I Wanna Make A FlatShaded 3D Polygonal World War II Flight Simulator

CaryMG
Unregistered
 
Post: #16
akb825 Wrote:If you find a BASIC derivative that supports OpenGL calls (through whatever API they use as a layer), it's possible. Actually, I think RealBasic does have such a layer.
I think I'm gonna go with "Unity".

akb825 Wrote:However, supporting down to System 6 is utterly impossible.
Having full 3D graphics of the level you want on a computer from 1989?
Hah, I'd love to see that tried.
Why wouldn't that be possible?
I mean, I undrstand the software that'd make it playable from "System 6" up'd be bit less easier than using "Unity", but why wouldn't a flatshaded 3d polygonal game work at all on a Macintosh SE/30?


Later!
Smile Smile Smile
Quote this message in a reply
CaryMG
Unregistered
 
Post: #17
kodex Wrote:Chuck Yeager was a great game, and if you wanted to clone it, it would be possible.
I don't wanna clone it.
"Chuck Yeager's Air Combat" is my inspiration.
"ParSoft", who made "HellCats Of The Pacific", "A-10 Attack!", & "F/A-18 Hornet" made absolutely beautiful flatshaded 3D polygonal flight simulators, but they didn't do one for World War II in Europe.
I wanna do that game ....
kodex Wrote:Remake it for OSX with better graphics and maybe even some color
For "OS X"? Yes.
A remake? No. lol


Later!
Smile Smile Smile
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 335
Joined: 2002.04
Post: #18
Apart from the problem that there aren't any tools that work on current Macs to do pre system 9 stuff (unless you run them on emulators) the only people playing a system 6 game would be playing it on emulators too.

If you were writing a flatshaded poly game for system 6, you'd have to write your own 3D engine from scratch (GL's only on 9 upwards) and jump through a lot of hoops to give 1 or 2 people about 10 minutes of "cool it works on Basilisk" before they wonder why it's so bad on OS X.

OS 9 and earlier are dead. The only reason for emulators is to run older games that haven't been written to work in OS X and the only reason you might want to consider adding OS 9 compatibility is if you're charging for your coding time by the hour Wink

If you like the look of flat shaded polygon games, then write it as a really good one for OS X rather than wasting your time on dead OS's.
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 613
Joined: 2004.09
Post: #19
SE/30 dosnt have the processing power to do a game in 3d, what you are looking at is very talented programmers faking 3d with 2d images and art.

Kyle Richter
DragonForged.com
Twitter: @kylerichter
Quote this message in a reply
CaryMG
Unregistered
 
Post: #20
diordna Wrote:First project?
Flight simulator?
I hate to burst your bubble, but the chances are next to nil.
Gonna try. lol

diordna Wrote:I doubt that anyone here could really recommend jumping into this as a first project, mostly because of the things involved:
1. Learning a new language (C!)
2. Learning OpenGL
3. Learning 3D in OpenGL.
Won't using "Unity" cut through that?

diordna Wrote:4. Trying to use MIDI with it all
(blech! We have GarageBand now, and it can do the same thing (and style) but better!).
My idea was ta make a flatshaded 3D polygonal World War II flight simulator that'd fit on a floppy, but since kodex said that using software to make a game that'd be usable from "System 6" up wouldn't be as shortcutty as using "Unity" -- which won't fit on a floppy -- I'll use "GarageBand".

diordna Wrote:5. Spontaneously learning how to model planes really well
6. Getting some non-sucky flight physics together.
I so am willing ta learn that.
Here's why ....
Time after time I've read flightsimulator reviews that said "Oh -- the flight model sucks!".
And I'd think -- "Well how tough can it be? Do developers deliberatly make the flight handling not right?
All ya hafta do is write formula XYZ and apply it to the physical forces experienced during whatver flight circumstance."
I think it's called "Emergent Behavior" -- setting a few simple rules & the object acts accordingly to whatever happens to it.

diordna Wrote:If you don't mind me asking...how old are you?.

Nope, I don't mind.
I'm 25.



Later!
Smile Smile Smile
Quote this message in a reply
CaryMG
Unregistered
 
Post: #21
Zwilnik Wrote:Apart from the problem that there aren't any tools that work on current Macs to do pre system 9 stuff
Absolutely none?

Zwilnik Wrote:(unless you run them on emulators) the only people playing a system 6 game would be playing it on emulators too.
There's a huge userbase that play "System 6" games on boxmacs.

Zwilnik Wrote:If you were writing a flatshaded poly game for system 6, you'd have to write your own 3D engine from scratch
Ouch ....
Didn't know that.
I thought there'd be ready-ta-use flatshaded 3D polygonal engine thingies.

Zwilnik Wrote:.... and jump through a lot of hoops to give 1 or 2 people about 10 minutes of "cool it works on Basilisk" before they wonder why it's so bad on OS X.
Flatshaded polygonal flightsimulators have their appeal.

Zwilnik Wrote:If you like the look of flat shaded polygon games, then write it as a really good one for OS X rather than wasting your time on dead OS's.
I wantd ta do both, but the the way that'd make it system compatible isn't as quick as just using "OS X" -- so I'll do that.


Latr!
Smile Smile Smile
Quote this message in a reply
CaryMG
Unregistered
 
Post: #22
kodex Wrote:SE/30 dosnt have the processing power to do a game in 3d, what you are looking at is very talented programmers faking 3d with 2d images and art.
Is that the case with these Macintosh SE/30 games?

[Image: A-10Attack6.jpg]
"A-10 Attack!"

[Image: HellCatsOfThePacific3.jpg]
"HellCats Of The Pacific"

[Image: FA-18Hornet5.jpg]
"F/A-18 Hornet"


Later!
Smile Smile Smile
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 365
Joined: 2002.04
Post: #23
CaryMG Wrote:Won't using "Unity" cut through that?
You'd need to learn JavaScript, C# or Boo (although that's not insurmountable). You don't need to know about low level OpenGL commands, but it doesn't hurt to have some idea of how OpenGL works so you have a realistic understanding of what's possible and what isn't.

Quote:My idea was ta make a flatshaded 3D polygonal World War II flight simulator that'd fit on a floppy, but since kodex said that using software to make a game that'd be usable from "System 6" up wouldn't be as shortcutty as using "Unity" -- which won't fit on a floppy -- I'll use "GarageBand".
Unity tends to output large binaries (mine tend to be about 10MB compressed) so adding a few more megabytes won't kill anyone. Wink

For what it's worth, I don't think it's a good idea to set yourself additional restrictions (like 'make it work on ancient computers') just for the sake of it, because it'll just multiply the amount of work you have to do by ten times. Concentrate on the game itself and nothing else until you've got something that's playable.

Quote:Time after time I've read flightsimulator reviews that said "Oh -- the flight model sucks!".
And I'd think -- "Well how tough can it be? Do developers deliberatly make the flight handling not right?
All ya hafta do is write formula XYZ and apply it to the physical forces experienced during whatver flight circumstance."
I think it's called "Emergent Behavior" -- setting a few simple rules & the object acts accordingly to whatever happens to it.
You can get emergent behaviour in game programming, and having a proper physics engine (such as the one in Unity) helps to make this happen, but for realistic behaviour, you need a lot of complex rules rather than just a few simple ones.

Unfortunately, before you know it, you'll be deep into physics textbooks reading masses of complex formulae presented in ways which are not directly compatible with games programming. I've had years of experience programming with 3D maths and I still have no idea how to go about doing physically accurate flight dynamics. On the other hand, if you're prepared to go for a more game-like approach, you can cheat with the maths a bit for a reasonably convincing effect.

I don't wish to put you off, but I think you should consider doing some preliminary projects to discover the basics because embarking on something monstrously complex.

Hmm, speaking of WWII flight sims over Europe, did you ever see version 2 of Warbirds? That was all flat shaded, using the old F/A-18 Korea engine. Sadly, I don't think it's possible to get it from anywhere any more, and the latest version has much more realistic visuals.

Quote:There's a huge userbase that play "System 6" games on boxmacs.
What's 'boxmacs'?

Neil Carter
Nether - Mac games and comic art
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 613
Joined: 2004.09
Post: #24
Unity will cut through a lot of the red-tape here. You will lose some control over your game but it lets you focus more on the art and models then the game itself. Personally im terrible at art so the more time I can spend programming the better.

What I will recommend since you arent a 12 year old kid (most the new people we get who want to take on large projects seem to be kids, no offense) Get Unity I belive they have a demo.

Look at examples of what people have done with Unity in the past. Then start playing around with the sample project tweaking them. Get to learn it for atleast a few weeks before you start work on a real project. I say this because if you jump right into it in the best case you will not include features from the start because you didnt know they were available.

Unity Link

EDIT: Hey Neil did you know they quoted you on Unitys homepage?

Kyle Richter
DragonForged.com
Twitter: @kylerichter
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 365
Joined: 2002.04
Post: #25
kodex Wrote:EDIT: Hey Neil did you know they quoted you on Unitys homepage?
Yes, although I didn't know the quote had migrated to the front page! Wink

Neil Carter
Nether - Mac games and comic art
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 771
Joined: 2003.04
Post: #26
CaryMG Wrote:Is that the case with these Macintosh SE/30 games?
[...]
"F/A-18 Hornet"

Err... I bought that game a long time ago ('97?), and it used to ran OK-ish but not great on my Performa 6400, 180MHz PPC 603e. The game used a LOT of tricks to even run on that machine, for instance, not updating sections of the screen that remained the same color. A non-optimized engine would get you probably no more than 5 FPS on such old machines, if that much.

I started doing 3D graphics on that mac, using Quickdraw & DrawSprokets (two now-dead technologies) and writing the 3D engine from scratch. It did flat shaded polygons & lighting, but performance was bad - really bad, and very fill-rate limited.

Later I discovered OpenGL, and have never looked back. Wink
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 1,140
Joined: 2005.07
Post: #27
CaryMG Wrote:Is that the case with these Macintosh SE/30 games?

[Image: A-10Cubad.jpg]
"A-10 Attack!"

[Image: HellCatsOfThePacificb.jpg]
"HellCats Of The Pacific"

[Image: FA-18Hornet3.jpg]
"F/A-18 Hornet"


Later!
Smile Smile Smile
I decided to look these up. A-10 Attack! came out in 1995 and the first F/A-18 Hornet game came out in 1993. (I couldn't find out when HellCats of the Pacific came out) The SE-30 came out in 1989. I highly doubt it could play any of those, since those games were pretty steep with system requirements for the time.

I think you should just give up supporting anything below OS 9. You probably should just support OS X, though, just because it would make it easier on you. Since you're new to programming, you probably shouldn't give yourself all sorts of limitations that will make your life more difficult. Just finding a way to compile for System 6 would be difficult enough.

If you don't want to write your own game engine, suggest that you use Unity or a similar tool. It will make it a lot easier to do this project. If you learn C/C++/ObjectiveC and OpenGL, you will need to write your own graphics and game engine. If you were to try to support System 6, you would likely have to write a 3D graphics engine using only 2D graphics. Believe me, if you just use a modern tool and support modern operating systems, you will have a much higher chance of finishing.
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 682
Joined: 2002.11
Post: #28
Past experiences have made me the pessimist I am.

Haven't tried Unity, so I can't speak for it. I do have extensive BlitzMax experience, however. (I'm a beta tester.) There is no current easy-to-use 3D engine, but the 2D support is really frickin sweet. Masks every OpenGL call you would ever need to make and wraps it all up in a nice box. Oh, and the syntax is pretty.

Since we seem to be on the topic of old systems...the difference between System 6 and OS X is comparable to the difference between Windows 3.1 and Ubuntu (which, in case you haven't heard, is modern, user-friendly, reasonably-powerful Linux). They are completely different systems. System 6 is based on an old, out-of-date structure, and OS X is based on UNIX, which was sorta-kinda-almost-but-not-really a competitor at the time of its release. Millions of people us OS X; probably under 1,000 still use System 6. In addition to that, you're going to be hard pressed to find any sort of resource that will tell you HOW to write for System 6. MAYBE you can find an old ResEdit manual on eBay, but that'll be about it.

A flat-shaded flight simulator is within your reach. But it's like climbing a mountain - one step at a time. You need to start small! Buy some supplies, pitch your tent at the foot of the mountain. Make a Pong clone. Then make an Asteroids knockoff. Maybe a platformer. After that, perhaps, a bit of dabbling in the 3D world. Do the NeHe tutorials. Then go ahead, make your 3D Polygonal World War II Flight Simulator!

But right now, with your total lack of experience in anything, any sort of 3D game is simply too much. It's like trying to leap from the foot of Everest right to the peak.

Of course, you can probably safely ignore every word I say. After all, I am but a mere 16 years of age.

My web site - Games, music, Python stuff
Quote this message in a reply
Member
Posts: 196
Joined: 2003.10
Post: #29
CaryMG: I'm amazed at how incredibly polite the forum is being to you. Generally in this situation you'd be lambasted with realism.

You demonstrate a complete lack of knowledge of the basics of game design and programming. You have a lot to learn, and a tough pill to swallow, namely that there is a lot of work and a lot of smaller projects to complete before you can even contemplate completing a flight sim.

You need to fully understand some basics first:

a) What a programming language is.
b) What an API is.
c) How they're related.
d) Basic game theory.
e) 3D Math, Physics.
f) Programatic flight modeling.

This is no small task. The fact that you're getting Garageband and Unity confused as possible tools to the same end indicates to me that you haven't done your research.

Seriously. Pong. It's hard. A lot harder than it looks.

Or Tic Tac Toe.

Start small, ask lots of questions, show us your mind-blowing tic-tac-toe AI, and go from there. Before you know it you'll have a plane flying around in 3D. But let's get something straight: it's not easy, and you won't get there by learning haphazard bits and pieces of technology.
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 1,140
Joined: 2005.07
Post: #30
I think the reason why people aren't flaming him is because though he is aiming a bit to high, it isn't as high as the people who do get flamed. I'm talking about the 13 year olds who come in, want to write an MMORPG in 20 days, and only know HTML. At least this guy has some BASIC experience and is trying for something somewhat simple. (as far as 3D games go, I'm not trying to say that this is trivial Rasp)

Just as a reference, I started a flight action game myself. This was my first major 3D project, and I was writing my own engine. I got somewhat far, but realized it wasn't working out. The main reason: speed. It worked fine on my computer, but I didn't want to have such insane system requirements for such simple graphics. I wasn't experienced enough (I only started programming at the beginning of last school year) to know how to do things very efficiently. I did things that now I wouldn't dream of doing, such as putting each individual particle separately into a linked list. Talk about too much overhead! Wacko I had some other speed issues, some of which I'm not 100% sure of caused it, but would probably not be there in any engine I'd write now.
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply