What you want to see in the Next release of Orbiter

[Kaito]

This is a list of things I'D like to see in the next Orbiter Version:

-Integrated Sound
-Integrated MeshLand (solid meshes)
-"Realistic" and "Non Realistic" models (like the DGIV and VanguardXR5), toggle able on and off
-Long-Term Missions: For example, the ability to setup a "base" on the Moon, which has people on-board. It has to be re-supplied every now and then. (I know that is turning Orbiter more into a game then anything else. Just an idea i had)
-Integrated UMMU
-Better, easier to follow tutorials, Like the one provided by Tex (his docking to ISS one)

And...thats pretty much all I can think of at the moment. What would you guys like to see?

 

[tl8]

First question is Why?

Next is what is wrong with the current way?

For the XRs you can change the setting in the config file.

And remember that Orbiter is primarily a community project with the basic package done by one person.

Last of all, you can make your own default install package.

 

[TSPenguin]

I agree. Integrating all these things in the base orbiter package, would not only make it huge, but also makes unneccessarily huge for most people.
Not everyone needs sound, UMMU and certainly huge ship packages like the XR series or the DGIV

btw, that ship is called XR5 Vanguard.

 

[Xantcha]

what's wrong with integrating sound and collision engines in base package?

 

[tl8]

Because the development of such things will become locked to the version of Orbiter. IE if Dan Steph wanted to release a new Orbiter Sound, a new Orbiter would need to be released.

That said, some addons (Orulex) will need to be integrated into the orbiter core for any more progress is made [in Orulex]

Edit: The above comment is incorrect, I misread the post.

http://www.orbiter-forum.com/showthread.php?t=4181

 

[ryan]

That said, some addons (Orulex) will need to be integrated into the orbiter core for any more progress is made.

So many years with 2006 alot of changes will be have to be made with some add-ons and on the other hand some improvements now could be made with some add-ons when it comes to the physics for example.
And for the record if there is one im with TS Penguin and TL8 no changes like that will needed to be made.

 

[Danny Ramone]

I for one will be stoked with photo-realistic graphics. That's all orbiter needs to be perfect.

Though i know thats a long way off.

 

[ar81]

I would like to see weather and mountains in alien planets (basically meshland).
I don't care about atmospheric weather simulation, just the visuals, so I feel in an alien planet.
Better clouds for Earth.
Underwater simulation (layered atmospheres and transitions). I would love to take off from the bottom of the sea, go to space and then land on a moving aircraft carrier.

Ability to remote control detachments. For example, detaching BSP and its launcher.
Automated flight plans for non player vessels, so if you detach BSP, launcher come back to base following nav points given by Latitude/Longitude.

Built in Pylon MFD with documentation to create STS like missions.

Default generic VC for vessels that do not have a VC.
Customizable default VC without using DLLs.

Reentry flames visible from cockpit.

Sun simulation. Visuals mostly.

 

[Urwumpe]

A copy protection system which does not allow launching Orbiter without correctly answering three questions from the manual.

 

[ar81]

A copy protection system which does not allow launching Orbiter without correctly answering three questions from the manual.

I think that's not necessary.
Just do not allow customizable splash screen and encrypt or hardcode credits.
Imagine you are showing Orbiter in a demonstration to very important people at a planetarium, and then the pop up window comes to ask you a question every time you load a scenario... that would kill the experience of the audience.

 

[Artlav]

Just do not allow customizable splash screen and encrypt or hardcode credits.

I think he meant it as idiot protection - to reduce amount of people asking "how can i turn the engines on on DG?" kind of questions on the forum.

 

[Master of Blades]

Only thing I'd like to see is proper water...

 

[ar81]

I think he meant it as idiot protection - to reduce amount of people asking "how can i turn the engines on on DG?" kind of questions on the forum.

Oh! You mean a FAQ or built-in tutorial?
It would require to add playback the ability to pause and display diagrams and play sounds.
I think Jane's simulation tutorials could be used as reference.

Or it could be like FSX tutorial... not really the best but easier to find.

 

[zerofay32]

A copy protection system which does not allow launching Orbiter without correctly answering three questions from the manual.

That is completely necessary. If people would just read the manuals.....

Oh! You mean a FAQ or built-in tutorial?

And Orbiter has a built in help feature that I'm sure no body uses.

Zerofay32

 

[Dambuster]

Kaito, the ideas I like most are the extended mission one (that one would be really fun), and the integrated sound/meshes ideas.

The tutorials are quite good, however from my own very recent (and still ongoing) experiences with them, they:
a) NEED to be consolidated, or at least have a very conspicuous document IN Orbiter containing links to all of them

b) really would benefit from having a glossary at the front, explaining the abbreviations etc in non technical terms (perhaps with a more-technical glossary at the front).

Dambuster

 

[HiPotOk1978]

well the first things are my mind
3d terrain

collision detection w/ ships, buildings, everything that isn't

better shadows from buildings, shadows are not always just 100% black

ability to add light sources - eg lights in a hangar that cast shadows instead of your only light source being Sol, lights from mesh buildings/ships affecting the world

 

[Kaito]

Like, the idea's about the extended missions, or just objectives in general, would probably dampen the effect of it. But also, it would make it cool. Here's an example:
Objective: Setting up a satellite around Venus in a equatorial geo-synchronous orbit.
What that would achieve: better communication for Solar System flights.

Just, some kind of "single player" mission, that each scenario you do would have some lasting effect on everything else.

Now, that arises some problems: 1) Distinguishing between "just-for-fun" scenarios and "mission" scenarios (probably just a little check box or parameter or something). Also, with something this complicated, it would probably need to edit the registry or something.

 

[jb42682]

Full Intergrated MultiPlayer!

 

[ar81]

And Orbiter has a built in help feature that I'm sure no body uses.

Zerofay32

No, I mean an in-flight tutorial mode, like you see in Jane's flight sims.

 

[Kaito]

Full Intergrated MultiPlayer!

This was suggested somewhere else. Don't think its gonna happen soon