://plib.sourceforge.net
                         http://tuxaqfh.sourceforge.net
                         http://tuxkart.sourceforge.net
                         http://prettypoly.sourceforge.net

Re: [Plib-devel] Zelda 64 Reply

[<Va...@t-...>]

> tjones wrote:
> 
> Basicly is like mario64 except you have a sword and shield, you travel
> around searching for jems in different areas of the world. Then after
> you have thoughs you travel back and forth in time, solving different
> problems, you can go into dungions and things like that, but you can
> also stay in town, play games and win things, help people around the
> town and get rewards.

IIRC it's a role playing game.

Ben, did you have a look at Majik3d (http://www.majik3d.org)? THey are
trying to build a RPG. It was even based on PLIB, but they are now using
a different graphics engine (dunno about the rest though).

The only pitty is that they've gone closed source now (it was GPL) and
that they are hardly accepting any new coder - but they are still
looking for artists et al.

CU,
Christian

PS: Is there still a Majik3d developer on the list? Could you please
comment on the involvement of PLIB in the future releases?

Re: [Plib-devel] Mario Kart Like Game

[<Va...@t-...>]

Steve Baker wrote:
> 
> ...MarioGolf - well, my Son (Oliver) has been interested in a 3D minigolf game 
Hm you called it crazy golf in an other mail, so I'm a bit confused. 
In Germany we've only got 'Minigolf' (small artificial tracks) that was
called crazy golf in England (Brighton). The English minigolf (real golf
just scaled down) isn't really known in Germany (at least in the part
where I live).

So is the name for the golf with the small artificial tracks in english
spoken coutries allways crazy golf or can it also be minigolf. Are there
some sort of rules (England vs. America)?

> ...MarioParty 

I've never heard of that. What's it about?

CU,
Christian

Re: [Plib-devel] Re: KobayashiMaru & plib

[Steve B. <sjb...@ai...>]

Alexander Rawass wrote:

> > > An actionbased flightsim doesn't need realism or accuracy
> > > at that high rates of speed.
> >
> > (Remember that I design flight simulators for a living - and
> > get paid six figures to do it - and now I'm telling you...)
> >
> >           You couldn't be more wrong.
> 
> Maybe we have a misunderstanding there.
> 
> What flight simulators do you program?
> 
> a) REAL flight simulators used to train pilots in military in civile
> b) good PC-Flight Simulators that I could buy
> c) action-based PC-'Flight'-Simulators

(a) Yes - mostly military fighters - F16's and F18's - but also
    attack helicopters, Stealth Fighter and F22.

(b) Yes - but only if you have $10M to spare!

(c) No - although I did write an arcade game flight sim (which happened
    to run on a PC) - I'll tell you more about that at the end of this email.
 
> if you're in a), I think you can't understand from what I mean, cause I
> will be doing c) with reality being stripped of like in those games.

The nature of the human perceptual system doesn't change.  If the terrain
doesn't have enough visual cue's for the speed you are travelling - then
your brain will mentally adjust the speed downwards.

I absolutely guarantee that you'd find one of our F16 flight sims more
exciting than any computer game you've ever played.  You come out of
the cab sweating, with wobbly legs - and adrenalin pumping.  Realism
rocks!

We have to *carefully* engineer our scenery to ensure that we have enough
cue's (rocks, trees, buildings) per square mile to ensure that the amount
of this "optical flow" is sufficient for the speed and altitude of the
aircraft.

This is hard to explain - but have you ever noticed that some cars 'feel'
faster than others?  When I'm driving my wife's miniVan, I continually find
that I'm driving faster than I should...it just 'feels slower than it is'.
That's because it has a high driving position - which puts you higher above
the terrain - which makes the small details of the road seem smaller (perspective)
and hence reduces optical flow.

That's why driving 60mph in a Porche seems so much more exciting than the same
speed in a school bus.

GoKarts (at just 15 to 20 mph) are amazingly good fun to drive.  A Porche at
the same speed is BORING!

...optical flow!

> > > Actually, we're not flying that fast, exept for hyperspace.
> > > A normal starfighter makes 1km in 10secs
> >
> > 360kph?  The Cessna's in FlightGear go faster than *that*!
> >
> > A 1970's F16 fighter can go about 5 times that speed.
> >
> > The space shuttle (when in orbit) has to orbit the earth ever 72 minutes.
> 
> Thats the point. I'n not going into realism. You'll be amazed how
> fast galaxies will rotate in the distance, and you'll maybe even see the
> rotation of planets - NO REALISM. Dump it.

Fine - but you said:

>>> You'll wonder how slow 'several times the speed of sound'
>>> can be in an action-type based game.

So I naturally assumed your planes would be a LITTLE more speedy
than a 30 year old prop-driven light aircraft!

Let me tell you two L-O-N-G (but hopefully instructive) TRUE stories:

You remind me of when I was working on a flight simulator *arcade* game
at Rediffusion about 9 years ago.  Because our management didn't think that
we "realism" fanatics could produce an exciting game, they paid Lucas Arts
(the StarWars guys) a small fortune to get one of their game design "experts"
to work with us as a consultant on "action and excitement".  I *hate* working
with consultants.

When he visited, I had just gotten the enemy aircraft "AI" working, and you
could dogfight with the other aircraft.  There was a problem (that I was
aware of) that the other planes were trying *too hard* to get away from
us - so they tended to always be rather further away than I'd like.

Mr Fox (the Lucas Arts guy) told us that the enemy planes (which happened
to be 'stealth fighters') were "too small".  I told him that they were EXACTLY
the right size for stealth fighters - but perhaps just a little too far away,
and he said that I was too hung up on realism and that he wanted more ACTION - so
bigger planes please.  We made the enemy planes 10% larger - then 50% larger - and
eventually TWICE the size of real stealth fighters.

Now this Fox guy (I forget his first name) said that the planes looked
about the right size - but why had I made them fly so slowly?  Once again,
I pointed out that these planes were flying at the EXACT correct speed for
a Stealth Fighter - and the REASON they appeared to be so slow was that they
were so huge that they traversed their own length (2x real size) in half the
amount of time that a real stealth fighter traverses it's own length. That's
why when you look up at a 747, travelling at half the speed of sound, it
looks like it's standing still. (Can you say "Optical Flow"?)

He insisted. I refused. He went to my managers - I got into a lot of trouble,
they said that he was the expert on excitement - and that I shouldn't get
hung up on this realism thing.  So I reluctantly doubled the speed of the
stealth fighters as instructed - and went home for the night.

As a result, the AI algorithms were able to fly the planes MUCH faster than
before - so they naturally ended up further away from the eye.

Fox comes in the next day - and flies into a total rage - telling my management
that not only had I slowed the planes down again in flagrant disregard for him
and management instructions - but I'd ALSO reduced them back to their original
size.  I got into MUCH more trouble - I tried to explain that I understood why
this was happening - but nobody would listen.  The aircraft sizes were doubled
AGAIN (so we now have fighters the size of jumbo-jets) - and then the speeds
were doubled AGAIN (so they are now flying at about mach 10 or so).

Now, Mr Fox turned his attention to the terrain.  Why had we modelled everything
so SMALL?  Well, of course everything was the correct size - but at Mach 10
and with fighters the size of jumbo's...the terrain did look pretty small.

It's that 'optical flow' thing...right?

Eventually, I came in late one night and changed the AI code so that the enemy
planes DELIBERATELY flew right in front of you - as close as they could
manage without you crashing into them or losing them in sharp turns.  I
restored the sizes and speeds to the real aircraft values - and everything
was fine.  Fox went back to California - convinced that he'd taught these
British 'realism freaks' a thing or two - and never knowing that the planes
were the exact size and speed that we'd originally had them and that we had
not in fact changed the scenery AT ALL.

*We* knew that SPATIAL/TEMPORAL realism was worth the effort.  What needed
to be changed was what went on in the heads of the other pilots.  The way
to make the player feel like a superhero is to make all the bad guys act
like klutzes.  My AI code ended up with the computer players TRYING to
get shot down by deliberately getting in front of the player and slowing
down.  Nobody ever noticed that they did that.  Everyone thought that they
were flying *SO* well!

If KJ is listening to this list still (I think he is) - he'll back me up on
that story.  Mr Fox was kinda infamous!

Trust me, flying in a realistic F16 is **WAY** more exciting than any video
game!  Fly one of our USAF sims - and you'll come out shaking and with white
knuckles.

I have a belief that in 3D (games or not), cheating realism will ALWAYS come
back to bite you.

If your planets spin much faster than real planets do - then you won't
feel like you are flying 200 miles above the largest thing you've ever
seen in your life. You'll feel like you are really close to a beach-ball.

When you try to land on the planet - that insane spin rate will require
that you match velocity at insane speeds - so you'll have to orbit the
planet once every 30 seconds instead of once every 72 minutes. When you
are zooming around the planet at that speed, it'll once again appear to
be stationary - but the supposedly stationary stars will be spinning
around you like a laser-ball light show!

You will find that you can't use real physical laws to make orbiting
work - because at those speeds, you'll fly off at a tangent.  So
you'll have to kludge that math too.  The kludges will pile higher and
higher until they show through into a really serious and unresolvable
logical anomaly that will prevent the game from working at all.

Better to start off with some reasonable premises and let it all 'just
work'.

Second story:

Do you watch StarTrek Voyager?  Watch the title sequence where Voyager
is flying above Saturn's rings.  Notice how the rings curve around
noticably?   Well, that's totally wrong.  In reality, they are twice
the radius of Saturn - I don't know how many thousands of miles that
is - but those rings would curve so subtly that they'd look dead
*straight*.  Because some artistic type at UPN thought that wouldn't
look right, they curved the rings quite noticably.  Because of that,
the rings can't be realistically WIDE either....and the planet
has to be much smaller so it fits inside the rings.

If the video sequence had continued with Voyager in orbit, you'd
have seen it clearly disappearing behind the rim of Saturn whilst
it was still quite visible...in reality of course, it would be
so small that you'd not be able to see it.  Saturn wouldn't look
like the second biggest planet - it would look like a beachball.

The way they built the sequence, all that cheating added up - HOWEVER,
they were able to pull it off by having Voyager do the hyperspace thing
before it vanished behind the planet and the trickery bit them.

In a game, you can't do that.  You'd end up with all the other
craft in orbit around Saturn being clearly visible from a point
just above the north pole because they are orbiting something
just 50 miles across !!

You really can't cheat spatially or temporally and get away with it.
If you want your spaceships to fly really fast and low - you have to
have them literally do that - and have the optical flow to back
that up.

"Be sure your sins will find you out!"

-- 
Steve Baker   HomeEmail: <sjb...@ai...>
              WorkEmail: <sj...@li...>
              HomePage : http://web2.airmail.net/sjbaker1
              Projects : http://plib.sourceforge.net
                         http://tuxaqfh.sourceforge.net
                         http://tuxkart.sourceforge.net
                         http://prettypoly.sourceforge.net

Re: [Plib-devel] Re: KobayashiMaru & plib

[Steve B. <sjb...@ai...>]

Alexander Rawass wrote:

> > of and if it does how much the kinetic energy changed etc. If after
> > the first collision the object rotates and 0.00001 seconds later a
> > second collision occurs that stops the rotation, will you catch it?
> 
> Maybe not. But maybe this precision you talk about isn't needed in
> an ACTION type game.

Yep - it is.

There is one place in Tux_AQFH where this happens.

If you are swimming around in one of the pools in which the Killer Whale
is swimming, and if you swim up to the side of the pool - so you are
colliding with it - then the whale can come up behind you and knock
you clean through the polygon - leaving you stuck *inside* solid
rock.

What happens is that the collision detection first tests you against
the wall - decides that you hit and backs you off to where you *just*
didn't hit it.  That makes you hit the nose of the whale - and the
collision detection notices that - and backs you off from *that*.
Since it's already checked your intersection with the wall, it doesn't
check it again.

Even *that* situation can be managed - you just get bounced around
between the whale and the wall until you eventually get shaken loose.

But what *REALLY* screws you up is that the collision detection of the
whale against the side of the pool is done AFTER the collision test of
Tux against the same polygon, so the whale's nose can be (temporarily)
embedded into the wall by a few tens of centimeters.  When Tux bounces
off of *THAT*, it pushes him far enough into the wall that he pops all
the way through and doesn't touch the wall on the following frame.
>From that point on, Tux is inside the solid rock - and *BAD THINGS HAPPEN*.

You might think that's pretty rare - but when we took Tux_AQFH to my son's
school "Family Math Night" - and the same level way played by about 200
kids over 3 hours - the bug pushed about 10 of them through the side of the
pool...which forced me to shut down the game and restart it.

So, these apparently subtle things can get blown up into major problems.

I'm *told* (although I can't verify it) that the same bug occours in
TuxKart if several other drivers 'rear-end' you into the crash barriers
in the same frame.

-- 
Steve Baker   HomeEmail: <sjb...@ai...>
              WorkEmail: <sj...@li...>
              HomePage : http://web2.airmail.net/sjbaker1
              Projects : http://plib.sourceforge.net
                         http://tuxaqfh.sourceforge.net
                         http://tuxkart.sourceforge.net
                         http://prettypoly.sourceforge.net

RE: [Plib-devel] ulNet Class

[Dave M. <dp...@ef...>]

Steve wrote:
> > tjones wrote:
>
> > I was wondering if theres been any word on if steve is going to
> commit the class to CVS, also I was thinking about creating a new
> directory for the networking code instead of just adding it to utils.
> > I have started working on the tcp code and hope to have
> something shortly.
>
> I don't think we need a separate library for the networking stuff
> - unless it gets REALLY
> huge.
>
> Let's keep it simple.
>
> Sorry - I didn't have time to mess with it - would any of our
> other half dozen registered
> developers like to grab this?
>
I'm currently using SDL_net alongside plib for my game.  Ben-- could you
please send me the source so I can look it over?

--Dave <mailto:dp...@ef...>

[Plib-devel] puDeleteObject

[Dave M. <dp...@ef...>]

I fixed puDeleteObject so that it calls a smarter puPopLiveInterface.  This
allows a callback to delete the dialog it belongs to and create a new one.
This is important for chaining together interfaces (hit a button, delete the
old interface, create a new one).

See examples/src/pui/complex.cxx for an example.  hit File->Save and then
when you hit OK or CANCEL it brings up a little message dialog.

the changes have been commited to CVS.

--Dave

Re: [Plib-devel] Re: KobayashiMaru & plib

[Alexander R. <a_r...@in...>]

Steve Baker wrote:
> 
> > >  or  "How do I allow space ships to
> > > fly into holes in asteroids - as well as have people stay stuck to
> >
> > When a Starfighter flies into a hole in an asteroid, there will be sort
> > of portal and he will get connected to a KobayashiMaru mission
> > server playing the inside_asteroid Mission.
> 
> In other words you basically throw out one game of one genre - and load
> up another.

Yep. Transient for the player. But I didn't meant it that way.
A whole asteroid would simply be so complex, you've got to make it an
own mission. A mission isnt the same thing as 'genre'
I could explain it by pointing out the plans for 3.0.0, but I dont make
the same mistake twice.

> > How would you rate the graphics of your game?
> 
> About 50% of what they could be.
> 
> > I think that it's one of the cutest little open source games I've ever
> > seen, and that the graphics are great, compared to other open source
> > games.
> >
> > But show Tux to a person who pays 80DM for a commercial game and
> > is used to graphics like Quake3, he will probably just laugh and
> > say 'yoz gfx sukkz' or so.
> 
> But Tux shouldn't be compared with Quake. It should be compared with
> games like Mario-64, DonkeyKong, Spiro, etc.

Never seen that, can't comment on that.

> IMHO, Tux's graphics are as good as Mario - not as good as DonkeyKong.
> 
> For TuxKart, I deliberately modelled two tracks that are nearly
> identical in 'look' to two tracks in MarioKart-64.  I have to say
> that "Tux Tollway" looks *MUCH* nicer than "Toads Turnpike" - the
> textures in my version are nicer - I have more detail in the track
> than Nintendo do, etc.
> 
> > No-one of them will play yours or mine.
> 
> No - but 7 to 12 year old kids (who enjoy Mario'64) think Tux_AQFH is
> pretty good.

Be glad. They loose their minds when they get older and get addicted to
commercial.

I like viewing Toons or Toon Kid series on TV, but I think the
commercials
in-between will ruin the life of many kids for ever.

> > An actionbased flightsim doesn't need realism or accuracy
> > at that high rates of speed.
> 
> (Remember that I design flight simulators for a living - and
> get paid six figures to do it - and now I'm telling you...)
> 
>           You couldn't be more wrong.

Maybe we have a misunderstanding there.

What flight simulators do you program?

a) REAL flight simulators used to train pilots in military in civile
b) good PC-Flight Simulators that I could buy 
c) action-based PC-'Flight'-Simulators

if you're in a), I think you can't understand from what I mean, cause I
will
be doing c) with reality being stripped of like in those games.

If I get it to be a HeliSim, it will very definetly be very like Comache
as
for non-realism than Jane's Longbow

> > > Think you can solve that?   Now apply that algorithm to a spaceship going at
> > > 0.8 times the speed of light towards another spaceship on a collision course.
> >
> > Actually, we're not flying that fast, exept for hyperspace.
> > A normal starfighter makes 1km in 10secs
> 
> 360kph?  The Cessna's in FlightGear go faster than *that*!
> 
> A 1970's F16 fighter can go about 5 times that speed.
> 
> The space shuttle (when in orbit) has to orbit the earth ever 72 minutes.

Thats the point. I'n not going into realism. You'll be amazed how
fast galaxies will rotate in the distance, and you'll maybe even see the
rotation of planets - NO REALISM. Dump it.

If you want a realistic space fighter game exactly like I don't want
KobMaru to be look at Orbit.


> > > detection even *detect* that situation?
> >
> > Nope. All that is done with your lib.
> 
> Nope.  I give you the low level primitive tests - you have to decide what
> to do with them.

I meant exactly this.

> Just try to limit the scope of what you are attempting down to something
> you can realistically achieve.
> 
> Just build a really *good* space shooter *or* a really good low level
> futuristic air combat game *or* a ground-based shooter...not all at
> once!

Yet another already existing game?

Just trying to achieve something new about a long period of time.



Alex

Re: [Plib-devel] Re: KobayashiMaru & plib

[Alexander R. <a_r...@in...>]

Hi,

Wolfram Kuss wrote:
> 
> >I've today drawn my first image, see my 3D math help page ;-)
> 
> Huh, I didn't see it?

Yet only on my disk, but soon on my page ... say with 0.2.10

> >The point is: if I'm going to concentrate on this one genre, I might
> >write a good game - and get stuck with it.
> >I have LONG LONG thought about howto write this Starfighter game
> >(version 1.0.0) in a way that it can easily extended to v2.0.0 in
> >some time, but if I would concentrate to this one genre, I had to
> >completely re-write code and classes to expand it.
> 
> I don't understand this, it sounds like a general engine is easier
> than a specialized one?

Aeh - yes.

If would have designed the game only as a starfighter game, it would
get a starfighter game, but then I would be stuck in in, cause
so many things would be attached to starfighting, you had to change
a lot in the code, many people do the error of hardcoding things that
arent'n necessary.

AND that game would be called just-one-another-lousy-spaghetti-code
-starfighter-game

I think I've set my standards so high to be motivated to at least try
to leap that high. If I fail, I still can say "I tried"


Just look at ./kobmaru.conf

Thats just the start of how the end user will configurate the game for
his needs.

The KIs (the code that flys the things) can easily be exchanged or
improved,
as well for the Huds, there is an API that KI and Hud can use,
the 3D Renderer is completely exchangeable (that's what I call Open)

I've thought about this design for 0.5-1 Year, without writing a single
line of code.

And because I have made it easily extensible - that's what I'd call
better.

> 
> >
> >V1.0.0 will be a good starfighter game, with all possibilities
> >to extend it.
> 
> >It will be better than XwA,XwT or WC, but it will probably not be
> >better than SpaceThing or glWars, from which I've heard today.
> 
> I have never played XwA,XwT, but I cant imagine that you could just do
> them in, say a few man-months so you can then improve. AND you need
> some time to learn 3D graphics, game development etc. With plib you
> have a HUGE head start over people a few years ago, but it STILL
> cost you a long time to do just the rotations.
> 
> I think one problem is that you come over as someone who hasn't done
> anything hard yet, but is sure that what all other people do is
> trivial and if he just tried it, he could of course do much better.
> 
> One advice if you want to become a good programmer and see things more
> realistic (which can be frustrating):
> Before you do things, guess how long it will take. Then, after you

To version 1.0.0 (exactly the starfighter game Steve wants me to 
concentrate on, but with enough empty 'PCI-Slots' to extend it)
To version 2.0.0 probably one year more?

And if in-between something inmy life changes, I'll probably stop
working due to no time.

But at least I'll try.

> of and if it does how much the kinetic energy changed etc. If after
> the first collision the object rotates and 0.00001 seconds later a
> second collision occurs that stops the rotation, will you catch it?

Maybe not. But maybe this precision you talk about isn't needed in 
an ACTION type game. Please see reply to Steve for that.

> >If the spaceship is so near that is makes sense to let you see
> >all 1.000 polygons, it's probaby so near that you wont even have
> >to think about drawing something other.
> 
> You are knocking down other games and argue like this?!?

I'm knocking down on their gameplay, their extensibility for players,
their re-usablility, the lack of features, but definetly not on their
3D display.

> >> > I've got so many ideas, I don't know where to start next.
> 
> Well, that's all we are saying: Start with one thing, for example a
> space fighting game a la Elite. Once you have done that, you can plan
> the next thing. BTW, I loved Elite.

I personally won't do any of the trading stuff, cause I dont like that.
But you if you like that part of elite, you could go and write sort
of Gui start goes around this stuff, and then calls the engine for
gameplay.

> >> > It will surely a game that will be a lot better than other commercial
> >> > games, but I also think that graphics and sound will suck. Relatively.
> 
> Do you think (all) game programmers suck?

Only the gay ones. (This is not intolerant cause I think my gay friends
would
say that)

No, how do you mean your question?

What I don't like is programmers who know nothing of portability and
multi-
platform, cause they only know Windows and DirectX
I know that for many this isn't their fault, but the decision of other
people.

> >But show Tux to a person who pays 80DM for a commercial game and
> 
> Huch ;-)
> 
> >is used to graphics like Quake3, he will probably just laugh and
> >say 'yoz gfx sukkz' or so.
> 
> And you really think you can beat many commercial games??

Never ever in graphics or sound. In what I _very_personally_ call
better.
No one will notice.

Not since Dragon's Lair came out, and gameplay and ideas got dumped due
to graphics and sound. Gimme C64 Thrust and Space Taxi, I'd be happy.

We probably have a VERY different understandung of the word 'better',
but better IS a truly subjective view.

> >> OK - so *everyone* is telling you the same thing.  People with 20 times
> >
> >They don't have the experience, so I igonored it.
> 
> Can you tell me one single area where you have experience?

> >I'd like to come to your town and explain KobayashiMaru to you, I
> >just need a ticket, a big blackboard and some hours of talking
> >time.
> 
> I fear that wouldn't help. I fear that for each argument pointing out
> a difficulty you would say - oh I will simply do it this way. I hope I
> am wrong so.

I'd think I'd really knew the answers to some, but maybe would be lost
for others.

Another problem I have is that no-one in my personal life is able to
discuss or brainstorm with me about that subjects (they are friends, but
not programmers!), so I really like this discussion here.

> Of course all the problems can be solved. After all, all the problems
> were solved in one or the other game. And if one engine for one
> genre has a difficulty with another, then just have n engines working
> together looking as one to the games-programmer.
> But the problem is how much time you will need (Steves 500 years isn't
> unrealistic IMHO), how complex it will get (I would bet it gets so
> complex that you couldn't do it ever as a single person even when
> working full time on it) and how fast it will run.

You are thinking wrong. Look in the mirror.

I am not alone, I am definetly not alone writing that game.

Look how many people are yet working on that project:
	myself
	Steve Baker (as author of plib)
	Oliver Baker (for having done models for Tux/Tuxkart)
	Steve Belzcyk (models from Orbit)
	you and Norman Vine (building win32)
	and every other person on plib,ppe etc.

WE ARE A LOT!

> I think you will only be able to do so if you have some experience of
> your own.
> So, PLEASE stop theoreticising about what great and unbelievable
> things you could do in V 2.0.

I can stop theoreticising, but I'll keep trying to achieve.

> >(I didn't asked if it will run fast, just if it _can_ be possible)
> 
> Well, we thought you wanted to make a playable game.
> If you want to make something to test theories, that's fine by me, but
> say so.
> And Steve didn't say the problem was that terragear is unsuitable. He
> said that to get good frame rates you have to tweak the game design,
> that is, you cant have a universal game engine with todays hardware.

Everyone will be able to tune KobMaru to his needs by editing
kobmaru.conf,
and it is designed to work as well in veryveryverylimitedmodeinlowres
on a PDA as well as on your 2GHZ machine in a year.

Time works for me, you don't need to have the boobs of laura croft AND
an
asteroid AND the 1000polygon spaceship on the screen, and you'd
probably wont do it if you haven't got the cpu - BUT

IF some day you have it, you have the freedom/the option to play
mission that are yet unplayable due to their general complexity I have
in mind for the future.

> >possible solutions: i) more framerates by

> You do realize that i) isnt a complete solution, don't you?

Of course.

> >It is true that you could say the things shorter, but on the
> >other hand I like this discussion, you're the first one
> >I have to respect,
> 
> Good, then try not to offend people.

I try not to, I have respect for Steve since I have been convinced,
but he is as much a novice in terms of 'KobayashiMaru-Design' as I
am in 3D.

I'm taking all his advice WHILE still clinging to my distant dreams.

> >No, only one.
> >I immediatly worked on that part, and I have seen that it was true,
> >the other wouldn't probably have been needed.
> 
> Good. But it would have been even better if you had said so.
> Just "Ok - I am testing it now" would have been enough.

Here you are true. Sorry.

> >*PLEASE* remember this:
> >
> >You went public when you were 1.0.0, as you told me.
> >[...]
> >Please see the difference between a fully grown & tested game, and
> >my early stage.
> 
> This is very funny. All we are telling you is that at 0.29 you should
> not think about 2.0 or 10.0 and even less brag about 2.0 and 10.0 .

If the programmers of Word had just thought of Word2000 before the
first line of code ever...



Alex

[Plib-devel] Quaternions in plib - reply to games using modems.

[tjones <tj...@is...>]

Hello Alexander

There are several games that work fine on a Dial-Up modem, (depending on =
the way the network code is developed), for example doom is a pig when =
it comes to networking, but diablo runs fine on a dial-up connection. =
There is very little lag, infact people have ADSL connection to battle =
net ususally have the same amount of lag.=20

Later Ben

[Plib-devel] Zelda 64 Reply

[tjones <tj...@is...>]

Is a 3d person perspective.
Complete 3d engine (Simmilar to Mario64)
Is a combination of indoor and outdoor, you have to enter caves and =
things like that, but the rest is out doors.
As far as what type of game, there is a combination of fighting (much =
like all the zeldas), there are some puzzles to solve and there is some =
search and explore. Does a good job combining them all.

Basicly is like mario64 except you have a sword and shield, you travel =
around searching for jems in different areas of the world. Then after =
you have thoughs you travel back and forth in time, solving different =
problems, you can go into dungions and things like that, but you can =
also stay in town, play games and win things, help people around the =
town and get rewards.=20

Later Ben

Re: [Plib-devel] Quaternions in plib

[Alexander R. <a_r...@in...>]

Christian Mayer wrote:
> 
> Alexander Rawass wrote:
> >
> > I have neither knowledge of net-related problems,
> > nor have I designed the net part of my game yet well enough,
> > bu I think that this is irrelevant !
> >
> > The speed of the game played through the net does not depoend
> > on the size of the data transferred at each frame, but
> > on the time the packet needs to go from joystick to client engine to
> > client net,
> > there to the internet to some distant server (TIME! is lost), into the servers engine,
> > and then back to the clients.
> 
> Wrong! Lag and data size are important. You are saying that e.g. for a
> car only the top speed matters but not the power of the engine. I can be
> faster than 200 km/h with a car that has only 1 horse power (by driving
> out of a plane...). The other way round also doesn't make sense (a tank
> is much slower than a motor bike, although it is much stronger).
> 
> A normal user doesn't know that the amound of data is important -
> because the game designers have alrady taken care of it.
> 
> There are actually many things that have to be taken care of when you
> are thinking of adding net support:
> - the phyiscal connection limits the amount of data which you
>   can transport in a certain time
> - the protokoll reduces that rate and can cause other problems.
>   Either it guarantees you that you recieve the data - but that
>   can be whenever (TCP does that). Or it transports the data as
>   fast as possible - but might get lost (UDP)
> - The network funktions of the OS might give you additional
>   limitations

Yeah, of course, if the max transfer rate is 3.0kB per sec, of course
the data
sent in this time has to be less than 3.0kB

But if've heard of other commercial games having big problems with
mutiplayer
playing, not because the data transferred is to large but simply to the
ping delay between client->server->client

I've never played that online, but XwA/XvT should have some instruments
there
showing you your pingtime, and when it goes red, the delay gets too
long.

Are there fast commercial games playable per modem? Really playable on
internet
servers some distance away? I think a german magazine said "...Well..."


Correct me.

For my game, I'll do first concentrace on running it on 10Mbit lan.
This may sound wrong too you, but it will show success (hopefully) quick
and
then I'll think about improvements etc.



Alex

Re: [Plib-devel] Zelda64

[Steve B. <sjb...@ai...>]

> tjones wrote:
> 
> Hey steve, Zelda 64 is an increadable game. I have yet to see a game that was
> that good. They followed almost every-rule about creating a good game. A good
> story line (although over used in the game enviroment), never had to use the
> save-and-restart feature (you don't have to start a game over because you are
> not strong enough to go the next level, or there was a trap that you can't get
> out of), its fun, your not rail-roaded (well as much as can be possible), its
> challenging but not imposible. It's just a good game. If you get a chance play
> the game, its really worth it.

OK - but what *KIND* of a game is it?  2D, 3D?  First person perspective? 3rd person
perspective?  Orthographic?  Indoor or Outdoor?  Is it mostly combat-based or puzzle-
solving or search/explore?

-- 
Steve Baker   HomeEmail: <sjb...@ai...>
              WorkEmail: <sj...@li...>
              HomePage : http://web2.airmail.net/sjbaker1
              Projects : http://plib.sourceforge.net
                         http://tuxaqfh.sourceforge.net
                         http://tuxkart.sourceforge.net
                         http://prettypoly.sourceforge.net

Re: [Plib-devel] Mario Kart Type Game

[Steve B. <sjb...@ai...>]

> tjones wrote:
> 
> Sorry Steve I meant to say mario64 type of a game. Not tuxkart. I did know about that.

Well, my first OpenSource game: "Tux the Penguin - A Quest for Herring" (TuxAQFH for short)
is meant to be a "Mario64 type of a game".  Tux doesn't have as many 'moves' as Mario - and
the game needs more 'bad guys' for Tux to battle with - but the essential mechanisms are all
there and work.  What's mostly missing are the level designs...I'd hoped that lots of people
would come forward with new level designs for TuxAQFH - but so far, not one single 3D model
of any kind has been donated.

I've shelved TuxAQFH for the time being because I don't have a good enough 3D modelling
package to build the things that the game needs.  That's one reason I'm working on the
PPE (PrettyPolyEditor) package - which will eventually be a modeller that will allow
me to return to finish TuxAQFH.

Anyway, go and grab TuxAQFH from http://tuxaqfh.sourceforge.net and see what you
think.

-- 
Steve Baker   HomeEmail: <sjb...@ai...>
              WorkEmail: <sj...@li...>
              HomePage : http://web2.airmail.net/sjbaker1
              Projects : http://plib.sourceforge.net
                         http://tuxaqfh.sourceforge.net
                         http://tuxkart.sourceforge.net
                         http://prettypoly.sourceforge.net

[Plib-devel] Zelda64

[tjones <tj...@is...>]

Hey steve, Zelda 64 is an increadable game. I have yet to see a game =
that was that good. They followed almost every-rule about creating a =
good game. A good story line (although over used in the game =
enviroment), never had to use the save-and-restart feature (you don't =
have to start a game over because you are not strong enough to go the =
next level, or there was a trap that you can't get out of), its fun, =
your not rail-roaded (well as much as can be possible), its challenging =
but not imposible. It's just a good game. If you get a chance play the =
game, its really worth it.=20
Later Ben Woodhead

[Plib-devel] Mario Kart Type Game

[tjones <tj...@is...>]

Sorry Steve I meant to say mario64 type of a game. Not tuxkart. I did =
know about that.=20

Later Ben Woodhead

Re: [Plib-devel] Mario Kart Like Game

[Steve B. <sjb...@ai...>]

> tjones wrote:
> 
> That would be a really good idea steve, but also like you said getting 3 or 4
> programmers together is a good start but you would still need some artists and
> things like that.

8-\

I'm confused.  A "Mario-Kart-like" game already exists!  That's what "TuxKart" is.

   http://tuxkart.sourceforge.net

...I released it a month or so ago...it's practically finished.

> I had been interested in the zelda area personally...

I havn't played that. What's it like?

> ...but a mario type game would be neet,

Well:

   MarioKart      ==>  TuxKart    http://tuxkart.sourceforge.net
   Mario64        ==>  TuxAQFH    http://tuxaqfh.sourceforge.net
   SuperMarioBros ==>  SuperTux   http://www.newbreedsoftware.com/supertux

...MarioGolf - well, my Son (Oliver) has been interested in a 3D minigolf game (starring
Tux of course) for some time - and he has actually started to build some simple holes
for experimentation using the TuxAQFH kernel as a starting point...I think it will be
a *simple* thing to do - not too much artwork needed - so I may attack that sometime
later in the year.

...MarioParty - that's something I'd like to do - but you'd need dozens and dozens
of programmers and artists to pull that one off...I don't think that's something
I'll do anytime soon.

"Major Damage" is a game I'd like to do...if I can get permission to use their artwork.
Klutzy Superhero's are rather nice to work with.

> I would like to help (as much as possible anyway).
> But there is more artist comming to the opensource community, most being textures
> and things like that. Have a look at crystal space, in there link section they
> have a large amount of links releaded free-texture.com and things like that. Also
> flipcode has listed a few sites like that.

Yes - I don't think textures are too serious a problem...it's mainly appropriate 3D
models and music that we are short of.

-- 
Steve Baker   HomeEmail: <sjb...@ai...>
              WorkEmail: <sj...@li...>
              HomePage : http://web2.airmail.net/sjbaker1
              Projects : http://plib.sourceforge.net
                         http://tuxaqfh.sourceforge.net
                         http://tuxkart.sourceforge.net
                         http://prettypoly.sourceforge.net

Re: [Plib-devel] VRML Loader issues

[Chris P. <cj...@lo...>]

On Fri, Aug 11, 2000 at 03:45:22AM -0500, Steve Baker wrote:

> Gil Carter wrote:

> > So what do people think - VRML1 or VRML97 first?

> When Chris sent me the first beta VRML97 loader, I searched high and low
> on the web looking for VRML97 models to test it against - the only ones
> I *ever* found were on the main VRML organisations's pages!

> I conclude that VRML2/97 is a failed standard that hardly anyone actually
> uses.

> Hence - since there are quite a few VRML-1 models around and LOTS of tools
> support it, then we should go with that.  Who knows, we might even get
> an OpenInventor loader out of it 'for free' and with packages like COIN
> floating around, this could become useful.

This is not what I've found.  Almost all the VRML I've found on the web
recently has been VRML2.  And all the VRML I want to use has been VRML2.
However I've yet to find anything that'll convert a VRML2 file into
something I can import into anything.  The only one I found is to the
povray format but I've not found anything to convert from that.

-- 
Christopher John Purnell  | I thought I'd found a reason to live
http://www.lost.org.uk/   | Just like before when I was a child
--------------------------| Only to find that dreams made of sand
What gods do you pray to? | Would just fall apart and slip through my hands

Re: [Plib-devel] ulNet Class

[Steve B. <sjb...@ai...>]

> tjones wrote:

> I was wondering if theres been any word on if steve is going to commit the class to CVS, also I was thinking about creating a new directory for the networking code instead of just adding it to utils.
> I have started working on the tcp code and hope to have something shortly.

I don't think we need a separate library for the networking stuff - unless it gets REALLY
huge.

Let's keep it simple.

Sorry - I didn't have time to mess with it - would any of our other half dozen registered
developers like to grab this?
 
-- 
Steve Baker   HomeEmail: <sjb...@ai...>
              WorkEmail: <sj...@li...>
              HomePage : http://web2.airmail.net/sjbaker1
              Projects : http://plib.sourceforge.net
                         http://tuxaqfh.sourceforge.net
                         http://tuxkart.sourceforge.net
                         http://prettypoly.sourceforge.net

Re: [Plib-devel] PLIB developers needed.

[<Va...@t-...>]

Steve Baker wrote:
> 
> Dave McClurg wrote:
> >
> > Christian wrote:
> > > But anyway, do SG and SSG brake with that compiler? If the answer is no,
> > > that is compiler supporting costs. SG *is* const correct and at least
> > > half of SSG (IIRC).
> > >
> > I went to fix the 'const' methods in ul.h that are *not* portable on IRIX
> > when I noticed there were similar 'const' methods already in sg.h like
> > Christian says.  The 'const' methods in sg.h have been there for a long time
> > and must work on IRIX.
> 
> Weird?  That particular program didn't use sg.h - but I'll try it when I
> get back to work on Monday.  I havn't tried to recompile PLIB on our ONYX
> using the native IRIX compiler (I know it works under GNU G++ under IRIX - but
> that's not the point).

Try it please.

> Interestingly, I was using ul.h to measure some benchmarks between GeForce-2
> ($300+$2000 for the 800MHz PC) and ONYX-2 ($100,000 per graphics 'pipe'+$200,000
> for the computer itself) - the GeForce is comfortably beating the ONYX by about
> 2:1 on polygon throughput and about the same on pixel fill rates!  Even if you
> turn on the antialiased rendering (The ONYX's main selling point) - the ONYX is
> still only about equal to the GeForce on polygons although it does beats it by
> about 2:1 on pixel fill.
> 
> **WOW**

But I doubt that we can run the famous Mont Blanc demo from SGI where
you can zoom from a space view of the earth down to the Mont Blanc and
fly around it. On the fair where I saw it (on an ONYX :-)) ) they told
me that the textures had a resolution of 1 metre and you could see the
walking tracks... The major point of the demo was to show of the
internal bus system as it used 300 MB of textures.
I'd wonder if a GeForce with 4x AGP could do that on a computer that has
enough ram.

But that's definitely not a standard PC - yet.

CU,
Christian

Re: [Plib-devel] Re: KobayashiMaru & plib

[Wolfram K. <w_...@rz...>]

Steve wrote:

>I'm conscious that I always underestimate times for things.  

I think almost all programmer do this. The difference is between the
programmers who know this and who know their factor and those that
don't. Also, there are certain things you can do to get a more
accurate estimate. One danger is that you know all the small steps of
the next problem - but don't think about all the small steps of
problems later on.

When I estimate something as one day, then I can be wrong by up to
100%. When I estimate something as, say 2 month then I am normally
pretty accurate. Of course some things are more difficult to guess.
For example, estimating the implementation a algorithm that is in my
head is normally fairly accurate. But if I have to use a new API 
or file format I have never used before, then its much harder.
So, besides giving an estimate I can foretell the accuracy of my
estimate.

>>I didn't find it, maybe you will find it in the
>> archives.
>
>It might have been on the TuxAQFH or TuxKart lists - I don't remember.

No, I am not subscribed to those lists. It has to be one of the lists
I mentioned.

>> And Steve didn't say the problem was that terragear is unsuitable. He
>> said that to get good frame rates you have to tweak the game design,
>> that is, you cant have a universal game engine with todays hardware.
>
>...or ANY hardware EVER.  The problem is that people's expectations
>have gone up as the hardware gets better.

Since I am fairly conservative in what I say, I wouldn't say that. But
certainly not for a long time. BTW, I just wrote about the growing
expectations on slashdot a few days ago. I think there is still quite
a lot of room for growing expectations.

Bye bye,
Wolfram.

[Plib-devel] Mario Kart Like Game

[tjones <tj...@is...>]

That would be a really good idea steve, but also like you said getting 3 =
or 4 programmers together is a good start but you would still need some =
artists and things like that.=20
I had been interested in the zelda area personally but a mario type game =
would be neet, I would like to help (as much as possible anyway).=20
But there is more artist comming to the opensource community, most being =
textures and things like that. Have a look at crystal space, in there =
link section they have a large amount of links releaded free-texture.com =
and things like that. Also flipcode has listed a few sites like that.

Later Ben