Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[PytonPago]

I doubt it would be possible to set the funding goal to a sum sufficient for a full out of the box simulator (which is assumed to require >2.5mil), given the state of the community, but an incremental development towards an open simulator platform could work with less. In any case, there's still a lot of work we have to do even before launching the campaign, if we want it to succeed.

 ... well, doesnt need to have 30 planes, 30 helos, 30 cars, 30 trains and 30 ships/subs ... if each had one "sample" model made deep as it can (thought to support as many possible functionalityes for each class to keep the room for more than just basics) and import-modding is done well, content would come eventually from people ... 2.5 mil for a dev team for this purpose would be neat, but i think its a much optimistic number for such a project (unforseen stuff allways likes to eat gold-nuggets somewhere in the dark corners).

[bomber]

Yes working with less, progressively working with you guys to build a sim is the way forward in my opinion for a community development project. Not everyone needs an out of the box sim before they start creating content..... Which you're seeing at present here..

However from my point of view, these projects are somewhat hidden within posts and not highlighted enough, so as to attract more members into the teams...

Can I suggest dedicated mod forums.. I'd like a Target4Today forum that could be used to generate interest... And I'm sure there are others, and in doing so it shows yet again the willingness of the Outerra team to work with its modding community.

Regards

Simon.

[Revolver]

...2.5 mil for a dev team for this purpose would be neat, but i think its a much optimistic number for such a project (unforseen stuff allways likes to eat gold-nuggets somewhere in the dark corners).

Sorry, dass ich mich wieder einmische, aber 2-3 mil sind viel zu wenig für ein Flugsim.
Da kannst Du locker über 8- 10 mil mitrechnen. Allein schon die alle Infos über
verschiedenen Fluggeräten (jetzt ohne Bodeneinheiten mitgerechnet) werden alle
vernünftigen rahmen sprengen. Vorausgesagt, dass man einen korrekten Flugsim
machen will und nicht so ein BSh...$&%, wie DCS, IL-2 StOrmofik, WT etc...
Bei allen anderen gebe ich Dir recht....die Leute, die sich wirklich daran interessiert sind
werden kommen und ja - sie werden zahlen.

p.s. man soll sie aber nicht verarschen und jeden Schritt durchdacht machen...sonst
wird man zum 2-en Schefftschenko bzw. Zhilzoff werden...

[HiFlyer]

...2.5 mil for a dev team for this purpose would be neat, but i think its a much optimistic number for such a project (unforseen stuff allways likes to eat gold-nuggets somewhere in the dark corners).

Sorry, dass ich mich wieder einmische, aber 2-3 mil sind viel zu wenig für ein Flugsim.
Da kannst Du locker über 8- 10 mil mitrechnen. Allein schon die alle Infos über
verschiedenen Fluggeräten (jetzt ohne Bodeneinheiten mitgerechnet) werden alle
vernünftigen rahmen sprengen. Vorausgesagt, dass man einen korrekten Flugsim
machen will und nicht so ein BSh...$&%, wie DCS, IL-2 StOrmofik, WT etc...
Bei allen anderen gebe ich Dir recht....die Leute, die sich wirklich daran interessiert sind
werden kommen und ja - sie werden zahlen.

p.s. man soll sie aber nicht verarschen und jeden Schritt durchdacht machen...sonst
wird man zum 2-en Schefftschenko bzw. Zhilzoff werden...

Much of the cost of a sim is in just creating the world. Outerra is already planning to do that anyway, and having OSM will just make it even easier to fill that world. Most of the cost in making an Outerra sim would probably come from specialized stuff like paying for certain types of data: Airports, sophisticated avionics, licensing etc.

Interestingly enough there are volunteers here willing to help make some of that happen already. Don't think of it as starting from scratch: think of it as adding to Outerra.

[PytonPago]

Interestingly enough there are volunteers here willing to help make some of that happen already. Don't think of it as starting from scratch: think of it as adding to Outerra.

 ... actually, its quite possible many of those will be done anyway thanks to the TitanIM guys project. So ... i guess we keep some deposits for support aside and jump to Blender/MAX again ! 

[Uriah]

I genuinely like it here, it has a nice feel this forum and I congratulate you on that. There's a level of mutual respect that comes across from the Outerra team towards people that are creating content that not seen in other flight sims. And because of it there's a genuine patience and warmth shown by the community towards the Outerra team, there's an understanding that things take time.

I really couldn't agree more! 

Regards,
Uriah

[HiFlyer]

I think the efforts over at Avsim and other places, to let people know about Outerra, its progress and the possibilities, has been in many ways about shining a light towards an area that with the community's long standing focus on FSX, could easily be otherwise ignored, losing what could be a golden opportunity.

Even X-plane, with all its many features, has failed to draw a significant following comparatively, making it seem sometimes that the community will hold on until the very last moment, covering FSX with layer after layer of new paint, while ignoring the programs inescapable age.

DTG might be a savior, but using "Microsoft flight technology" can it really be something new? The jury is still out until DTG finally speaks up.

In the meantime, the tone of the Avsim thread leaves me fairly certain no bold initiatives will originate from within the current community, and I'm very unsure about the Nexgen initiative as well. For me, Outerra remains one of the most promising options for a true Nexgen simulator (among so many other things!) and as long as there is a forum, I think I and others will continue trying to spread the word, and keep the community up to date.

[bomber]

Nexgen has shot itself in the foot... With all the talk of hidden forums and NDA's and not wanting others to 'steal' their ideas..

Ideas have value yes, kinda like a free £1.50 bugger
voucher that you get... However it's monetary value is 0.00001pence.

An idea has little value, untill it's implemented in code...

Going 'dark', talking behind closed doors or privately will just destroy their greatest asset, enthusiasm and momentum..

I'd say something over there, however I've been told by a young sprog to only post things they like to hear.

[HiFlyer]

Well, I'm certainly not a stranger to hidden forums and NDA's, and certainly if this reached a certain stage it would probably become a necessity.....

But I'm not sure why it would be important at this stage, when, as you said, enthusiasm and momentum (and hence relative openness) is so important.

On the other hand, some tough business/legal reasons were given that I have no experience to judge, so.......... whatever.

[bomber]

Well the threads from Stephen are now being locked at avsim.... 162 days of simposium over at nexgen still to go.

[StephenB]

Hey Guys,
Stephen B. Here from nexgenflightsim.

I read through this thread with great interest and thought I'd add my two pence worth.

The SIM-Posium was always meant to be a community driven effort to discuss the future of flight simulation. The Idea was that folks like you, particularly those who have skills would become a part of the SIM-Posium and actively take part in the discussion. Through your leadership and guidance and others like you I think we could have (and still can) have great discussions that lead the community towards a consensus as to what can be done to ensure the future of flight simulation.

Several comments have been made regarding our lack of experience... well... you're absolutely right... the handful of folks who hang out at the SIM-Posium do have a lack of experience, but that could all change if individuals who do have experience, knowledge and expertise would get involved.

UNIGINE Sim may wind up not being the ideal engine for the development of a next generation flight simulator and then again... in the right hands, it could be. But with that being said... so could Outerra... but because of our lack of experience over at the SIM-Posium (as noted in a comment made earlier) I doubt seriously that the Outerra boys would let us take a serious look at it to learn of it's potential. But... just for a moment... think what could and still can happen if all you folks here with all this experience joined together and created a clear roadmap for the evaluation of Outerra, UNIGINE, etc.  I'd be willing to bet that we could then have access, because the talent and knowledge would be there.

Here's the point... the SIM-Posium was created for one purpose and one purpose only... to gather the community together under one roof (so to speak) as a place where all this talent and knowledge could be used to forward the progress of flight simulation.

It can still happen... and I, for one, would welcome each and everyone of you to join us and help us organize, and take leadership roles and... well...  together... do something great.

As individuals... no one is going to take the flight simulation community seriously... but as a gathered force... now that's a different story.

Stephen B.

What happened, at least from my perspective, is that we had a lot of people drop by to see what was going on but never really did get into the discussion of the possibilities.

[HiFlyer]

Well my login over there stopped working, probably for about the 5th time, and I kind of gave up on posting. 

I do stop by and read the occasional post by others though, but honestly, there doesn't seem to be that much activity, really.

[StephenB]

Well my login over there stopped working, probably for about the 5th time, and I kind of gave up on posting. 

I do stop by and read the occasional post by others though, but honestly, there doesn't seem to be that much activity, really.

If you want to get logged in, please contact kc999 he'll be able to fix the issues.

You're right, there isn't a lot of activity... but that could change if everyone here who posted in this thread came over and helped us out. There are a lot of thoughts here on this thread that if implemented into the SIM-Posium could go a long way towards success. Activity... has always been dependent upon those interested to come and join the discussion. It's a movement... simple as that... and the more people who help... the greater the movement will become.

It boils down to each individual deciding for themselves... are they completely satisfied with what they have and the future direction that is being taken in the world of flight simulation or do they want something better, something newer, another step towards "as real as it gets". Each person can make a difference and contribute to the future of flight simulation. Making a choice and getting involved... that's as simple as it gets.

Stephen B.

[bomber]

The SIM-Posium was always meant to be a community driven effort to discuss the future of flight simulation. The Idea was that folks like you, particularly those who have skills would become a part of the SIM-Posium and actively take part in the discussion. Through your leadership and guidance and others like you I think we could have (and still can) have great discussions that lead the community towards a consensus as to what can be done to ensure the future of flight simulation.

Hi Stephen,

I want to try and explain something about this place...

We've all paid a small sum to evaluate Outerra, so it's a community that has put their money where their mouth is...

Outerra is available for us to evaluate, and not just that but to add objects, work with the product and the developers to identify missing functionality and over time hopefully add them.

Now I watched from the sidelines for a few years, because Outerra although good in many features had for me a key missing feature.... Flight Model creation... It wasn't for me to add the flight model functionality, but to point out that it was missing.

Outerra added JSBsim... Lets look at it, it's open source, constantly evolving, used by universities around the world and within other flight sims such as Flightgear and so versatile that if you want (and I did) you can rework it to suit your requirements such as the inclusion of damage within the very heart of the calculations rather than just as an add-on.

So what I'm saying is Outerra gave me the opportunity as a modder (not a programmer) to continue my hobby on flight modelling by using the best system, JSBsim that's currently available... And that's a perfect example of the modding community and the engine developers working together..

Now above you talk about discussion and evaluation.... yet at the same time working on an ungine demo and that's surely wrong as a demo has nothing to do with evaluation, in it's pure sense of the term...It's about looking at what the product has to offer in it's present form and future possibilities of the engine, it's developers and community....

Isn't that the symposium stated intentions ?
The symposium ought to be discussing the requirements of an engine and then evaluating 2, 3 or 4 engines to see where they meet the requirement and their intentions.

You request access to Outerra, the core code ?... but that's not required to evaluate it's present form, and you can certainly evaluate it's developers and community because they're here.

Put your hand in your pocket, (there's no free ride in life) and join this community, me, hiflyer etc by supporting the development and then there'll be three people over at the symposium that can evaluate this product.... as opposed to just dismissing all the comments hiflyer has posted.

Simon

[HiFlyer]

Now above you talk about discussion and evaluation.... yet at the same time working on an ungine demo and that's surely wrong as a demo has nothing to do with evaluation, in it's pure sense of the term...It's about looking at what the product has to offer in it's present form and future possibilities of the engine, it's developers and community....

Isn't that the symposium stated intentions ?
The symposium ought to be discussing the requirements of an engine and then evaluating 2, 3 or 4 engines to see where they meet the requirement and their intentions.

This is where I began to get lost. All engines should have been on an even keel, with input from anyone from the community that expressed a willingness to participate. Unfortunately, true discussion/debate seemed absent. There was strong sense of predestination to the whole process, and that left questions about the democratic nature of the choices being made. You lost a lot of people right there, and it'll be hard to get them back.

This isn't about Outerra by the way. I think that if in the end, after a general discussion of the merits, it was legitimately decided that the engine in its current state was inappropriate, that would have been fine. But that should have been a community decision according the the stated principals of the symposium, and it clearly was not. There's a feeling that discussion of other engines (not just Outerra) was deflected, and this has helped create a certain loss of faith in the workings of the symposium.