Profile image

My Honest Opinion of Cuttable Fuselages in SP... (Plus news for Jundroo)

217k jamesPLANESii  2 months ago

Most people don't like reading a wall of text, but uh, I'll try and explain.
1.11 has been out for over a year now, and I want to share my opinion on the main addition of the update that I'm probably largely responsible for being added: the ability to cut fuselages.


Before 1.11, building an aircraft with an interior was much harder. Getting realisticly thin walls and getting smooth curves on your plane without protrusions of blocks into your interior was extremely difficult. High detailed cockpits were mostly reserved for some of the most skilled builders on the site.
However, when this was done, because of the fundamentals on how paneling was done, more care was taken to get the shape of the aircraft realistic, especially considering you had to find cross-sections of the fuselage of your plane to get the shape right. Also the end result would be more room for small details and larger aircraft ended up having a higher polygon, smoother look, with shapes that blended much easier.


Now comes fuselage cutting. Now fuselage cutting is great don't get me wrong, I mean, it's great that the 20 hours we used to spend paneling a build has been reduced go about 2 hours of fuselage cutting... if you don't go into detail, but there's problems.
First thing, people have become lazy in the way they create their planes now. Especially with GA aircraft and airliners, people have been building their planes with only 1 layer of fuselage blocks vertically, and the cross-sections of aeroplanes seems to jave been completely forgotten about since 1.11. The number of cheek bones I've seen on aeroplanes and complete laziness around making the windscreens and cockpits of planes is kinda sad. It just makes plane look weird and I can't unsee them.

The next issue is that fuselage blocks only have 24 sides. This is a not-very-round shape, and is especially not-round when you get to airliner-sized aircraft. It's kinda sad seeing your windows cut in half by a clear polygon edge that you can't change the location of. It's also very annoying trying to make wings using fuselage cutting, because in the end you have a rear half of your wing that has only like 3 stupendous polygons and it's really obvious and looks terrible. It has potential, but in the end it just looks bad because of fuselage blocks.
Another thing that's kinda dumb but not related to fuselage cutting, but the number of polygons fuselages have, it's pretty lame and inefficient that fuselage blocks that are 5 metres in diameter have the exact same number of polygons as needle-sized fuselage blocks...

And the last annoying thing, that actually stops me from playing, is making smooth doors and windows, especially weird shaped ones, although they are now possible, they MAKE ME WANT TO DIE.
I am a perfectionist, and if something can be done in SP, I will probably try and do it. But doing a double-opening door on a part that has a different height on the front and rear, and tapers, and has a sideways door in the middle, and also has a circular top seriously draws the line.

ALL OF THESE PARTS HAS TO BE INDIVIDUALLY SIZED MANUALLY.




I have to calculate the correct run and size of the part for every single section and I have to do the sections for all of the curves. This jas taken me about 6 hours already, and I haven't even started the inside door yet. And most annoyingly, there is no fuselage divider in SP. It would be easier if I could just make 1 section of fuselage and slice it up to make more where the lines are on the blueprint, but if I could do that it would massively increase the part count etc.
Also making perfectly straight lines on wavy, weird shaped fuselages is also really annoying, as the fuselage fill is a slider with 1% increments, with no typable spots.

Doing the hinge line for the rudder on my C-46 took literally about 10 hours, because I had no easy mathematical way of telling how much I needed to cut the fuselage to make the line, and the tolerance of the regular cutting was massively too high. To make it straight, I had to place that really thin wing where I wanted to slice and through several minutes of trial and error, I will eventually get it in the spot that I needed.


In summary:

Hollow fuselages have made building cockpits much easier... but they make adding accuracy significantly more time consuming than just taking short cuts. The lack of polygons of the circular and curved faces of fuselages also reduce the effectiveness of fuselage cutting, and, while cutting has enabled extreme detail, it hasn't made it any easier and it's painfully time consuming and actually makes me miss the days of paneling.
.
.


.
.

A second note. And a really important note at that. Especially for the devs.

Recently, the closed beta for the game Flyout has been released.
The discord server for the game is almost entirely made up of all the old-timer SP and SR2 players that you haven't seen in a few years. .
I've been asked to remove the advertisement explaining the game here, since, well, this is another game's forum and this game is still in closed testing; but I just want to stress to the devs, if they want to compete with this game, SP is kinda gonna need to be pretty much entirely remade. Particularly with the way fuselage blocks work. SP2 seriously needs to be put in development if it isn't already in it...

Anyway that's all.

  • Log in to leave a comment
  • Profile image

    i dont think ive commented on this website for at least a year or more and havent been active on sp, dont take what im gonna say seriously, james ur a try hard bro get a gf, also this games great and if u cant make a door bummer, also wnp i like the fueslage cutting and i also like whatever the hek was goin on w the fueslage shape in that other game that was hot too but games are great
    edit: youve made some great planes too

    Pinned 2 months ago
  • Profile image
    Dev WNP78

    I felt inclined to write a long response to this, but I don’t think it’d flow so I’ll try to summarise it in as few bullet points as I can. It’ll probably be really long anyway, because I have a lot of thoughts and I type too fast for my own good. First, on your comments about fuselage cutting:

    • Fuselage cutting never removed any options to the game, only added more.
    • I started work on the fuselage cutter after pondering solutions to the issue of easily making hollow cockpits – necessary to lower the skill barrier to making planes with detailed cockpits – a necessary change for the launch of SimplePlanes VR. Countless people had asked for a mesh subtraction feature, but this was always seen as complex and time consuming to implement, the interface would also be complex to use and there are technical constraints that would make life hard; such as PhysX not supporting dynamic concave meshes – subtracting one mesh shape from another can produce a concave shape even if both initial shapes are convex. I picked clipping by a flat plane because it’s the simplest 3d clipping, which made implementing the algorithm with the particular quirks of SP’s mesh system achievable. Also, clipping a convex mesh by a flat plane will always yield flat planes, which fixes the collider issue. It was only after this investigation that I came up with the idea of defining the plane using sliders in the same way in the UI as width, height or corner radius.
    • Understand that you’re playing ‘SimplePlanes’ and although you, and other players who put such huge amounts of effort into getting their planes to precisely match real life, are important to us and we’re always impressed with what you manage – naturally, you are pushing the game to its limit. And that can be fun. But remember, this a PC/mobile game about snapping blocks together and flying them.
    • I don’t understand your complaints about other people’s builds being ‘lazy’ since 1.11 – I’ve only seen top-end quality permeate across to a much wider range of people.
    • There are definitely some annoyances to the workflow in building in SP, especially at the high end. And we’d all love to have everything work as flawlessly as possible but we have a lot of other things deserving of our time to work on – personally I’m also at university now too, so the time I do get is stretched even thinner.
    • Everyone enjoys the game differently and everyone’s free to do that. We play games for fun and if you’re not enjoying it, simply don’t play. It’s not like you’re paying Jundroo a subscription or anything – I’d absolutely prefer players to not burn themselves out, and maybe pop back in once in a while to check out what we’ve been up to :)

    And secondly, about your comments on Flyout (which seem to have changed since I wrote most of this):

    • Flyout and SimplePlanes are at heart different games with different target groups they appeal to
    • Of course, there is overlap between these groups – and you’re free to play one, the other, or both! This isn’t a romantic relationship or an exclusive contract, and barely anyone plays just one game
    • In addition, there are many other games that also overlap with SP’s fanbase, like War Thunder, KSP, SR2, Besiege, Homebrew, and I’m sure countless I haven’t named. And that’s fine. I play other games too.
    • In particular, I think Flyout definitely has a lot of appeal to the people like you who want to design their aircraft in a more technical way (this would explain your perspective on it)
    • In addition to targeting a different (though overlapping) audience, Flyout (as far as I know) isn’t targeting the mobile market.
    • To summarise, Flyout looks like a nice game and I’m sure plenty of people who play SimplePlanes will give it a go – this isn’t some sort of cult. To paraphrase what you said earlier, my metaphorical pants will remain un-pooped.
    Pinned 2 months ago
  • Profile image
    14.6k Kittyhawk208

    Flyout has quite a ways to go but Stone is working fast. in my opinion it just needs retractable wing gear in order to be worth transitioning too.

    one month ago
  • Profile image

    @jamesPLANESii Please tell me what you mean by "Cheek Bones" on builds?

    one month ago
  • Profile image
    1,727 GrandPrix

    Yeah I agree

    2 months ago
  • Profile image
    33.5k rexzion

    j emes you got roseted by wnp7

    +13 2 months ago
  • Profile image
    128k Kennneth

    As WPN said, they are two separate games, sure, both flyout and sp centre around building planes, and sp finally getting a competition is a real plus for us players, but having paid and played flyout, I think I’m staying here, at least for now.

    Having HDRP for unity is nice and all, and building realistic-looking planes are relatively easier in fo, but when I did decide to give it a try, I've always found myself reminiscing the charm of pushing this ancient game that stated on mobile to its absolute limit.

    For example, the freedom sp gives you with modding and xml editing; trying to make a blob look good with reshade + a hundred shaders, and questioning your existence as all your connection point breaks, not to mention the cursed undo button...

    imo, all of the struggles above are what makes sp the amazing clusterfuck I love, and things like this, this, and this all the more impressive.

    edit: (maybe I'm just a masochist... who knows)

    +7 2 months ago
  • Profile image
    14.1k Johnnyynf

    in short i think SP needs to be specialized
    For now SP can do a lot of things, but just kinda
    3D modeling is kinda there, air/fluid simulation isn't there, physics simulation (ie interaction between object, joints, collision) are kinda there and gameplay is kinda there
    But it's all kinda. It's good for somebody to get in, but not good enough to really make something great.

    I think a good start will be built in scenario editor and or proper multiplayer
    It could massive improve the playability of the game

    In my opinion the next step for SP build system is block occlude/merge
    This could make buildings a lot straight forward and hopefully reduce a lot of unnecessar polygons to improve performance

    +2 2 months ago
  • Profile image
    809 Numbers2

    The key thing is that SP doesn't have Multiplayer yet we have a mod for it and I think it's time that SP for competitive reasons with Flyout had multiplayer not just because of of mobile and SP should update their tutorials and teach how to build helicopters and make new engine parts for ships and a new rudder for ships as well

    +1 2 months ago
  • Profile image
    64.9k SnoWFLakE0s

    Flyout people have been saying the same thing since like 3 years ago.
    There is still no direct alternative to SP.
    The aesthetics and mechanics of SP are still very much its own.

    +5 2 months ago
  • Profile image
    5,812 11qazxc

    ̶2̶4 28 Sides of fuselage... Building with calculator and notepad... But it works correctly, right?
    What doesn't works correctly is slicing of hollow fuselages and a lot of underlines in combination with full stops.
    I'm not sure if it's just for me and how exactly it works, so i can't send bug report at the moment, but it's a post for complaining, right?

    +1 2 months ago
  • Profile image
    77.7k Walvis

    @BaconAircraft Oh...

    +2 2 months ago
  • Profile image
    Hello Walvis, 
    
    After careful consideration and an in-depth review of your skills, assets and talents, we regrettably inform you that you do not meet the criteria for this opening.
    
    Please see the following reasons
    - Lack of relevant industry experience (10 year at minimum).
    - Insufficient stature for education (Master's degree in mechatronics, systems, aerospace engineering or equivalent).
    
    We wish you the best of luck in your future endeavors.
    
    Best regards,
    
    Talent acquisition
    

    /s @Walvis

    +4 2 months ago
  • Profile image
    77.7k Walvis

    Name: Walv!s
    Age: 69
    Height: 29.9m
    Hobbies: Cry, sometimes make video
    Looking for: a mobile game for building planes / vehicles, must be atleast CAD level of 3D modeling, must include fully fletched coding language, full soft-body physics simulation would be a plus. Preferably only playable with a bachelors in aerospace engineering.

    +3 2 months ago
  • Profile image
    Mod Vincent

    I can sort of understand what you're saying, but you also have to take into account that SP is a mobile game from 2014, that's been retrofitted to suit our needs.


    But who am i to say, i just take screenshots of garbage i made six months ago.

    +4 2 months ago
  • Profile image
    21.1k Dragoranos

    I agree

    As for the cross sections, I find them very difficult to do, especially on Razorback planes.
    what made me

    Huh, so SP has competitors? This is amazing, we may have more frequent updates! But I didn't like the part that SP can die...

    Andrew needs to know this. Flyout seems to be, as it is now, insanely awesome. At the level of when I discovered SP. The cross-section editor is inexplicably amazing... If SP had something 1% similar to that, it would be infinite better.

    Also, I think the skill issue isn't exactly an issue. There's still no replacement for Panneling for many things, and this cross-section editor would basically be passing from SimplePlanes to ComplexPlanes. It's not about skill anymore. SP wouldn't be so simple if it had a Blender to build the vehicles.

    +2 2 months ago
  • Profile image
    33.5k rexzion

    everybody just completely forgot how to make a good fuselage->canopy blend after fuselage cutting was added
    (cheekbone syndrome)

    +6 2 months ago
  • Profile image

    @Rodrigo110 For me it's more than a aircraft game, you can just build whatever you want, car, boat, plane, spaceship, tank, ballon, pigeon or dragons, that's what I call the ultimate sandbox. of course, skill is needed, otherways, where would be the fun.

    +1 2 months ago
  • Profile image

    That being said, a cross-section editor as a mod (or in game feature) would be incredibly neat and useful (but as previously stated, might take away from the building experience in certain ways).

    +2 2 months ago
  • Profile image

    After taking a look at the building process and UI of FlyOut, I must say that I am impressed. But, as previous users have commented about, it definitely takes away from the effort and skill required to actually make an aircraft. Additionally, FlyOut seems to be limited to aircraft, instead of incorporating parts and processes that would allow users to create a much larger variety of builds commonly seen on SP (this is just speculation, however, and this could be incorrect). SP requires skill, time, and practice to make good aircraft, and I personally feel that this newer game (though very interesting and promising) doesn't quite live up to those same standards (this is, again, speculation). This isn't to say that this new game doesn't require any skill however, but SP (in my opinion) tends to be more rewarding due to the more complicated and time-consuming process of building a good quality aircraft. FlyOut still has a ways to go before becoming superior to SP (in my opinion).

    +2 2 months ago
  • Profile image
    7,901 SinisterARMS

    @CanadianAircraftBuilder less than 60 but def not 200

    +1 2 months ago
  • Profile image

    @SinisterARMS Thats 35?

    +1 2 months ago
  • Profile image
    7,901 SinisterARMS

    @CanadianAircraftBuilder its actually like 35 or so

    +1 2 months ago
  • Profile image

    Jesus christ, that AN-2 door looks like its 200 parts, JUST FOR THE DOOR

    +2 2 months ago
  • Profile image

    🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓 @jamesPLANESii

    +1 2 months ago
  • Log in to see more comments