Print

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

[PRiME]

We are aiming for a summer release a new version with completely reworked sandbox editor,

What I would like to see cameni, is the ability to use plugin simulators like Havok 2.0 with the engine which allows for physics and netcode simulation (if I remember correctly.). Also the ability to assign projectile properties to vehicles such as tanks and machine guns etc...

I really would like to play around making a small tank game for my friends and I to have fun with. Also Havok 2.0 can simulate tank tracks also so that be nice, I understand licensing may be involved but I really do not care about that, just being ABLE to do it is enough to get started with stuff.

For the longest time I have been sitting on the fence wondering if Outerra is EVER going to be a viable engine for vehicle/plane game play. Hope that changes soon, because you guys are sitting on a virtual gold mine and it seems you're not fully aware of it given the limited progress we have seen over the last few years (in functionality mainly).

[cameni]

So you are saying that our progress is slow because we aren't fully aware on what we are sitting, and we are just lingering around

Licensing issues would be the least of the problem. Physics engines generally do not support large spherical worlds and if you base your thoughts on some finely tuned demos, it doesn't mean they can scale (they usually don't, else they'd make them full scale in the first place). Or they are unsuitable for dynamically and procedurally generated worlds, using primarily precompiled data.

If it was easy we'd have done it already, unfortunately everything is much more complicated at this scale.

[PRiME]

So you are saying that our progress is slow because we aren't fully aware on what we are sitting, and we are just lingering around

Just meant progress just seems to have been slow as of lately, meant no offense by it. Perhaps real life just takes over sometimes

I understand a global physics render isn't possible but configuring so it only calculates a local portion of where the player is (this is how its done normally) should be possible, is worth looking into and not automatically presuming it won't work or can't support it.

Allot of engines will also call upon the physics system within a set area AFTER the world has loaded, so not sure how procedural asset issue can conflict with this.

Anyway if you've tried looking into getting something like Havok working and its clear it won't work then that's ok. They offer free use of their middleware btw for testing purposes.

[necro]

Hope that changes soon, because you guys are sitting on a virtual gold mine and it seems you're not fully aware of it given the limited progress we have seen over the last few years (in functionality mainly).

Sorry, but i couldntresist. You know nothing Jon Snow.

[PRiME]

Sure, but at the end of the day. If I can't get access to whats under the tip of the ice burg then not much point boasting about it is there?

[necro]

The point is that they are working hard on this product. Complaining about slow progress without being part of them is just unfair. Wait for the summer release which will prove progress. I'm following OT since 2010. To this point of time we hadn't clouds, we hadn't terrain shadowing, we hadn't animations, we hadn't the new material processor, etc. Many time consuming tasks are accomplished now. I dont have the feeling that they are sitting on their gold mine and dont know how to handle this. At least they aren't 15 year old MMO project leaders with unrealistic goals. So that makes me trust in their skills.

[Acetone]

I think it's also important to mention that there is a lot of work done behind closed doors in the Outerra modding scene, which explains why some users are really quiet right now. This progress was made possible thanks to the direct participation of Outerra developers 

[bomber]

Why not work with what you've got, rather than wait for something to come.

Simon.

[bomber]

I'd like to make another point, yet I'd like to make it clear that what I'm saying isn't aimed at the orginal poster or any individual, but is rather an obvious piece of human behaviour..

The modding community can go two ways..... it can sit and wait for the perfect application, with all the bells and whistles that they wish to see before committing any time and effort...
or
The modding community can recognise the applications short falls and voice them to the developers, but at the same time get stuck in with all the blood and guts struggling in an imperfect world.

The normal unconsious human response by the developers to these actions are as you yourself would behave if in their shoes....

Loads of modding work by individuals and small teams within the community has been done, 3d modeling, 2d artwork, JS scripting, FDM, landscaping etc....and the people that have done this work,. have struggled and reworked and simply shown willing.... Now it's only human nature to want to help these people, so you can explect the developers to be more open to improvements in the areas effecting these peoples contributions because they can see that their improvements are being used straight away.

The point I'd make is ..... Yes voice an opinion about what's missing and what you'd like to see....but then you have two choices.

Anyway that's my take on it.

[zzz]

Why not work with what you've got, rather than wait for something to come.

Simon.

There are limits to what you can do.

[bomber]

There's always limits to what you can do.... that's life... the trick is to work around those limits where possible and where not to expose those limits, not by just posting on a forum "can we have this that or the other feature" but by actually producing an object that missing key features and thus raising the level of importance that this be rectified... And the developers WILL rectifiy it once it's staring them in the face.

We're either a modding community or a user community....

[zzz]

We're either a modding community or a user community....

We're paying customers.

And I've made plenty of new aspects for my work within the confines of the current Outerra version, but unless you're suggesting we should be creating our own APIs for core functionality then your comments contribute nothing except for trying to deflect criticism.

[bomber]

We're paying customers.

And received what you payed for....

And I've made plenty of new aspects for my work within the confines of the current Outerra version,

I've never seen any of your vehicles, such that I can learn from your contributions... where's the link ?

but unless you're suggesting we should be creating our own APIs for core functionality then your comments contribute nothing except for trying to deflect criticism.

An API.... for what exaclty ?
and if given it tomorrow, would your project be able to be completed 100%, or would there still be a list of requirements ?

Simon

[necro]

We're paying customers.

You paid for early access and the game when its finished. You have early access and you will get the game. So at which point exaclty we had to be upset?

And I've made plenty of new aspects for my work within the confines of the current Outerra version, but unless you're suggesting we should be creating our own APIs for core functionality then your comments contribute nothing except for trying to deflect criticism.

You cannot create your own api without getting access to the source code. This does not make sense in any dimension. Criticismn is not recommended here because it wont affect anything. They are working on 100% each day. What does that mean? Yes, exactly. The current progress is the best we can get now. Throwing money at them wont change anything. At least bomber had said it: What would you do with an API now?

[PRiME]

At the moment you can make vehicles and get them to move around in a sports car like fashion. I haven't gone mad with making things primarily because Outerra is still a very big unknown for me, and I have been following it since 2011.

(I don't see clouds/grass/shadow/material additions as representing the GUTS of a flexible game/simulator engine!)

Unknown in that, 'is this going to be a engine the indie developer community can use' or will it silently one day in the future be sold to the military and we'll be forced to use the existing Anteworld stuff in a limited community mod fashion.

Just my 2 cents as how I see it that's all, I look forward to the update none the less, see what it brings to the table