Original X-Wing engine rebuilt project

This is the place for chit chat! Everything goes even Star Trek! Just make sure to buy the Moderator a drink!

Re: Original X-Wing engine rebuilt project

azrapse
Cadet 3rd Class
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2014 7:42 am

Post by azrapse » Mon Oct 31, 2016 9:22 pm

What would be your stance about removing the geometry of those screens, and leaving just the text floating there (with some semitransparent background color) without actually showing the physical monitor frame?

Adding XWA floating panels would be just like that, only making the text be orthogonal to the camera, instead of at an angle as it is now. All of that is matter of changing some rotation numbers, or hiding or showing parts. Nothing that cannot be made optional and customizable, really.

Voice recognition exists, but it well beyond the scope of this demo. :)
I don't know. If the community added text-to-speech to Freespace2, I guess a next step would be to add speech-to-text. :D
But that is like not only super advanced stuff, but I am skeptical of its utility.
It does sound cool, I won't deny it. But I think people would barely use it beyond the first few minutes.

User avatar
K-j
Cadet 3rd Class
Posts: 41
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2016 6:49 pm

Post by K-j » Tue Nov 01, 2016 2:02 pm

I think it might look a little strange, disorientated? Regular parallel text would probably work best, on, off, pop-up options? (pop-up as in text appears for a little while when there is something new happening/to report, then disappears again, like DICE (shudder)).

Some people might like the XWA coloured HUD option, others not. Maybe there could be options like XWA, different colours to choose from, and also a slider for how opaque the background appears, 0-100%. It's been a while since I've played XWA, so I can't remember how intrusive those pop up messages (central at top of the screen) might have been, but I don't remember having any difficulties seeing because of them. I've only had a small amount of time of SWBF flight time (bit of a let down, and aiming cursor no longer shows up!), but also the messages that appear to one side of the screen don't appear to be distracting.

I figured the vocal game commands were quite a specialist thing. "Attack target.. Cover me!!! Cover!!!... wtf..." lol It could be very immersive. Especially if you put one of these on with a mic:
WedgeHelmet.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Fek'LeyrTarg
Cadet 1st Class
Posts: 243
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 12:01 am

Post by Fek'LeyrTarg » Tue Nov 01, 2016 4:20 pm

Hmmmm..... could having the mission goals and message log being shown on the CMD work?

User avatar
K-j
Cadet 3rd Class
Posts: 41
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2016 6:49 pm

Post by K-j » Wed Nov 02, 2016 4:08 pm

I've been thinking for the pop up messages, perhaps it would be best to mix the old method with the new. If you just do away with the obtrusive grey bar that ran along the bottom of the screen, and simply have the messages pop up in the bottom left of the screen like they used to, and disappear after a short while as they did? You could then also add a logged/listed version elsewhere as you suggested. Either in game, or when you used to press escape for options and other stats for instance?

User avatar
K-j
Cadet 3rd Class
Posts: 41
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2016 6:49 pm

Post by K-j » Wed Nov 02, 2016 4:47 pm

I'd forgotten about this Ansel the 3D modeller guy, but his work is mind blowing. I know you can't have that high poly count models in a game engine, but it could help fill out some details in mesh and textures that weren't there before for your rebuild. Inspirational.

https://www.artstation.com/artist/fractalsponge

azrapse
Cadet 3rd Class
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2014 7:42 am

Post by azrapse » Wed Nov 02, 2016 7:15 pm

K-j wrote:I'd forgotten about this Ansel the 3D modeller guy, but his work is mind blowing. I know you can't have that high poly count models in a game engine, but it could help fill out some details in mesh and textures that weren't there before for your rebuild. Inspirational.

https://www.artstation.com/artist/fractalsponge
Fractalsponge models are awesome!

azrapse
Cadet 3rd Class
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2014 7:42 am

Post by azrapse » Thu Nov 03, 2016 7:47 am

Fek'LeyrTarg wrote:Hmmmm..... could having the mission goals and message log being shown on the CMD work?
Yes, but I see a problem on that.
The message log shows messages which are most useful if read as soon as they appear. If you hide the messages in a mode you need to switch the CMD to, they become less useful.
Having the message log in a dedicated monitor at all time serves both the purpose of displaying the most recent messages, and allowing the player to check those that him might have missed recently.
If the dedicated monitor is to be removed, then we need to develop pop up messages that show them as soon as they happen, plus a dedicated log that can be accessed to read those that the player has missed. That is more development time, that is premium at this stage.

We will definitely have pop up messages at some point, plus the message log in a dedicated screen, for those that dislike the message log dedicated monitor. But that goes to the polishing phase. There are still so many core features not yet implemented, so I don't think it's high priority at this moment to put dev effort on creating redundant features just yet.


Talking about something else, does anyone know who created the Nebulon-B Frigate for the XWAU project? I am willing to release a playable prototype of the game, but I can't unless we create a replacement for the frigate's model (MajorParts is working on it), or we get permission to use the XWAU one.

Fek'LeyrTarg
Cadet 1st Class
Posts: 243
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 12:01 am

Post by Fek'LeyrTarg » Thu Nov 03, 2016 4:21 pm

According to the credits list of DSUCP, found on Darksaber's website, the author of the Nebulon-B is Master Qui-Gon.

User avatar
K-j
Cadet 3rd Class
Posts: 41
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2016 6:49 pm

Post by K-j » Thu Nov 03, 2016 6:30 pm

The one listed on this page by Qui-Gon and Darksaber I think is credited as being from Star Wars Galaxies?

There is a pretty detailed model listed here; though it appears to have a price, it is royalty free, can be distributed in games if packed properly (in engines such as Unity)/can't be extracted/downloaded separately, and if the IP owner allows it, which is good as free fan games are a go. With some altering it could look very good in game:

http://www.turbosquid.com/3d-models/3ds ... on/1050659

azrapse
Cadet 3rd Class
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2014 7:42 am

Post by azrapse » Thu Nov 03, 2016 7:10 pm

K-j wrote:The one listed on this page by Qui-Gon and Darksaber I think is credited as being from Star Wars Galaxies?

There is a pretty detailed model listed here; though it appears to have a price, it is royalty free, can be distributed in games if packed properly (in engines such as Unity)/can't be extracted/downloaded separately, and if the IP owner allows it, which is good as free fan games are a go. With some altering it could look very good in game:

http://www.turbosquid.com/3d-models/3ds ... on/1050659
The one in Turbosquid is 478,836 polygons. It's a model meant for 3D printing. I fear it is quite unusable for an action computer game.

I had no idea the Nebulon-B frigate from XWAU was actually ripped off SWG. I didn't think that was allowed.
Of course, it makes now sense that it wasn't created by the XWAU team, because otherwise it would have had a hangar bay, as in previous games in the series. So Darksaber and MasterQuiGon just retextured it? I guess we could then reuse it as long as we don't use the same textures, if we don't get permission from them? Or use it as a foundation for a custom model?

User avatar
K-j
Cadet 3rd Class
Posts: 41
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2016 6:49 pm

Post by K-j » Sat Nov 05, 2016 6:01 pm

I meant to add a link in my last post, which shows credit for the models. Unless someone's user name is actually Star Wars Galaxies?

Edited by Darksaber: Please DON'T link to the individual pages from my website!!

Oops, I didn't realise how high the poly count was in that other link.

The SWG model is from a game no longer played, wasn't it licensed to Sony Online Entertainment at the time? Of course that's no longer the case. It's all 'out of print' grey area stuff. I don't remember seeing one from Attack Squadrons.

Fek'LeyrTarg
Cadet 1st Class
Posts: 243
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 12:01 am

Post by Fek'LeyrTarg » Sat Nov 05, 2016 6:07 pm

K-j wrote: The SWG model is from a game no longer played, wasn't it licensed to Sony Online Entertainment at the time? Of course that's no longer the case. It's all 'out of print' grey area stuff. I don't remember seeing one from Attack Squadrons.
Actually, it's being played again thanks to the SWGEmu project. (http://www.swgemu.com/forums/index.php)
But I understand what you mean. :)

Here's a screenshot of SWG's Nebulon B Frigate:
http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/swg ... 0830114041

azrapse
Cadet 3rd Class
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2014 7:42 am

Post by azrapse » Sat Nov 05, 2016 10:02 pm

Seems to be the same model, yes.
Probably there is some texturing work to adapt it to XWA engine limitations, but the geometry seems almost identical.
Except for the turbolasers. You cannot see any turbolaser turrets on the SWG screenshot, while the XWAU frigate does have 4 turrets on the sides. Two in front, two behind.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

azrapse
Cadet 3rd Class
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2014 7:42 am

Post by azrapse » Sun Nov 06, 2016 11:23 am

Hi, Darksaber. First of all, thanks for your attention.

The main point of this thread was to ask for permission to use your models, and we were showing what we had achieved so far, in case the model creators wanted to see something first to decide.
Why is it in the XWAUP forum is something you need to answer yourself, since we were just following your instructions not to try and contact you directly, but to use the XWAUP forums instead.
Because about 4 months have gone by without answers, we started building our own models so that we had actually to show on screen if we release some downloadable version of the prototype (we didn't want to release anything that included your models without your permission).
We have a TIE Fighter and a Y-Wing, while the original X-Wing game has about 20 different ships and objects, and it would be a huge amount of work to rebuild all of that when instead it makes much more sense to collaborate and give credit, and even accept suggestions from the people in this forum.

We aren't making our own game. This is meant to be a mod to classic X-Wing (to start with), as much as XWAUP is a mod to XWA. Currently we are using no particular model format at all, but the goal is to implement an OPT importer so that the mod can be run without providing any external models other than those included with the game assets (for the 98 edition, at least).

I am sad that you don't see in this attempt at rebuilding the game engine any interest for the XWAUP project, while I cannot see them but as sibling modding projects. You rebuild the models, we are rebuilding the engine. Or wouldn't you prefer to get rid of XWA engine limitations (resolution, input, VR, lighting, texture size, lack of better shaders, lack of 3D backdrops...), while keeping all the rest? (missions, campaigns, audio assets, ...).

In any case, if you believe that we aren't welcome here, there is nothing else to say.
We respect you for what you did to keep the X-Wing series alive, and without you we would probably not be here talking about this wonderful game.
I understand your decision, based on your past experience with people taking advantage of your efforts. Please don't worry, we will never use any of your models without your explicit permission.
It feels a bit heartbreaking to be invited to leave. If you reconsider your stance towards us, we will be happy to come back, and contribute with whatever we can to your project.

Until then, or if you do not, farewell, and thank you for allowing us to express ourselves in your forum. We'll be talking about our XWVM project in our thread in the GOG forum.
Long live the XWAUP project!

User avatar
MajorParts
Cadet 3rd Class
Posts: 32
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2014 12:50 am

Post by MajorParts » Sun Nov 06, 2016 10:36 pm

Good news indeed. Thank you so much!

To anyone not aware, we also have a facebook group (sharing is encouraged)

https://www.facebook.com/groups/512806878928876/

User avatar
Vince T
Fleet Admiral (Administrator)
Posts: 14045
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2001 11:01 pm
Contact:

Post by Vince T » Sun Nov 06, 2016 10:53 pm

Nice! Joined!

Coming to think of it, why don't we have a facebook group? Might be worth it introducing the project to the 21st century :P
Your ship, Captain. I need a drink. - Vince Trageton
Vince T's X-Wing HQ - where the bad guys get their gear

azrapse
Cadet 3rd Class
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2014 7:42 am

Post by azrapse » Tue Nov 08, 2016 10:51 am

I have been working on AI, (as usual, and probably as long as the project lasts :D) and on implementing the torpedo launchers on the Y-Wing, with the instruments and all.

The torpedoes themselves need some further research. There are several "attributes" of them that aren't numerically described anywhere, as far as I know. Perhaps you know, or know where to find out, about these attributes.

I have guessed that the attributes involved are:
- Homing rating: How well a torpedo turns around to face their target. Do torpedos and missiles lead their targets? How many degrees per second can the turn?
- Locking rating: How long does it take for a torpedo to get target locked on a target? When does the reticule becomes yellow first (I mean, how many degrees away from the target is good enough?). What happens when you look away from the target for a moment?

Let's call "target lock quality" to how much a torpedo is currently locked on a ship (before or after firing it).
With a ship that we have not spent any time locking at all, it will be 0.
With a ship that we have a red target lock, it will be 1.
With a ship we have a yellow target lock (reticule), it will be a value between 0 and 1.

Somehow, this quality seems to grow while we look at the ship, at a pace that seems to match 1/7 per second. That means, it takes 7 seconds to go from total blue reticule (quality 0) to red reticule (quality 1).
My values are just from experimenting informally.
I wonder if this target lock quality increase rate is higher the more centered we keep the target ship while locking at it.
Also, I guess looking away from it decreases the quality in a similar rate? You don't totally lose all quality in one go, because if you re center the target ship, you get a red back much faster than in 7 seconds.

Also, does all of this change depending on the distance to the target ship, or the size of it?
I know that you can target Freighter-class and Capital-class ships from as far as 6 kilometers, and smaller ships can be targeted first at 3 kilometers(?). But I mean the build up and fade off times. Do you remember them being affected?

Finally, how does this target lock quality value affect the torpedo once shot?

What I have done is basically multiply the "homing rating" times the "lock quality" value.
So if a torpedo has a homing rating of 15 degress per second, that means that at a totally red target lock, it will be able to turn towards its target at a rate of 15 degrees every second, but at a yellow 0.5 quality target lock, it will be able to turn only half that much, 7.5 degrees per second.
Does this sound right to your ears?
Is there something that feels off with this design?

User avatar
Vince T
Fleet Admiral (Administrator)
Posts: 14045
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2001 11:01 pm
Contact:

Post by Vince T » Tue Nov 08, 2016 12:14 pm

Hm I can only speculate and tell from experience here.
I think so far the criteria for a successful lock was keeping the target within your firing reticle.
I don't think there is a targeting build-up, it only took the lockon time to get a solid lock, 1 or 0. As for fade, if there was one it would only influence the time you would need to reacquire the solid lock.

Locking range is likely depending on shiptype.
For small targets: 2.5km
- fighters
- shuttles
- utility vehicles
- mines
- sentient beings

For large targets: 6km
- capital ships
- stations


For containers and freighters I'd have to check in which category they fall.
Your ship, Captain. I need a drink. - Vince Trageton
Vince T's X-Wing HQ - where the bad guys get their gear

azrapse
Cadet 3rd Class
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2014 7:42 am

Post by azrapse » Tue Nov 08, 2016 1:19 pm

General_Trageton wrote:Hm I can only speculate and tell from experience here.
I think so far the criteria for a successful lock was keeping the target within your firing reticle.
I don't think there is a targeting build-up, it only took the lockon time to get a solid lock, 1 or 0. As for fade, if there was one it would only influence the time you would need to reacquire the solid lock.
Are you sure about that?
What happens when you are half ways to get a solid target lock and then instead you shoot the torpedo? Does it fly totally straight ahead? Doesn't it turn a little bit towards the target?

I actually remember from the TIE Fighter campaign, once you get to use Advanced Missiles and Advanced Torpedoes, that the briefing officer tells you, in different missions, that you don't need to wait for a full lock, and instead you can shoot them while "orange" and they will still hit most of the time.
That led me to the hypothesis that the advanced missiles and torpedoes have so good homing rating that even when negatively modified by a semi-lock, they are still almost as good if not better than a normal missile or torpedo.

I mean, if it is true that locking is either 1 or 0, then shooting a torpedo at any reticule color other than solid red should make the torpedo fly straight, and not home at all, right?

User avatar
Vince T
Fleet Admiral (Administrator)
Posts: 14045
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2001 11:01 pm
Contact:

Post by Vince T » Tue Nov 08, 2016 1:30 pm

Like I said, I'm definitely not sure. :D
It's been some time sice I've played the game but those were the experiences I recall. May as well be poor perception on my side, especially since a gradual lock would definitely be appreciable.
Your ship, Captain. I need a drink. - Vince Trageton
Vince T's X-Wing HQ - where the bad guys get their gear

azrapse
Cadet 3rd Class
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2014 7:42 am

Post by azrapse » Wed Nov 09, 2016 9:27 pm

Some screenshots of how torpedoes look, as well as the frigate, with higher resolution texture, bump mapping, and emission channel for the windows and lights.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
K-j
Cadet 3rd Class
Posts: 41
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2016 6:49 pm

Post by K-j » Thu Nov 10, 2016 1:08 pm

I never knew why they made the in-game proton torpedoes and concussion missiles look different to how they looked in the films. Does anyone else know?
Protorp.jpg
Missile.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Vince T
Fleet Admiral (Administrator)
Posts: 14045
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2001 11:01 pm
Contact:

Post by Vince T » Thu Nov 10, 2016 1:47 pm

I guess they mainly tried to make the various warheads distinguishable, especially with TIE Fighter bringing in new additional warheads that weren't in the movie. So you have:
- Missiles / adv. Missiles: Thin/Red
- Torpedoes / adv. Torpedos: Thick/Blue
- Heavy Rockets: Thick Yellow/Brown-ish
- Space Bombs: What color were they again?
- Mag Pulse: Thin/Purple
- Ion Pulse: Thin/Blue

The Prequel Trilogy + TCW then introduced blue missiles

TFA Introduced Mag Pulse to the Movie cannon although I can't remember how they looked.

I know the XWAUP Weapons upgrade addressed some of the looks so e.g. the Proton torpedoes would look somewhat similar to their original, at least in shape.
Your ship, Captain. I need a drink. - Vince Trageton
Vince T's X-Wing HQ - where the bad guys get their gear

azrapse
Cadet 3rd Class
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2014 7:42 am

Post by azrapse » Thu Nov 10, 2016 5:05 pm

The first inspiration for the torpedoes was both X-Wing and TIE Fighter. The trail attempts to be like the one you see in the flight engine. The warhead itself, looks like the torpedo in the ordnance selection screen in TIE Fighter.

Why we use the looks of the game and not of the movie?
To start with, there isn't one canonical torpedo and one canonical missile. The movies weren't really trying to be consistent with each other, or at least the didn't reuse the same kind of weapons. In the Original Trilogy, missiles and torpedoes looked like K-j's screenshots show: torpedoes are short conical shapes with short red trail, missiles are arrow head fiery shapes with even shorter orange trails.
Then in Attack of the Clones we see these missiles being shot by Jango Fett towards Obi Wan:
aotcmissile.jpg
And in The Force Awakens, Poe Dameron and the other T-70 X-Wings fire these torpedoes against the totally-not-the-Death-Star's-exhaust-port thingie:
tfatorpedoes.jpg
The missile looks like, well, the missiles looked like in the ordnance selection screen in TIE Fighter, more or less. Less red, more whiteish, with a blue trail.
The torpedoes look like bright energy balls with a medium blue trail.

We can argue that the movie looks is canon while the videogame looks is non canon(even when the movies contradict themselves). But in 2012, after the acquisition of LFL by Disney, all the old Expanded Universe was jettisoned and new canon was given a blank slate with one rule changed:
From that point on, all product published under Star Wars brand would be supervised by LFL to make sure that they are 100% canon, or they wouldn't be released at all.

Then we got this with the X-Wing Miniature Game:
ordnance.jpg
So it seems that there are lots of different torpedoes, missiles, rockets, bombs and mines in Star Wars, all of them cannon.
The Heavy Rockets from the games clearly match the Proton Rockets in the image.
The bright bluish torpedoes from The Force Awakens seem to be the Plasma Torpedoes.
Jango Fett's missiles seem to match either the Ion Missiles or one of the Homing Missiles.
The missiles from the Return of the Jedi screenshot look most than anything like the Advanced Proton Torpedoes, but if we need to choose a missiles, I would choose the Advanced Homing Missile, for that arrowhead shape.


All in all, I would say, it doesn't matter. In a galaxy as big as Star Wars', we could have different weapon manufacturers creating the same category of weapons, but with different shapes and particularities. I am fine with that.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
K-j
Cadet 3rd Class
Posts: 41
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2016 6:49 pm

Post by K-j » Fri Nov 11, 2016 9:58 am

Good post.

From one shot to the next the proton torpedoes' look differs somewhat. The actual warhead cone is quite prominent through out though, can really see them in this slow-mo gif:

http://i.stack.imgur.com/syxHD.gif

They're also just not seen much on screen for it to drastically deter the games' overall movie look. You could quite easily find on overall medium, or stick to the original games and not hinder anything. But I seriously really wouldn't worry about Disney's canon having anything to do with, well, anything. Too many inconsistencies, discrepancies and inaccuracies already.

If the Rebel Alliance were equipped with Jango's smart missiles, they probably could've just flown themselves through the trench and straight down that exhaust port! ;)

Post Reply