Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: USRanger on September 02, 2012, 12:31:42 AM
-
Thinking about using this in my next terrain. Would like to hear some opinions first.
(http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/3237/17088354.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/195/17088354.jpg/)
(http://img685.imageshack.us/img685/5104/67464321.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/685/67464321.jpg/)
(http://img707.imageshack.us/img707/197/93366828.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/707/93366828.jpg/)
-
The smoke looks real nice, Ranger. The fire, could use some more tune up to look more realistic. :salute
-
Thx Puma. Yeah, I didn't mess with the fire, just the smoke. :)
-
Smoke looks amazing Ranger. Keep up the good work.
-
Looks awsome!
-
I would like to see this as the default in the MAs :aok
-
Looks great!
-
If you do an MA terrain, can you make the supply routes show up on the clipboard map? There's one map which to my certain knowledge shows where the roads run, so far as I know the rest dont'.
-
Holy Smoke! :aok
-
S-uh-WEEET!!!!! :O
Ranger,
I think I know the answer to my own question, but just being hopeful. Is there any way besides making a new terrain or having all of the resource files to make a terrain, to have your smoke show in a Custom Arena?
Now, for the inquisitive side of, "how da heck did you get so dem good at tweaking these graphics?" I noticed in the last few frames the smoke seems to dissipate rather realistically. Is the rate of transparency in the game code or is that something that you did manually?
The second part to that question, if you can alter transparency in these bmp, (and I know this is NOT the subject of your post) I wonder if experimenting with a much more transparent flame would result in a more realistic result? I am talking both from the external view as shown, and from the internal (looking back, oh my plane is on fire) cockpit view? An explosion, would show the solid wall of flame we now see, but a flame :devil would be much less visible IMHO. (Again, I Apologize for speaking on another matter than your very awesome smoke tweak).
-
I would like to see this as the default in the MAs :aok
My computer would not be able to handle it with the new clouds my FPS has suffered
-
WOW! what a great difference to the smoke :aok
:salute
BigRat
-
My computer would not be able to handle it with the new clouds my FPS has suffered
How many improvements are we going to hold back for people with these stories. Buy a $50 gpu and you'll likely run AH on medium/high settings at max resolution. I know for sure a 5570 can do it. It's 2012, we still have 2000 explosions, fires, smoke, trees, and even some planes.
-
the third pic down, in that view it has a distinct pattern that throws it off a bit, otherwise looks awesome.
-
I like it. :aok
-
Looks great, it may be time for HTC to hire another "art guy" :noid
-
My computer would not be able to handle it with the new clouds my FPS has suffered
I believe HTC has stated that the new clouds have no negative impact on frame rates.
-
I believe HTC has stated that the new clouds have no negative impact on frame rates.
my computer sucks and is less than 2 yrs old
-
my computer sucks and is less than 2 yrs old
All the more reason to spend a measly $50 or even $40 on a entry level GPU...AH isn't that demanding.
-
All the more reason to spend a measly $50 or even $40 on a entry level GPU...AH isn't that demanding.
its my parents computer and they know nothing about computers
-
Buy it with your own money, plug it in when they're not looking, close the case. They'll never know unless your parents play games. :rolleyes:
-
Buy it with your own money, plug it in when they're not looking, close the case. They'll never know unless your parents play games. :rolleyes:
its called facebook :rofl
-
:headscratch: What does FB have to do with anything?
-
Looks excellent Ranger :cheers:
-
looking good! i agree, fire tune up and it'll be the talk of the season :rock :aok
-
:headscratch: What does FB have to do with anything?
Cake!
-
Cake!
I thought it was a lie? :banana:
-
Looks pretty but IMO needs to be thinned out a tad. Would make great smoke for a burning CV though
-
Is there a way to replace the HTC standard smoke in the MA with this?
:D
(I have been craving for better FX for 2 years or more now even made a wishlist thread in 2010)
-
The way I see it, the flames shouldn't trail behind THAT far. I know it's an AH thing, but of all the photos I've seen of planes on fire, I don't recall seeing them trailing that far back.
As is, the smoke does appear a little thick towards it's tail, and may do for a little thinning. If you are going to stick with the AH Default fire, the transition between the flameballs and the smoke needs a little more attention. Not much, but a little more "poofy" between the two could make it a more smooth transition. In your 3rd shot, right where your LA is at, that is where I think you could add a little more "poofy". :aok Kind of like a smokey fire thing. :)
Either way, VERY nicely done. :cheers: Hey HiTech, could you make this the new smoke? :D
Ranger, I know you had played with fire before, have you thought about combining that with what you have done with the smoke? Or will you stick to the default fire?
-
To be honest it doesn't look very realistic at all. I'm not defending the defaults, as I don't think they are realistic either, but yours isn't much of an improvement.
-
To be honest it doesn't look very realistic at all. I'm not defending the defaults, as I don't think they are realistic either, but yours isn't much of an improvement.
Better than anything you have came up with.
-
Well hey now, he asked for opinions, he got some. ;) So much hostility today Jo.
-
Wakeem is my favorite :)
-
:aok :aok :aok It looks great! :rock :rock :rock :rock :rock :rock :rock :rock
-
my computer sucks and is less than 2 yrs old
First, there are a number of things that can probably be done to drastically improve your framerates. Second, since all that (assuming) USRanger did was "color" the existing bmp files, it is no way possible that it would impact your computer's performance if HTC updated it into a standard texture (hope that I am using the correct term).
Adding it as a custom texture in a terrain, might use a tiny bit of resources but :headscratch: even then I am guessing once the texture is loaded with the terrain, it is no different than seeing the skin on your plane.
Tracerfi,
;) I got your funny about your parents' fondness for facebook. :D I applaud your decision to respect your parents' property and not to potentially damage or change any thing. With that in mind, there are so many programs and adware apps that steal valuable resources not only from your ability to play games, but also from the speed and health of your family's PC. There must be someone that you know and trust, that your parents would allow to set up preferences and profiles to meet each of your needs as well as get rid of the clutter that only slows the computer down.
-
Don't be too hard on Krusty. He dislikes anything he didn't do himself. I did find his "unrealistic" comment funny, since I used a picture of real smoke to make it. :)
To answer some of Chilli's questions & some others' comments, I'll explain what I did. The plane fire & smoke effect consists of 15 .bmps which control the colors and 15 alpha .bmps which control the shape and transparency.
This was just a quick 3 minute experiment, so I kept the default alpha .bmps and only changed the color .bmps. Alphas work in balck & white. Anything in the .bmp which is black is totally transparent, anything white shows the solid color.
So making the smoke and/or fire more transparent is simply a matter of making the white parts or the alpha .bmp shades of gray. This will change it to semi-transparent.
I did this just on a whim to see what it would look like, and even used the same new smoke .bmp over & over to save time. Now that I see there is some interest, I will go back and do a more thorough job using different smoke .bmps and see how it turns out. I'll also play with the fire too. It looks kind of funny with the default fire. Updated pics to come.
Thanks all for putting up with my lil experiments I do from time to time. I do like getting the feedback, whether good or bad. It helps steer me in the right direction. :salute
-
I'm starting to play with the fire also. What I need from the community is any pictures you can find, preferably color, of what a WW2 avgas plane fire looked like. What I just made is too dark, but I'd like something to work from.
(http://img404.imageshack.us/img404/54/fs1dm.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/404/fs1dm.jpg/)
(http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/6782/fs2n.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/20/fs2n.jpg/)
(http://img268.imageshack.us/img268/3125/fs3g.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/268/fs3g.jpg/)
-
I like it, but I think it needs more yellow. :angel:
-
Looks great Ranger. Only improvement would be oil stains on the trailing fighter windscreens. Nice job! :aok
-
Go figure...I google B-24 Shot Down, and I see flames as long as what we have in AH. :bhead
A lot of the fires I saw on that 1st page alone appear to be fuel. Even with it being in black and white, you can see that they burn quite brightly. The fire you have is too dark. From what I can see in the black and white photo's, it's very bright right up to the end, similar to how our default is. I would try matching the brightness to what we see in the default fire. :aok
-
:aok
-
The flames are a great effect, but dont look right thanks to AH repeating it uniformally.
-
The real question is how it will impact the lower systems.
-
short and simple, looks great and thanks for the effort put into it. Been a long time coming and much needed. Agreed that it is a bit dark now.
-
Looks nice..............
It would be interesting to wonder what is actually burning when something catches fire in AH
Oil? Fuel? or fuel/oil soaked wooden fuselage?
IMO its oil (& tyre rubber) that leaves the long black plume and a wooden fuselage that may leave slightly more ash as per your grey plume. Seems to me that as we can set light to B17 engines that its oil based with maybe some fuel thrown in.
The length of the fire plume although pretty is tooo long IMO.... I doubt it would be longer than the air craft itself.
I have never liked the fire plumes for buildings.......... they are far too prominent IMO. For me there should be big smoke (as existing) and little smoke (to replace the present tall fire plume) for buildings. Little smoke would contain an inner fire glow no higher than the original building.
-
Don't be too hard on Krusty. He dislikes anything he didn't do himself. I did find his "unrealistic" comment funny, since I used a picture of real smoke to make it. :)
You know how easily you dismissed my comments? Well they had substance behind them. I could tell you used a real picture of smoke to make it. It's obvious. It's also not realistic. You used smoke from something on the GROUND burning. A stationary fire. The sun hits the upper parts, the volume of the cloud creates shadows, and you get some kind of effect like that.
I dare you to find any smoke trail from a wind-fueled fire that's moving at LEAST a couple hundred miles per hour, which looks as you have made your smoke effect.
It just doesn't look that way, at all. Despite the fact that most airplanes on fire don't leave black smoke (some do, but most don't) it is a more homogenous consistency and IMO our default appears to mimick it slightly better. I say that actually hating how our current smoke looks, mind you.
One of the few examples that actually has some smoke:
(http://i814.photobucket.com/albums/zz63/krustacious/airplane%20flame%20trails/AAF-V-p584e.jpg)
Others that do not:
(http://i814.photobucket.com/albums/zz63/krustacious/airplane%20flame%20trails/0apN9QzyI7Y.jpg)
(http://i814.photobucket.com/albums/zz63/krustacious/airplane%20flame%20trails/fw_b17.jpg)
(http://i814.photobucket.com/albums/zz63/krustacious/airplane%20flame%20trails/b26flakeb4.jpg)
(http://i814.photobucket.com/albums/zz63/krustacious/airplane%20flame%20trails/USAF_QF-4_drone_shootdown.jpg)
So the next time you only want yes-men answers, please specify in the first post. Otherwise, please don't dismiss my comments as nothing.
-
I dont know Krusty that first pick the smoke looks awful black(as are all pics I find) and the shape is pretty close to what ranger has. Not as "billowy" but that can be worked on, but not as unrealistic as you post seems to make it
-
Hey Ranger, stay with it and continue to improve the product. Your results speak for themselves. You know that you can always depend on a cheap shot from the negative.
The photos posted below are somewhat deceptive in that there's no way to tell how far into the fire timeline the photo represents. In other words, the instant the fire flashes there may be little to no smoke. As the fire progresses, smoke develops and trails. Of course, it's also dependent on what is burning, i.e., fuel, oil, hydraulic oil, structure, etc and airspeed.
I did find his "unrealistic" comment funny
please don't dismiss my comments as nothing.
Big difference between "unrealistic" and "nothing" versus twisting the meaning and context to support a derogatory comment.
-
maybe streching out the "billows" or what have you migth be worth looking into and might be what Krusty is talkibg bout.
-
having been in aircraft that were on fire at one time or another (HH-60s to be precise) I can say there most definitely is smoke. In fact it's one of the first things we look for to confirm that there is a fire and not just a malfunctioning fire/warning light. The color and thickness depend on whats burning and how big of a fire it is.
-
You know how easily you dismissed my comments? Well they had substance behind them. I could tell you used a real picture of smoke to make it. It's obvious. It's also not realistic. You used smoke from something on the GROUND burning. A stationary fire. The sun hits the upper parts, the volume of the cloud creates shadows, and you get some kind of effect like that.
I dare you to find any smoke trail from a wind-fueled fire that's moving at LEAST a couple hundred miles per hour, which looks as you have made your smoke effect.
It just doesn't look that way, at all. Despite the fact that most airplanes on fire don't leave black smoke (some do, but most don't) it is a more homogenous consistency and IMO our default appears to mimick it slightly better. I say that actually hating how our current smoke looks, mind you.
So the next time you only want yes-men answers, please specify in the first post. Otherwise, please don't dismiss my comments as nothing.
and
Just because there's a photo of it doesn't qualify its existence, just states that it existed.
-
:aok Here is another experiment for ya. Some comments on fire being too dark or not enough yellow, I can agree with. Instead of changing the color bmp, how would it look if you took that same bmp file change it to grayscale and then increase the contrast to different levels and apply experimental levels to the alpha bmps.
What I am guessing would happen is the darker orange areas would be more transparent and the lighter yellow(ish) areas would bleed thru and brighten up the fire.
Wish that I could do this as effortlessly as you seem to be able to. :salute
The other experiment would be just to randomly give the fire overlapping swiss cheese alpha. I would hope that would create more finger like flames, similar to those seen in Krusty's jet flame.
Likewise, you may find that simply increasing the transparency in those smoke bmps would give wildly differing results. I sure wish I could help. They both look much more interesting than what we presently have, and to answer Challenge's question, should come at no cost to low end systems as it should render the exact same way that it already does.
-
Good ideas Chilli. I'll give that a shot.
Krusty, it's not your opinion, it's your usual lack of tact. I was looking for opinions, good or bad, and was not looking for "yes men", but merely stating "it sucks" (more or less) like your first post is of no help. Now, your second post, where you actually explain what you mean by it IS of help, which is what I was looking for. This was meant as a fun thread, so if you want to just come in and be a dick, go elsewhere. If you have constructive critism like in your second post, then I am thankful for the help. Btw, as for your dare, the smoke I used was from a shuttle liftoff, so I'm sure it was moving a couple hundred miles an hour. ;)
Maybe the smoke effect I made would look better if used for building/object fires instead of plane fires. What do you guys think?
-
Ranger, I like it!
Thanks for playing around with it!
I do have to agree with the idea that it may look more in place for structure/ground fires though.
Here are some vid clips of fires int he wind, showing the texture differences that might make all the difference-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCyQD83NLDc
BTW, follow the link from that vid to the one where the blades come apart- pretty awesome, lol!
This pilot was able to make it out ok! It's a pretty safe bet that our flaming planes shouldn't look much different than this corsair that caught fire during an air race...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bc3InHWB1es
-
Thanks for the help Mtn. :salute
-
Hmm question, will this be tied to a terrain or is it available regardless of map?
-
Hmm question, will this be tied to a terrain or is it available regardless of map?
Just tied into a terrain.....for now. ;)
The Chief wanted to see what it looked like when used as ground smoke instead of aircraft. This is my first rough draft. If I increase the transparency somewhat, and find the right lightness & contrast for the details to stand out, I think I might be off to a good start. I hope so anyway. What began as a 3 minute fun experiment is becoming a real interest for me. :)
Here is a comparison. Original ground smoke on top, with my rough draft on the bottom:
(http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/6915/smoke1n.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/266/smoke1n.jpg/)
-
Just tied into a terrain.....for now. ;)
The Chief wanted to see what it looked like when used as ground smoke instead of aircraft. This is my first rough draft. If I increase the transparency somewhat, and find the right lightness & contrast for the details to stand out, I think I might be off to a good start. I hope so anyway. What began as a 3 minute fun experiment is becoming a real interest for me. :)
Here is a comparison. Original ground smoke on top, with my rough draft on the bottom:
(http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/6915/smoke1n.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/266/smoke1n.jpg/)
:O :aok
-
Pyro/Hitech - why isn't Ranger on the payroll... :D
-
Pyro/Hitech - why isn't Ranger on the payroll... :D
:lol Probably because I've never had any computer or art training.
:salute
-
I'm thinking Ranger could do some teaching for us less talented types. :aok
-
man even if it dont get used as the smoke for a/c its pretty dang good looking as a ground smoke.
-
The darker smoke off the fuel tank looks more like the real thing. Nice job, Ranger! :aok
-
:noid :noid :noid You wanna see smoke? Come to my garage! :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol
-
:noid :noid :noid You wanna see smoke? Come to my garage! :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol
That's not smoke, that's your own fart! :D
-
Playing around with some other effects too. Here's a new explosion:
Default
(http://imageshack.us/a/img43/7677/lgxp2.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/43/lgxp2.jpg/)
New
(http://imageshack.us/a/img580/6858/lgxp8.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/580/lgxp8.jpg/)
:salute
-
:aok
-
wow ranger, we really need you on the HTC team :O :banana:
-
(http://imageshack.us/a/img825/5711/80446199.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/825/80446199.jpg/)
-
Wow man, thats nice.
-
See rule #4
-
:O that's awesome!
-
(http://imageshack.us/a/img825/5711/80446199.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/825/80446199.jpg/)
:O :rock :rock :rock
Please HTC, Christmas is right around the corner.. :pray :angel:
-
wow ranger, we really need you on the HTC team :O :banana:
no disrespect intended to Ranger, but I'm pretty sure HTC could make similarly improved explosions themselves if they wanted to
they just haven't done so yet, for whatever reason
-
We need this now :furious
-
no disrespect intended to Ranger, but I'm pretty sure HTC could make similarly improved explosions themselves if they wanted to
they just haven't done so yet, for whatever reason
For the same reason they are not making new maps and skins. They are busy doing other things that they feel are more important. to the game.
While I'm a big fan of Rangers work, you have to admit it really doesn't matter "what" the explosion looks like, but that it blows up.
On the other hand, I don't know how much trouble it would be to add the stuff that Ranger makes. I would like to think that if Hitech gave Ranger the parameters that he needs to work with in, and Ranger was willing to sign off all of his stuff as a "labor of love" I don't see way HTC wouldn't let him do a bit of the small things like smoke and explosions.
-
no disrespect intended to Ranger, but I'm pretty sure HTC could make similarly improved explosions themselves if they wanted to
they just haven't done so yet, for whatever reason
Yea, they are too busy making trains that we see all the time ingame... :rolleyes:
-
Yea, they are too busy making trains that we see all the time ingame... :rolleyes:
Rule #4! :lol :banana:
-
Yea, they are too busy making trains that we see all the time ingame... :rolleyes:
don't forget all those new maps to prevent things getting totally stale :]
-
don't forget all those new maps to prevent things getting totally stale :]
:)
-
You guys seem to be forgetting the time spent on the updated goon and jeep.
-
Dont be so rude, im sure we are getting the updated 110, Hurri, Lancaster, B26, Tempy, Boston, D3A, B5N in 2 weeks.
Also the tater on the G6 :devil
-
For the same reason they are not making new maps and skins. They are busy doing other things that they feel are more important. to the game.
While I'm a big fan of Rangers work, you have to admit it really doesn't matter "what" the explosion looks like, but that it blows up.
On the other hand, I don't know how much trouble it would be to add the stuff that Ranger makes. I would like to think that if Hitech gave Ranger the parameters that he needs to work with in, and Ranger was willing to sign off all of his stuff as a "labor of love" I don't see way HTC wouldn't let him do a bit of the small things like smoke and explosions.
I've made the offer. We'll see where it goes. Right now it's just me having some fun. :)
no disrespect intended to Ranger, but I'm pretty sure HTC could make similarly improved explosions themselves if they wanted to
I agree with coombz. HT did take notice to this thread. He even gave me some tips and info that I needed with the smoke. Maybe he'll put some of this type of stuff on their to-do list. We'll see. In the mean time, we are planning on using some of this stuff in some AvA terrains just to try it out. :aok
:salute
-
Looks awesome Ranger! Will definitely make a point of getting in AvA to check this out when its ready!
-
In the mean time, we are planning on using some of this stuff in some AvA terrains just to try it out.
:aok I'll be there!
-
Very nice Ranger! I would enjoy seeing your efforts in game. :aok :cheers:
Over the years I have learned that HTC always has multiple burners going.
What is moved to a front burner and turned on high, or to the back burner to simmer, or turned off, depends on multiple variables that are not always clear to customers.
-
Very nice Ranger! I would enjoy seeing your efforts in game. :aok :cheers:
Over the years I have learned that HTC always has multiple burners going.
What is moved to a front burner and turned on high, or to the back burner to simmer, or turned off, depends on multiple variables that are not always clear to customers.
Or the epic fails like CT.Was on high heat then ..... well just ,then.But i also cant wait to see what Rangers efforts look like once there in game somewhere.
-
Imagine trying to takeoff or land in this mess. :lol I think I need to shrink it down some. :)
(http://imageshack.us/a/img7/2286/fireyl.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/7/fireyl.jpg/)
-
Smoke looks awesome. The candle....not so much. But then that's not your fault. :frown:
-
I haven't played with the default ground fire yet, but I do have the .bmps, so it is planned. :)
-
no disrespect intended to Ranger, but I'm pretty sure HTC could make similarly improved explosions themselves if they wanted to
they just haven't done so yet, for whatever reason
I am sure that USRanger took no offense. I agree with you premise that HTC could and has come up with some equally impressive advances to their graphics appearance. Just take a look at the new trains. However, I do get the feeling that HTC knows that by making these files available to the community, talented individuals will experiment. Who knows where their inspirations come from or how much farther advanced their plans are. More than we could even imagine.
I would hope that seeing the results of such experimentation and the response from their customers, it would merit some sort of acknowledgement. Even possibly a custom arena / custom terrain contest or something similar to the splash screen, screenie competition. I thought that was great inspiration for folks to enjoy a totally separate experience from the game besides the whole competition for rank, etc.
Edited: After reading further responses, it does appear that HTC has acknowledged, and even encouraged such experimentation, and we are fortunate to have arenas that HTC allows to stray from the MA standard and fortunate to have folks like USRanger, Waffle, Greebo, Soda, MrMidi, ImAdot, Fester, etc .....
Also, good to have all those folks who volunteer and do the wonderful skin work.... I could go on and on with the list, even about how much I enjoy Fugitives comics, but the buck really stops with those that made it all happen and made the files available.
-
Shouldn't HTC be implementing this? They should be knocking your door down to get this in the MAs.
-
Shouldn't HTC be implementing this? They should be knocking your door down to get this in the MAs.
A good system test will be in the AVA.
-
A good system test will be in the AVA.
They are in AvA starting tomorrow. Everyone is invited to come and be teste's.
-
They are in AvA starting tomorrow. Everyone is invited to come and be teste's.
Teste's... don't they only come in pairs?
-
Ranger, my first post stated quite politely and in a civil way "It's not very realistic" and the response was mindless Krusty-bashing, a knee-jerk reaction from some. I in NO way invited that kind of reaction, nor was it warranted. Had the response been "How do you mean?" I was fully prepared to post all the examples I had on hand. That is how a polite and civil discussion takes place. Instead I was summarily dismissed as some crackpot and always wrong.
The science of it is this: The only reason you get the billowy "bulges" or "bubbles" or whatever you want to call them, where light and shadow create high contrast, is when a stationary fire, on the ground, is pushing more smoke and heat upwards. There's already smoke there, and it has to displace this, thereby creating the outward bulges.
In a plane on fire, this doesn't happen. Why? It's simple: The flame isn't there anymore. It's just a suspension of smoke particles in the atmosphere. Nothing to push it or displace it and create bulges or bubbles or whatever you want to call, and nothing to create such interesting shapes for light and shadow to play upon.
Again, this would only be where the flames are relatively stationary. On your CV, for example, it would look like this if the CV were stationary, otherwise it might only look like this right over the immediate flames. The rest of the smoke trail would be far more solid and dark in nature.
You can't do that with Aces High, though. It's all one smoke trail. You can't place a localized effect over the immediate flame then another to depict the different-looking trail. That's just a problem with how the game is set up. That makes the smoke look unrealistic past the point of combustion.
-
I guess politeness is in the eye of the beholder, but personally, I feel that since you initially had nothing constructive to add, there was no reason for you to even express your opinion except to be a negative nabob.
To be honest it doesn't look very realistic at all. I'm not defending the defaults, as I don't think they are realistic either, but yours isn't much of an improvement.
Your second reply (without the defensiveness) would have been a better first reply, and then perhaps the defensiveness would have been unnecessary.
Here is away of stating your point that is unlikely to draw such a reaction.
"Hey Ranger that looks cool, but it also looks like it was modeled after a stationary ground fire. I don't think smoke trailing from a plane would look quite like that. Maybe you could look at some that are traveling at speed to make it look more realistic."
Or you could have said, "You are likely limited by game mechanics from getting something to look totally realistic, but with those limitations it looks pretty cool. Have you tried such and such?"
-
Awesome Jimson, I can hardly wait :banana: USRanger :aok your da man. HTC, thanks for making this possible. Krusty, you have to admit this looks cool. :D
A Carrier at top speed is traveling how fast? So, in the case of the fleet and standing structures the smoke effect seems to be working appropriately. In a plane, however I could see that AH smoke may be overstated. I think, that if I follow Krusty correctly, he is also saying that high velocity smoke would be much more vaporized and their rounded puffy appearance is off.
What I was wondering, if USRanger had any success with playing with the alpha layers, to offset the default bubble/puffy appearance of aircraft flames and/or smoke?
-
Ranger's smoke..
(http://img685.imageshack.us/img685/5104/67464321.jpg)
Krusty's smoke..
(http://poqd.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/krusty.jpg)
You be the judge. ;)
-
(http://i58.photobucket.com/albums/g256/BloodyBandage/Lewis0024_zps222b5eed.jpg)
B-24 on fire.
-
:huh :huh :huh Smoking....not Fire! :huh :huh :huh
-
:huh :huh :huh Smoking....not Fire! :huh :huh :huh
There is a saying that seems apt in this situation "Where there is smoke there is fire."
-
Ranger's smoke..
(http://img685.imageshack.us/img685/5104/67464321.jpg)
Krusty's smoke..
(http://poqd.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/krusty.jpg)
You be the judge. ;)
:rofl :cry :rofl
-
Ranger's smoke..
(http://img685.imageshack.us/img685/5104/67464321.jpg)
Krusty's smoke..
(http://poqd.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/krusty.jpg)
You be the judge. ;)
Aaahah to good my man!! :rofl
-
Copy all & understood Krusty. I do agree. :salute
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTAViMX-w6c (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTAViMX-w6c)
based on the first part of this video, rangers fire looks pretty good to me! even with the billowing!
-
To be fair, that ship was stopped and for all intents dead. Similarly, you can see the Lexington fire here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=iipW_576Ea0#t=347s
An equally destructive fire with a high crosswind that totalled the ship, but looks more "normal" (so to speak). You can see the clouds and bulges directly over the ship but as the wind blows it, it becomes a solid singular plume. Through most of the WW2 footage I've seen of ships on fire, this is how they look (for the most part)
P.S. I should have guessed Shifty would weigh in. I mean, after all he is nothing BUT hot air, right?
-
actually it wasn't stopped, look at the bow, you'll see it slicing through the waves. since the fire is in the stern, they need to keep it moving into the wind so they can see what they're doing. if you watch the fire hoses you can see the mist getting caught in the wind and blowing off to the side. in a later scene you see the smoke going straight up, thats when its not moving/or drifting with the wind. in the yorktown fire, you can see its broadside to the wind and drifting. even then there is enough wind to give it that billowing affect.
as for it becoming more solid, you are correct that at distance it does do that. but we're not reconstructing historical photo's, we're trying to make the game something of its own. if the fire isnt perfect, who cares, its that much more effect then was there before ranger started messing around with it. good bad or indifferent, most will agree it enhances the game and thats all that matters to most of us that play on a regular basis! :salute
-
P.S. I should have guessed Shifty would weigh in. I mean, after all he is nothing BUT hot air, right?
I'll bow to your wisdom and agree with you on this one Krusty.
Because if anyone is an expert on hot air.. It has to be you. ;)
-
actually it wasn't stopped, look at the bow, you'll see it slicing through the waves. since the fire is in the stern, they need to keep it moving into the wind so they can see what they're doing. if you watch the fire hoses you can see the mist getting caught in the wind and blowing off to the side. in a later scene you see the smoke going straight up, thats when its not moving/or drifting with the wind. in the yorktown fire, you can see its broadside to the wind and drifting. even then there is enough wind to give it that billowing affect.
as for it becoming more solid, you are correct that at distance it does do that. but we're not reconstructing historical photo's, we're trying to make the game something of its own. if the fire isnt perfect, who cares, its that much more effect then was there before ranger started messing around with it. good bad or indifferent, most will agree it enhances the game and thats all that matters to most of us that play on a regular basis! :salute
The 2nd bomb that tore through USS Franklin left it dead in the water with a 13 degree list. It had to be towed out of the area until repairs on the engine were sufficient enough to make it to Pearl Harbor under its own power.
ack-ack
-
I'm working on a new ground fire effect that I am very quickly falling in love with. My personal favorite so far. Should have it finished up late tonight or tomorrow. Pics tomorrow night.
:salute
-
Sneak peek:
(http://s8.postimage.org/65xmxjdz9/fiya.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/cwe46z14x/full/)
:salute
-
In the AvA now!
(http://i1236.photobucket.com/albums/ff457/avacmstaff/fire_zpsafd81f21.jpg)
-
Thanks for sticking it in your terrain Jimson. :salute
-
(http://i1046.photobucket.com/albums/b461/snax6/f6fsmoke3.jpg)
(http://i1046.photobucket.com/albums/b461/snax6/f6fsmoke2.jpg)
(http://i1046.photobucket.com/albums/b461/snax6/f6fsmoke.jpg)
Went took some shots of the smoke and fire!!!!! Awesome job ranger! :rock :salute
-
Thx bud. I don't like the smoke in its current size. It's too big. I haven't gone back to mess with it more since I started the thread. I think it would look much better at half its current size. Right now I'm making a new air explosion effect for when planes go BoOm. Should have pics up later tonight.
:salute
P.S. I had no idea the .bmps used for ground smoke were also used for smoke coming off weapons firing and engines starting. Looks goofy to me. :lol
-
I like it how it is big and puffy, but maybe your right about making it smaller...we will see the finished product... :x
-
Damn ranger, I really hope you can get this all implemented in the MA's! Awesome stuff :rock :aok
-
Thanks for sticking it in your terrain Jimson. :salute
Thanks for making it available, We love new stuff and are always willing to be a testing ground.
-
Well now I got a reason to get back on.
-
Last night I made a new plane explosion effect. The problem is my rig is having trouble with it for some reason. When a plane explodes, my screen goes white for a few, then when the game kicks back in, I have a message saying I've ran out of video memory and to turn off some graphic settings. I turned off everything I could but it made no difference. My PC is a couple years old and my vid card is an old GeForce 9800, which makes it a good test machine for adding anything new. It's bugging me because I can run any other "effect" just fine, just not this one, which I think is going to look really good if I can get it going. I made need to post a terrain containing it to see if anyone else has any luck. Wanna be testers?
-
Thx Puma. Yeah, I didn't mess with the fire, just the smoke. :)
Good job on the smoke. It's obvious that you didn't work on the fire.
-
Last night I made a new plane explosion effect. The problem is my rig is having trouble with it for some reason. When a plane explodes, my screen goes white for a few, then when the game kicks back in, I have a message saying I've ran out of video memory and to turn off some graphic settings. I turned off everything I could but it made no difference. My PC is a couple years old and my vid card is an old GeForce 9800, which makes it a good test machine for adding anything new. It's bugging me because I can run any other "effect" just fine, just not this one, which I think is going to look really good if I can get it going. I made need to post a terrain containing it to see if anyone else has any luck. Wanna be testers?
I'll be happy to help.
-
Smoke looks great got some real detail and depth to it. I do agree that next up would be improving the fire. What about adding the smoke to the structures on the ground that would look good too, wouldnt mind seeing it in the town for a little effect plus it would make it easier to identify when a town has been flattened from a distance... just a thought but do love the new effect.
-
based on what 9thAFE just said an idea came to mind.... smoldering smoke that can be seen from a distance when town has been hit hard. This could give bombers an idea of town's % of damage. Say 70% down and a billowing smoke cloud rises above town? :devil :pray
Of course it would be very light smoke, nothing substantial like fuel or ords burning just a light shade of grey to give an idea of the amount of damage the town has taken.
Oh and seeing it from friendly CV's off the coastline would be cool too :aok
-
Ranger I will test out stuff for ya also :aok
-
based on what 9thAFE just said an idea came to mind.... smoldering smoke that can be seen from a distance when town has been hit hard. This could give bombers an idea of town's % of damage. Say 70% down and a billowing smoke cloud rises above town? :devil :pray
Of course it would be very light smoke, nothing substantial like fuel or ords burning just a light shade of grey to give an idea of the amount of damage the town has taken.
Oh and seeing it from friendly CV's off the coastline would be cool too :aok
There in lies the problem..... I think all smoke is tied together and can't be differentiated. At least that is what I seem to be noticing. Sit on the carrier and start you engine. The engine smoke looks like a fire.
-
and engine damage looks kinda weird too
maybe Hitech will introduce some smoke variables
go on I dare ya :)
-
We won't be using the smoke again after this week until I go back and fix the size & transparency to what should look a lot better than what it does now. I'm not happy with it at all in its current form.
In other news, I figured out what the problem was with the custom air explosion. Somehow I doinked it up and made the .bmps 1 pixel too small. Yes, 1 lil pixel can crash the game. Fixing it as I type this. Expect pic tomorrow night!
:salute
-
Looks great! :aok
-
Custom air explosion. It is a 25 .bmp animation, so this is just one frame of it.
(http://imageshack.us/a/img853/5148/elosion.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/853/elosion.jpg/)
-
Farr That's mean owh, Slick az. :D
<jam>
-
Now THAT THERE IS SOME ROCK STAR FIREWORKS!!!!!!! USRanger, again cranking out some awesome tidbits of fantastic looking cartoon ecstasy. :pray
-
:rock Yeah Baby ..... :rock
-
Wow!
-
Do you think you could work on what happens when tanks blow up?
-
Do you think you could work on what happens when tanks blow up?
Why, you want a fancy exit? :lol