Future graphics of Orbiter?

[ar81]

If Orbiter plans to have the ultimate visuals, here is a challenge....
I found a site of a multiplayer beta game called "Black prophecy"
http://www.blackprophecy.com/

Screenies are just impressive. I wonder if Orbiter will look like this some day.

 

[Coolhand]

those visuals are easily achievable within a dx9 engine, those are fairly detailed low poly ships with tiled mapping controlling diffuse, specular, illumination and normal. there doesn't seem to be any self shadowing going on with the ships. so once the dx9 or higher rendering engines are available for orbiter and people take advantage of the features, you could see things like that. currently orbiter only supports one light source and one texture per material which really limits things, multiple maps per material and per-pixel shading (currently we only have vertex shading) will make things look a lot better for addons created to take advantage of this.

this is one of the reasons why i asked about the .msh format in the visualisation project area, orbiter needs a 3d file format that will support these multiple maps per material and extended material capabilities... .dx format for example. i've had no relevant answers however.

one cool thing that would help a lot with the realism would be support for multiple light sources, not only could you put realtime lights on ships, but each planet could potentially emit light depending on how its lit. so, for example you're in your shuttle above a lit portion of the earth, the sun is illuminating the earth and the ship. In orbiter currently you'd have very stark, unfilled shadows... In a realistic scenario the earth would be reflecting sunlight back up onto the spacecraft. self shadowing would also be neat, so the objects cast shadows back onto themselves and other objects. this would be great for VC's as you'd suddenly have some realistic lighting inside the pit, struts would cast shadows on the inside and so on, rather than the light simply passing through everything as it does now.

 

[Kyle]

It be nice, but I don't think so.

 

[spcefrk]

those visuals are easily achievable within a dx9 engine, those are fairly detailed low poly ships with tiled mapping controlling diffuse, specular, illumination and normal. there doesn't seem to be any self shadowing going on with the ships. so once the dx9 or higher rendering engines are available for orbiter and people take advantage of the features, you could see things like that. currently orbiter only supports one light source and one texture per material which really limits things, multiple maps per material and per-pixel shading (currently we only have vertex shading) will make things look a lot better for addons created to take advantage of this.

this is one of the reasons why i asked about the .msh format in the visualisation project area, orbiter needs a 3d file format that will support these multiple maps per material and extended material capabilities... .dx format for example. i've had no relevant answers however.

one cool thing that would help a lot with the realism would be support for multiple light sources, not only could you put realtime lights on ships, but each planet could potentially emit light depending on how its lit. so, for example you're in your shuttle above a lit portion of the earth, the sun is illuminating the earth and the ship. In orbiter currently you'd have very stark, unfilled shadows... In a realistic scenario the earth would be reflecting sunlight back up onto the spacecraft. self shadowing would also be neat, so the objects cast shadows back onto themselves and other objects. this would be great for VC's as you'd suddenly have some realistic lighting inside the pit, struts would cast shadows on the inside and so on, rather than the light simply passing through everything as it does now.

Coolhand, I'm behind you 100%. At least some sort of multiple maps would be excellent. It's a little sad seeing the amazing textures of things like the shuttle's belly tiles without a second texture to reflect light in a way that shows their shape.

I'd like to see the whole process of 3d modeling and texturing get a facelift to make it easier for people unfamiliar with the conversion and tweaking into Orbiter.

 

[Coolhand]

well dx7, which i believe orbiter currently uses could do a lot more than the current rendering engine and .msh format supports, we could for example have spec and bump mapping which would do a lot for those tiles and everything else... of course it's easier said than done from a coding pov, which is where my knowledge is lacking... it relies on the specific engine that orbiter uses so a new rendering engine would have to be developed, or an off the shelf solution would have to be incorporated. i think this is the major thrust of the OVP project and the separation of graphics and physics within the next version. Someone who's working on the OVP could comment on this more succinctly than myself.

as it is for the process of modelling and texturing, that in itself is separate from orbiter and dependant on the tools the developer wants to use, it doesn't really need a facelift as such but i think animator is more limited than some of the other options, i don't know any professional current generation studios that use animator. if orbiter could use the .dx format then applications like max can export directly to those formats so it should in some ways make the process of getting models into orbiter easier.

 

[Moonwalker]

The Earth doesn't really look realistic in my point of view. The colour and brightness of the horizon looks too much artistic/exaggerated while the Earth looks too dark.

I do prefer the new level 11 textures of Orbiter...

 

[spcefrk]

well dx7, which i believe orbiter currently uses could do a lot more than the current rendering engine and .msh format supports, we could for example have spec and bump mapping which would do a lot for those tiles and everything else... of course it's easier said than done from a coding pov, which is where my knowledge is lacking... it relies on the specific engine that orbiter uses so a new rendering engine would have to be developed, or an off the shelf solution would have to be incorporated. i think this is the major thrust of the OVP project and the separation of graphics and physics within the next version. Someone who's working on the OVP could comment on this more succinctly than myself.

as it is for the process of modelling and texturing, that in itself is separate from orbiter and dependant on the tools the developer wants to use, it doesn't really need a facelift as such but i think animator is more limited than some of the other options, i don't know any professional current generation studios that use animator. if orbiter could use the .dx format then applications like max can export directly to those formats so it should in some ways make the process of getting models into orbiter easier.

At the risk of derailing the thread, sometimes I wonder why Mr. Schweiger doesn't rewrite the simulation code rather than try to pull parts out (as I get the feeling is going on) -- someone correct me if I'm wrong. When I've had to drastically change my own codes, I usually opted to simply rewrite it line by line using the old code as a quick reference.

Divorcing the simulation from the graphics is a beautiful if not inevitable idea but I wonder if Orbiter just needs to be rewritten from the ground up. (This of course coming from someone whose programming expertise extends no further than Fortran 77 and Matlab) He simply needs to pass in and out a giant array of variables to a visualization code which are updated each time step with some sophisticated numerical methods. The concept is simple enough, and were this one of my Fortran codes, it's a simple matter of pulling out blocks of old code into a new code, but on a much bigger scale.

I have to believe there are open source graphic engines out there that could be tweaked to use whatever output variables he has available. At any rate, I also sympathize with the distractions of the real world and how difficult it is to push forward on a thoroughly enlightening though completely profitless endeavor. Once the OVP is done I'll feel like a complete moocher if I don't donate at least the equivalent new price of a game like Homeworld 2 or Flight Sim X. The opportunities available by separating the time-step dynamics from the visualization really puts it in competition with professional and for-profit software despite the lack of a similar for-profit piece of orbital mechanics software.

 

[Artlav]

Screenies are just impressive. I wonder if Orbiter will look like this some day.
{IMG}
{IMG}

That looks quite impressive. May even be within modern RTR technology.

Proof it is not vaporware?

 

[ar81]

A sample that it is not just a 3D render.
Here is a working game that you can download and play offline. Perhaps not as good as previous screenies, but it is somehow good for a shooter.
It works with low requirements. Evochron renegades
http://starwraith3dgames.home.att.net/evochronrenegades/
If you download, it will be evaluation version, which allows you a certain amount of time to play. I have played it.

 

[Kyle]

That looks quite impressive. May even be within modern RTR technology.

Proof it is not vaporware?

Artlav, you continue with your Orluex stuff and we will go beyond that. Highly recommended addon.

 

[Coolhand]

Guys, there's nothing that impressive about it by current standards really. i mean it looks pretty good, but nothing revolutionary or cutting edge - looks good for an indie title, mind... But that standard of graphics has been around for a few years now.

 

[Woo482]

if you want a realistic looking game with really good Graphics ? look at crysis hear is a comparison now if you could make orbiter look like that i would play it more

 

[willy88]

if you want a realistic looking game with really good Graphics ? look at crysis hear is a comparison now if you could make orbiter look like that i would play it more

Very, impressive, but Crysis is a resource-eater. I've heard that you need a computer with specs similar to the Cray XT4 supercomputer to run it at a decent FPS.

 

[Woo482]

yes the current game engine That crysis runs on is very unoptimised and thats why its a resource eater but the new game engine for Crysis:War Head (Cryengine 2.5) is a lot More optimized than Cryengine 2.0 ( the game engine currently used by Crysis)

 

[tl8]

Very, impressive, but Crysis is a resource-eater. I've heard that you need a computer with specs similar to the Cray XT4 supercomputer to run it at a decent FPS.

That is a lie,

Yes you need a good PC to run it, however Medium in Crysis is as good as High in other games , The new game that will be released this year will have better graphics and lower PC power required

 

[Woo482]

^
Yes exactly what you said thats what I was trying to say in my last post

 

[adamb193]

From the AP

Jul, 4
Scientists at NASA's John F. Kennedy Space center have revealed that they are extremely close to accomplishing what experts once thought to be impossible: running EA;s PC shooter Crysis at maximum settings. Using a custom built Cray XT3 Opteron supercomputer, NASA's engineers, in partnership with a team of students at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, claim to to have actually run the game at full capacity for 10 minutes before a total fatal system crash. "It's been hard," comments NASA project lead James Ferguson, "but challenges like this are why we do what we do. Hearing everyone applaud in the control room when we got the first level up and running was a feeling I'll never forget. This has been a real journey for the whole team...even a few months ago we weren't able to put the sliders up past half before it crippled the system. Now we're playing for five, ten minutes at a time at full resolution with no demonstrative frame lag."

Although progress has been good, time is of the essence, as recent rumors have speculated that a rival team in China will be attempting a gull run-through of the game within the next month. Still Ferguson remains confident. "I believe in America's know-how, and I guarantee we'll be the first country on Earth to run Crysis. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go sign off on a shipment of Red Bull. It's gonna be a long night"

 

[tl8]

From the AP

Jul, 4
Scientists at NASA's John F. Kennedy Space center have revealed that theyare extremely close to accomplishing what experts once thought to be impossible: running EA;s PC shooter Crysis at maximum settings. Using a custom built Cray XT3 Opteron supercomputer, NASA's engineers, in partnership with a team of students at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, claim to to have actually run the game at full capacity for 10 minutes before a total fatal system crash. "It's been hard," comments NASA project lead James Ferguson, "but challenges like this are why we do what we do. Hearing everyone applaud in the control room when we got the first level up and running was a feeling I'll never forget. This has been a real journey for the whole team...even a few months ago we weren't able to put the sliders up past half before it crippled the system. Now we're playing for five, ten minutes at a time at full resolution with no demonstrative frame lag."

Although progress has been good, time is of the essence, as recent rumors have speculated that a rival team in China will be attempting a gull run-through of the game within the next month. Still Ferguson remains confident. "I believe in America's know-hoe, and I guarantee we'll be the first country on Earth to run Crysis. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go sign off on a shipment of Red Bull. It's gonna be a long night"

LOL, haven't seen this one:lol:

 

[Woo482]

Ive run it on max but my graphics card was touching 95oc