@Treadmill103 Guess what, one of the people whom this hyar talk is about is going through all my posts and removing all their upvotes. Only thing is, they're so smart they upvoted the builds they hadn't upvoted previously. Must be one a dem inty-lectuals.
I usually never say this, but I'll make an exception: LOL!
(Their username rhymes with "forever cry"). Hil-freaking-arious.
@Mustang51 I don't know, it might get enough upvotes to be noticeable to the developers, but I doubt it. I'm guessing most users would be against the idea of paying more for anything.
@Treadmill103 Yah, I like big engines... speakin er which, this mighty fine lady tol' me I mus' be com-pen-say-tin fer my small peanuts cuz mah airyplane an' 'specially ma engines wer so durn big. You know anythin' 'bout dat? Duz dat mean guys who fly them itty-bitty fairy-toy ultra-lights have de bigges' peanuts? How duz dat work? I doan' even grow peanuts, fer Chrissake.
"Toroidal?" Thar ye go wit dem eddicated wurds agin. Dun ye know, we doan' like eddication 'roun' heah? We're salt-of-the-earth types, we work widder hands, not er brains. Whud are you, some kind of intylectual er sumpin? :)
@Mustang51 And as for ads, I wouldn't want them (I'd block them in any case, for privacy, security, and annoyance reasons). I don't think this website gets enough traffic to make a meaningful amount of money from ads anyway. I'd rather pay more.
@Mustang51 I'd love DLC -- maps, missions, parts, the lot: I'd be all "shut up and take my money" -- but the limiting factor, for maps and missions at least, is performance. If I'm flying a 1000-part build and spawn another AI-flown instance of it, the game becomes totally unplayable on my beast of a PC. Mobiles/tablets are a lot more limited. The SR2 engine seems to be better optimized, so let's see what that can handle.
Who knows, maybe some enterprising user can write a conversion tool to make SP builds playable in SR2. As long as they keep the file format open, I don't think that would be too hard.
@MAHADI I'm saying nobody can change a person, not others, not the person themselves. You see that on TV and in movies all the time -- someone resolves to become a better person and does -- but I'm sure I have a bit more life experience than you, and I can tell you, I've never seen that happen. The nasty kids I knew are now nasty grownups, the stupid kids are now stupid grownups, the nice kids are nice grownups. No exceptions.
I, too, would like to believe that people can change, but in all my life I haven't seen a single person do that. You can break a person mentally and/or physically and change their behaviour temporarily that way, but other than that, "the child is the father of the man."
Anyway, that's about as much as I want to speak of regarding that individual. Let's just enjoy building and appreciating cool stuff, ok?
@Mustang51 Sure, I get what you mean, but I'm not sure it can be done without fundamentally changing the game engine. Right now the game handles blocks as separate entities, so if you want to paint a shape made out of a bunch of blocks, especially if the shape has anything but flat surfaces, the engine would have to calculate the "total surface" of the shape, then map a texture to it. I'm pretty sure that's very difficult or impossible without converting the "bunch of separate blocks" to one mesh.
Also, for anything but flat surfaces -- if the user wants a paint a decal on a curved surface, for instance -- you'd need to project the flat decal on to the curved surface without distorting it, which is probably not possible with the current engine.
If we're talking about painting a texture on a flat block, then mounting that block on the airplane, yeah, that could probably be done quite easily. But flat blocks sticking out all over curved fuselages would just look ugly.
The other big problem with allowing users to add their own textures, of course, is the inevitable troublemakers who'll be sticking dirty pictures all over their planes, in obvious and hidden places. If some parent finds porn on something their 13-year-old is playing, well, that's a can of worms I'm sure nobody wants to open.
Finally, I'm pretty sure SP won't be getting any major updates any more. SR2 is supposed to be a superset of SP, and maintaining two codebases is just too hard for a small team like Jundroo. I'm OK with that, as long as they add weapons and lots of targets. Hopefully someday....
If there was a desktop-only building game, so much could be done in terms of tools. You could take a cylinder, make it tapered using whatever curve you like at both ends, and you have a fuselage. Add a wing (with the proper airfoil shape), tell the game engine to blend it into the fuselage, add flaps and control surfaces, etc. and the engine could automatically do it for you, including hinges and pistons, etc. The lego-like approach is too limited.
@Mustang51 Nah, if you look at those builds, they're only 100-200 parts or so, and I would just edit the numbers directly in the XML file instead of using Overload or Fine Tuner, so it didn't take that long. It was just tedious.
@Mustang51 Ha, no. This degree of smoothness is possible to achieve by hand (using a calculator or Excel or something), but that would take hours and hours, if not days. My first few builds were made by hand, before I got tired of the drudgery and wrote some programs to generate shapes for me. Now I just define curves using code, and the programs generate the shapes out of fuselage blocks in one go. On this plane, for instance, the nose cone, tapered fuselage, cockpit front curve, cockpit rear curve, engine spike, inlet cowling, nacelle, etc., are all individual subassemblies, generated separately. Then I snap them together in the designer, add flight capability and weapons, and bam, shiny new plane.
@Mostly kind of. I generate the individual shapes separately, like nose cone, rear fuselage, engine inlet cowling, cockpit front, cockpit rear, etc. Then i put them together in the designer, add flight capability, and weapons.
@Mustang51 I've never played SP on a Mac, so can't say for sure, but as long as it allows you to access the XML files, you should have the same total freedom as on Windows.
@jamesPLANESii Getting upset in an argument is a sure sign that deep down, you know you're losing.
Again, not interested in your challenge, or your fallacious arguments. You enjoy doing things the dumb, primitive, laborious way? Good on you. I prefer working the smart way. Now be on your way, do your thing, and don't presume to tell people what to do or how to do it. (I have the right to say this because you started this.)
I don't know about you, but I have limited time in this world, and I'd rather spend it creating new things than copying what others have already done. There's nothing creative about replicas. It's drudge work. What you're spending days or weeks building could be done by a computer in seconds, if not milliseconds, and done better (perfectly) at that.
Again, because I have limited time, I like to spend it efficiently. SP is not a game that makes it efficient to create replicas.
Why do people pay millions for paintings, but not for photos (not even for those taken by multimillion-dollar cameras like Hubble)? Because the whole point of art is to see the world through the eyes of the artist. To see something new.
Why did Rembrandt spend his time creating original masterpieces, instead of spraying graffiti all over the place, or using stencils to spray-paint the same thing over and over again? (I'm not saying I'm Rembrandt, I'm making a point about creativity.)
Why is a forgery, even if perfect, not considered anywhere near as valuable as the original work of art? A replica is just an honest forgery.
I'm not trying to rain on anyone's parade here. If you enjoy making replicas, more power to you. But don't act like it's the holy grail of a building game.
@Treadmill103 Guess what, one of the people whom this hyar talk is about is going through all my posts and removing all their upvotes. Only thing is, they're so smart they upvoted the builds they hadn't upvoted previously. Must be one a dem inty-lectuals.
I usually never say this, but I'll make an exception: LOL!
(Their username rhymes with "forever cry"). Hil-freaking-arious.
@Treadmill103 Yer, dem plasmy cannons sure are heavy. Nivver bring a GAU-8 to a plasmy cannon fight, as muh grandpappy used ter say...
@Mustang51 I don't know, it might get enough upvotes to be noticeable to the developers, but I doubt it. I'm guessing most users would be against the idea of paying more for anything.
@Treadmill103 Yah, I like big engines... speakin er which, this mighty fine lady tol' me I mus' be com-pen-say-tin fer my small peanuts cuz mah airyplane an' 'specially ma engines wer so durn big. You know anythin' 'bout dat? Duz dat mean guys who fly them itty-bitty fairy-toy ultra-lights have de bigges' peanuts? How duz dat work? I doan' even grow peanuts, fer Chrissake.
"Toroidal?" Thar ye go wit dem eddicated wurds agin. Dun ye know, we doan' like eddication 'roun' heah? We're salt-of-the-earth types, we work widder hands, not er brains. Whud are you, some kind of intylectual er sumpin? :)
Thanks, @Treadmill103.
@Alpha029 Does that mean you no longer need help with it?
@Alpha029 sure, I'm always happy to help. I'll look at it when i get home tonight.
@Mustang51 And as for ads, I wouldn't want them (I'd block them in any case, for privacy, security, and annoyance reasons). I don't think this website gets enough traffic to make a meaningful amount of money from ads anyway. I'd rather pay more.
@Mustang51 I'd love DLC -- maps, missions, parts, the lot: I'd be all "shut up and take my money" -- but the limiting factor, for maps and missions at least, is performance. If I'm flying a 1000-part build and spawn another AI-flown instance of it, the game becomes totally unplayable on my beast of a PC. Mobiles/tablets are a lot more limited. The SR2 engine seems to be better optimized, so let's see what that can handle.
Who knows, maybe some enterprising user can write a conversion tool to make SP builds playable in SR2. As long as they keep the file format open, I don't think that would be too hard.
@MAHADI I'm saying nobody can change a person, not others, not the person themselves. You see that on TV and in movies all the time -- someone resolves to become a better person and does -- but I'm sure I have a bit more life experience than you, and I can tell you, I've never seen that happen. The nasty kids I knew are now nasty grownups, the stupid kids are now stupid grownups, the nice kids are nice grownups. No exceptions.
@MAHADI Thanks. You've been away for a while...?
I, too, would like to believe that people can change, but in all my life I haven't seen a single person do that. You can break a person mentally and/or physically and change their behaviour temporarily that way, but other than that, "the child is the father of the man."
Anyway, that's about as much as I want to speak of regarding that individual. Let's just enjoy building and appreciating cool stuff, ok?
@Mustang51 Sure, I get what you mean, but I'm not sure it can be done without fundamentally changing the game engine. Right now the game handles blocks as separate entities, so if you want to paint a shape made out of a bunch of blocks, especially if the shape has anything but flat surfaces, the engine would have to calculate the "total surface" of the shape, then map a texture to it. I'm pretty sure that's very difficult or impossible without converting the "bunch of separate blocks" to one mesh.
Also, for anything but flat surfaces -- if the user wants a paint a decal on a curved surface, for instance -- you'd need to project the flat decal on to the curved surface without distorting it, which is probably not possible with the current engine.
If we're talking about painting a texture on a flat block, then mounting that block on the airplane, yeah, that could probably be done quite easily. But flat blocks sticking out all over curved fuselages would just look ugly.
The other big problem with allowing users to add their own textures, of course, is the inevitable troublemakers who'll be sticking dirty pictures all over their planes, in obvious and hidden places. If some parent finds porn on something their 13-year-old is playing, well, that's a can of worms I'm sure nobody wants to open.
Finally, I'm pretty sure SP won't be getting any major updates any more. SR2 is supposed to be a superset of SP, and maintaining two codebases is just too hard for a small team like Jundroo. I'm OK with that, as long as they add weapons and lots of targets. Hopefully someday....
Thank you, @Rodrigo110
@Mustang51 Yeah, drudgery is soul-destroying.
If there was a desktop-only building game, so much could be done in terms of tools. You could take a cylinder, make it tapered using whatever curve you like at both ends, and you have a fuselage. Add a wing (with the proper airfoil shape), tell the game engine to blend it into the fuselage, add flaps and control surfaces, etc. and the engine could automatically do it for you, including hinges and pistons, etc. The lego-like approach is too limited.
@FinalGambit TL;DR
@Mustang51 Nah, if you look at those builds, they're only 100-200 parts or so, and I would just edit the numbers directly in the XML file instead of using Overload or Fine Tuner, so it didn't take that long. It was just tedious.
@FinalGambit Nope, I don't make mistakes like that, Darth. That file is all you need.
You're quite active, I see, for a new user. Bustling like a bee. Is it ok if I call you Darth a Bee, now?
@FinalGambit You're welcome. By the way, do you mind if I call you Darth? Seeing as how you're so knowledgeable about Star Wars ;)
@Mustang51 Ha, no. This degree of smoothness is possible to achieve by hand (using a calculator or Excel or something), but that would take hours and hours, if not days. My first few builds were made by hand, before I got tired of the drudgery and wrote some programs to generate shapes for me. Now I just define curves using code, and the programs generate the shapes out of fuselage blocks in one go. On this plane, for instance, the nose cone, tapered fuselage, cockpit front curve, cockpit rear curve, engine spike, inlet cowling, nacelle, etc., are all individual subassemblies, generated separately. Then I snap them together in the designer, add flight capability and weapons, and bam, shiny new plane.
@FinalGambit re. The shader pack, read the instructions that come with reshade.
@Mustang51 experience, yes, but mostly it's using generated shapes that cuts down on build time.
@Mostly kind of. I generate the individual shapes separately, like nose cone, rear fuselage, engine inlet cowling, cockpit front, cockpit rear, etc. Then i put them together in the designer, add flight capability, and weapons.
@Mustang51 thanks. I usually make a build like this in one sitting, in under two hours. Some things like artillery take more time.
@Alpha029 (fist bump)
@Alpha029 thanks again. If only more people could be as positive and appreciative of good work as you are...
@Alpha029 thank you very much!
@ForeverPie Oh look, another luddite. "Manual labor good! Brain work bad!" Hilariously pathetic. Have a nice life :)
@ThePilotDude Why are you still here? Learn to take a hint.
@Mustang51 You're welcome :)
@ThePilotDude You're not part of that conversation, so I don't know why you're butting in.
@Mustang51 This might help. Relevant bit here:
/Users/YOURUSERNAMEGOESHERE/Library/Application Support/unity.Jundroo.SimplePlanes
Good work. The pseudo-propellers are a nice touch.
@Mustang51 I've never played SP on a Mac, so can't say for sure, but as long as it allows you to access the XML files, you should have the same total freedom as on Windows.
@FinalGambit Thanks. But look at the upvote count. This is the community you expect me to donate my tools to?
Thanks, @Z3RO @Cream
@jamesPLANESii no, thanks.
@Mustang51 Couldn't have put it better myself
@Mustang51 And had much beefier engines and guns...
@CRJ900Pilot I wasn't consciously going for it, but that was the inspiration, sure.
Nice thrust-to-weight ratio :)
@Mustang51 Are you kidding, the Star Wars fans would probably jump down my throat screaming "that's not an X-Wing!!!" Thanks, though.
Thanks, @Treadmill103, this behemoth lags even my PC. The quad-cannons are a joy to use, though.
@jamesPLANESii "Have a nice day," when used in this manner, means "I'm no longer interested in talking to you, please go away."
@jamesPLANESii Getting upset in an argument is a sure sign that deep down, you know you're losing.
Again, not interested in your challenge, or your fallacious arguments. You enjoy doing things the dumb, primitive, laborious way? Good on you. I prefer working the smart way. Now be on your way, do your thing, and don't presume to tell people what to do or how to do it. (I have the right to say this because you started this.)
Have a nice day.
@jamesPLANESii Likewise.
@jamesPLANESii
I'm not trying to rain on anyone's parade here. If you enjoy making replicas, more power to you. But don't act like it's the holy grail of a building game.
@jamesPLANESii I'll answer that if you promise not to accuse me of trying to make you feel dumb/harassing you/bullying you.
@jamesPLANESii Not interested.
Welcome back. Nice build.
Thanks, @DemonSniper8 @BaconRoll