CoD vs some other sims that model Kent?

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by Heliocon

So then the problem comes down to yet again optimization, the "green puke" (which I really dont think is as bad as you say, because its a background technique and very discrete) is a work around for display far off objects. Now in COD you can see further technically, but that doesnt actually mean when your playing in the game, even at full zoom you can make out details that far away. They could easily implement trees at a certain distance as sprites, same with buildings (lots of games do this) and have the speed tree operate only at a distance where you can tell if the tree is a sprite. Same with buildings.

They are clearly not done with CoD. I'm sure they will continue to work on making it look better. But it's pretty clear that they have an excellent base to start with.

Originally Posted by Heliocon

As for collisions while they do have to track each plane, all they need to do is: P=plane, G=ground, A=altitude from nearest ground surface, V=velocity.
Using simple equations they should create a bubble around each aircraft. So trees only receive hitboxes when a plane is within a certain limited distance

The problem is that they still have to calculate all these things for every tree on the map. When you say "within a certain limited distance", they currently still have to calculate what the distance is for every tree and every aircraft. That is a lot of calculations even if you're only checking for aircraft which are close enough to trees that you should be checking for collisions.

I would fix it by breaking up the map into boxes. I would constantly keep track of which box the aircraft is in and only check it's distance from trees in that box. However, I have no idea if that is even possible with their engine. It might not be. But eventually I am sure they will find a fix.

But thank you for the polite reply, so I will pay the same respect back to you.

If you can refrain from calling me a moron, I can try to treat you with respect. But you have to give the devs a break. What they are trying to do is not nearly as easy as you seem to think it is. I have more than 20 years of programming experience with hospital software. When I make a mistake it could cause one of our users to kill a patient, and they don't get as upset when they have a problem with our software as many in here have got about this game. It's a game. No one is going to die. Lighten up a little.

[Heliocon]

Originally Posted by David Hayward

They are clearly not done with CoD. I'm sure they will continue to work on making it look better. But it's pretty clear that they have an excellent base to start with.



The problem is that they still have to calculate all these things for every tree on the map. When you say "within a certain limited distance", they currently still have to calculate what the distance is for every tree and every aircraft. That is a lot of calculations even if you're only checking for aircraft which are close enough to trees that you should be checking for collisions.

I would fix it by breaking up the map into boxes. I would constantly keep track of which box the aircraft is in and only check it's distance from trees in that box. However, I have no idea if that is even possible with their engine. It might not be. But eventually I am sure they will find a fix.




If you can refrain from calling me a moron, I can try to treat you with respect. But you have to give the devs a break. What they are trying to do is not nearly as easy as you seem to think it is. I have more than 20 years of programming experience with hospital software. When I make a mistake it could cause one of our users to kill a patient, and they don't get as upset when they have a problem with our software as many in here have got about this game. It's a game. No one is going to die. Lighten up a little.

Programming for a game vs hospital software are too entirely different beasts, even if you program for a UI etc - the crossover is very minimal.
As for the calculations - reread the post, they dont need to calculate anything until the aircraft gets to a certain altitude, then the hitboxes would be generated, no calculations need to be made unless an impact occurs. Each tree would have a hitbox which is generated around it when an aircraft gets close, since the game irrespective of trees has to track the aircraft anyway,you can impement a "if" and "then" scenario. This is likely what they they already tried (luthier mentioned that they tried hitboxes when I suggested it, but also said they have to do it for every tree in the game and every plane *facepalm*). Its not an excellent base if it doesnt work, its not that the game has problems, its that the problems it has should not be an issue/should not even be there for a modern game. Over that unfortunetly they developed it in a way that is limiting them from offloading work to additional cores/threads. For god sake a ipad 2 has 2 cores, why do people still use 1 core machines?...

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by Heliocon

Programming for a game vs hospital software are too entirely different beasts, even if you program for a UI etc - the crossover is very minimal.
As for the calculations - reread the post, they dont need to calculate anything until the aircraft gets to a certain altitude, then the hitboxes would be generated, no calculations need to be made unless an impact occurs. Each tree would have a hitbox which is generated around it when an aircraft gets close, since the game irrespective of trees has to track the aircraft anyway,you can impement a "if" and "then" scenario. This is likely what they they already tried (luthier mentioned that they tried hitboxes when I suggested it, but also said they have to do it for every tree in the game and every plane *facepalm*). Its not an excellent base if it doesnt work, its not that the game has problems, its that the problems it has should not be an issue/should not even be there for a modern game. Over that unfortunetly they developed it in a way that is limiting them from offloading work to additional cores/threads. For god sake a ipad 2 has 2 cores, why do people still use 1 core machines?...

Programming is programming, and you're not a programmer. You are in no position to "facepalm" over anything Luthier tells you.

[Heliocon]

Originally Posted by David Hayward

Programming is programming, and you're not a programmer. You are in no position to "facepalm" over anything Luthier tells you.

Java, programming is not just programming, because when you say that it makes you look rather stupid. Any qualifications you claim here and cannot back up make you look idiotic. Programming simple operations for utilities is NOTHING like programming a game engine. Different language, different requirments. Also you are not a programmer either, unless you are willing to publish your personal details I would say argument from authority is best left unsaid.

You sound like a kid who knows how to play a song on a guitar and since he can do that, he can conduct an orchestra. Also please expand on what equipment you programme exactly? Does it use hitboxes?

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by Heliocon

Java, programming is not just programming, because when you say that it makes you look rather stupid. Any qualifications you claim here and cannot back up make you look idiotic. Programming simple operations for utilities is NOTHING like programming a game engine. Different language, different requirments. Also you are not a programmer either, unless you are willing to publish your personal details I would say argument from authority is best left unsaid.

You sound like a kid who knows how to play a song on a guitar and since he can do that, he can conduct an orchestra. Also please expand on what equipment you programme exactly? Does it use hitboxes?

The sort of programming I do is absolutely nothing like programming a game, that's why I never even considered offering solutions to Luthier. It's also why I'm only using generalities.

You said that you have minimal programming knowledge. Where do you get the nerve to criticize something when you have virtually no experience of your own?

mate do you own the game ?

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by BigPickle

mate do you own the game ?

No. What difference does that make?

[Heliocon]

Originally Posted by David Hayward

The sort of programming I do is absolutely nothing like programming a game, that's why I never even considered offering solutions to Luthier. It's also why I'm only using generalities.

You said that you have minimal programming knowledge. Where do you get the nerve to criticize something when you have virtually no experience of your own?

Ummm - because I have some experience with programming but I know how programmers solve these issues because I have been playing games/beta testing for a good 6+ years now. I also spent a year in class using Maya 7.5/Autodesk which is what is used for game models and CGI. For a good amount of time I also considered attending Digipen (a school for game design).
I also am a big hardware techie. Now none of that really matters because anyone could claim these things, thats why I am always careful to rely on and explain everything I say as per the game engine. You wont see me throwing around opinions on other topics based on what I have "heard" or on "generalities" because I do not have the knowledge to contribute meaningfully to those debates.

Thats why I normally bring out the truckload of quotes/posts I made in mid-late 2010, and the best one is when Luthier said DX11 tesselation would never be used for anything other than "plane wheels". I said that was absurd etc, and earlier this year in that german interview they said what they would use DX11 tesselation for (all the things I talked about) and direct compute for the physics (only person/first person here to ever suggest or comment on it) while using the new shader/lighting pipeline for the engine (especially clouds etc) and therefore confirmed all of my points.

Also as someone who has done alot of talking with devs a year or two back in closed beta about collision detection in MMORPGs (most games you can just run through people) I gained alot of knowledge about how it is done. Same thing for Closed beta on Mortal Online and Darkfall which are the two most recent games that use multiple hitboxes.

I dont comment on things I dont know about, as others have re-affirmed my point there is 0 reason for them to be having to generate hitboxes for all trees all the time. There are easy fixes other companies have used to solve these types of problems, maybe it wasnt translated into russian?

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by Heliocon

Ummm - because I have some experience with programming but I know how programmers solve these issues because I have been playing games/beta testing for a good 6+ years now.

Being a beta tester does not make you a programmer. Nor do you have anything to do with this project, so every comment you make about it is nothing but a guess.

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by Heliocon

As for the calculations - reread the post, they dont need to calculate anything until the aircraft gets to a certain altitude, then the hitboxes would be generated, no calculations need to be made unless an impact occurs.

If no calculations have to be made until an impact occurs, how does the computer determine that an impact has occurred? Magic?