lol, This is funny stuff, I must not know a thing about flight physics.
Please Hitech, I hope that you are not getting affended by all of this,
If you are then why?
I find it rather rude and false for you to come out and say I have not even a basic understanding of flight physics. I guess this can be summed up to your anger that is brought on by me asking these controversial questions.
Beyond all of your data and explanations of how the physical flight model is calculated compared to X, you have NEVER ONCE answered my QUESTION that I have posed to PYRO, of whom I guess did not feel inclined to answer on his own behalf.
I question that, being you are the developer of a program ,and another person suggests you look into another programs way of calculating flight, you have not told the specific differnces of your own program.
It seems easy for you to say that X is only doing such and such, and then not give any info that compares the two... Why?
This entire argument about feel is rediculous, ANYONE CAN FEEL by some factor of immersion of a program whether or not it is simulating somthing. You can compare this example...
QUAKE feels LESS relistic than say RAINBOW 6, because of the way that it HANDLES and involves Shooting of weapons/damge inflicted onto another player.
Just as gunslyer has posted at an earlier time, the FEEL of driving game A has a more REALISTIC feel than DRIVING game B. You can take someone who has never driven a car before take them on thier first drive and then have them play MARIO KART for nin64 then play GPL.I wonder what game they will say FEELS MORE REALISTIC.
TO go to an EXTREME, would be to compare TOP GUN for nintendo, and ACES high. IT IS MOST obvious that Aces High is MORE realistic by the way it looks/FEELS/and involves Air combat in a multiplay environment.
For anyone to say that you cannot determine anything by feel, I guess the senses should really only be sight/Taste/sound. Or how about this ...
Anyone who has ever stated that the N1k is jacked up because it flys like a UFO, the way it flies "FEELS" like a UFO, or anything along those lines, I guess they are WRONG for "FEELING" the strangeness of
how it flies, and therefore are ignorant to any basic understanding of what is right/wrong in fluidness of Flight physics.
Heres a really exotic example, hopefully I dont loose people on this,IM
SURE I will though.. its inevitable...
YOu ever driven down the highway going around 75-80, heya even better how about out side the window of a little single engine as your flyin along and feel the airpressure/resistance on your hand. beyond it feeling tingly and fluidlike, your hand is now very receptive to any change in movment. IT is very fluid, very precise also. This is how X-plane feels, Based on airpressure densities and so forth all set via options you can choose for it to simulate. Now take Aces,.... same situation,... well instead of being completley Fluid and dynamic, you
feel restricted, to a degree less precise. More sluggish, and overall less responsive to overall randomness of physical(simulated air being rushed around the aircraft)... Is Aces Bad? By no MEANS.. but my
Point... X "FEELS" more realistic. I know it sure doesn't look as good as Aces, but thats just the Sight part.
Hitech,...
You pose the questions of what are the differnces in the form of tests between the two programs and that I have to test them,...
Is this not what I have been asking all along? I would think that based on your feeling so strong that X is only doing such and such as far as its FM goes, then why are their so many drastic differences
between the way X vs Aces handles flight? Why would you have not already posted how Aces handles more acuratly than X? I mean your the programmer, you have obviously more resources to work with, as well as an already established set of data, couldnt you wip up a conclusion between the two to prove your point?
With your statment that I lack any mathematical knowledge reguarding the calculations of simulated flight, this is rather laughable and unfounded. Are you an elitist now? Is the knowledge that you possess so unatainable that I may never reach the understanding that you have?
(ive never proclamied to be a programmer) if I had the Visual C library in my head I would write out some code, and show you some ideas. Untill I start writing more than int such and such and cout lines,.. All this
comes down to feel, Of which according to many sources does not exist.
On another note,..Hitech I commend you on many efforts you and your team have placed in getting aces to where it is now,.. Dont get the impression that I am downlplaying other aspects of aces (well with the
exception that it is becoming more of a massive FFA furball without real strategic goals) BUT I know that you are adressing even this so that is very commendable on your part. I also understand that aces is
in an ever evolving state, so changes come and changes GO. Ive said it before and I'll say it again, ACes is the Best WWII Air combat game I have ever seen.
For all the knuckle heads ala..hehe the peanut gallery "all those who say AK" please stand up
Your next
You guys that rant and rave about deez this and deez that, have you even done what I have suggested posts & posts ago?... try it yourself and then say somthing? Is that hard? I mean if someone told me that hey
try this its better(or political term "Different") than such and such... I would see what the deal is. Based on anything that you "KNOTHEADS"
have said, I dont get the impression you've even
checked it out. Oh well though I guess untill you see some printed form of data sheet that shows such and such can only go such and such at such and such, then is it hard evidence. Or better yet if the Creator
of the game we all play says something that seems to be in anger with an obvious disagreeing with me and agreeance with you,... your sure to pucker up real well
Anyway Deez-out
