Idea RPG elements

[2Gm over cxc]

No, I'm not looking to blow a hole in the side of my ship with a rocket-propelled grenade.:lol:

But I strongly believe that adding in some level of role playing would enhance this simulator tremendously.

I love this program to death, but I cannot tell you how many times I have meticulously (and excitedly) planned out and executed the beginning stages of a "mission," only to quit half-way through. As such, I cannot help but feel an anti-climactic sense of accomplishment. Typically this occurs after my mid-coursed correction; I just don't feel compelled to wrap things up like I used to when I was first learning the ropes. (With the exception of Earth re-entry's - those are always fun :thumbup: )

This is mostly because I have little investment in my ship, cargo, or crew. If I crush my landing gear, or if I use a little too much fuel or LOX, or if I have to EVA a crew member in solar orbit to extend my LOX, so what? Who cares if I eject all those empty - or full, fuel tanks with reckless abandon to cut down on weight? I ain't paying for them - and if I need new ones, F4 is only a keystroke away.

The solution? IMHO: role play and economy elements.

In my perfect world, this is an example of what this would look like:

Captain David is just starting his career as a space pilot. He inherits an outdated and poor-performing XR-2 from his father. With such inefficient ISP, obsolete somewhatunobtainium hull material, tiny oxygen tanks, no passenger seating, and last-years engines, David and his rickety XR-2 can barley take jobs transporting H20 and supplies to the ISS.

But the work has decent pay, providing David operates efficiently and causes no accidents (maintenance is expensive!). After a few jobs as a delivery man, David has enough money to upgrade his XR-2 (via changes to the config file).

He decides to upgrade his passenger capacity and LOX tanks, allowing for more lucrative crew-shuttle contracts.....

And so it goes until Captain David is piloting an XR-5 with excellent stats, able to accept multimillion dollar base/satellite-construction in the outer planets...

Is something like this possible?

Am I alone, or do others find something like this exciting?

Or maybe I need to play more Fallout to get my RPG fix.... :facepalm:

I am not a programmer, but I am a fast learner and intuitive with computers. How complicated would something like this be to create?

Appreciate all feedback in advance.

 

[garyw]

I love this program to death, but I cannot tell you how many times I have meticulously (and excitedly) planned out and executed the beginning stages of a "mission," only to quit half-way through

This is the problem that many applications and VSA's face. Personally, I don't think it matters what addons are used people will still quit at the half way point.

I've created my own VSA for this role-play experience yet every now and then I get fed up with it and walk away for a month or two. It's just how it goes.

 

[2Gm over cxc]

For sure. I do get the hedonic treadmill effect..... which is unavoidable.

My favorite thing to do in Orbiter is to play with the XR-series config files to see what max and min ranges are possible for various tasks.

Like, lowest ISP to reach orbit, setting an actual realistic ISP and thrust in the XR-5 and finding out just how large the fuel tank needs to be to reach orbit, ect.

So I figured that an upgrade and economy/mission system would give that sort of play some structure, and a sense of progression and accomplishment..(ie, yay! I can finally go to the moon with my upgraded engines and LOX tanks)

 

[boogabooga]

O.K.

Keep in mind that Orbiter is meant as a simulation, and not a "game" per se.

If you need a space "gaming" fix, then I recommend you to try Kerbal Space Program, which is developing pretty much what you describe.

 

[Codz]

O.K.

Keep in mind that Orbiter is meant as a simulation, and not a "game" per se.

Who's to say it can't be both, especially if you're talking about an addon? Plenty of simulations have additional modes and options beyond sandbox, such as "careers", resource management, etc. KSP is perfectly fine in and of itself, but it's a bit of a different animal in comparison to Orbiter.(Not to mention being commercial, albeit at a reasonable price)

 

[Izack]

O.K.

Keep in mind that Orbiter is meant as a simulation, and not a "game" per se.

If you need a space "gaming" fix, then I recommend you to try Kerbal Space Program, which is developing pretty much what you describe.

The line between simulation and game is poorly-defined in this case. Why not attempt to simulate background human elements as well as spacecraft systems? What's the difference? There are already human crews modelled (UMMU.)

On top of being a simulator, Orbiter is a sandbox engine: the user does whatever she wants within the capabilities of the engine. Economic or story elements are IMO within those capabilities.

 

[2Gm over cxc]

O.K.

Keep in mind that Orbiter is meant as a simulation, and not a "game" per se.

If you need a space "gaming" fix, then I recommend you to try Kerbal Space Program, which is developing pretty much what you describe.

Yes, I realize this..... I suppose I could have phrased it as an economy and dynamic ship modification/maintenance simulation, or "RSS" (Roll simulation simulator - to be extra redundant ).

Have you heard of Digital Combat Simulator (DCS)? The simulated A-10C Warthog model's avionics, flight dynamic, AI, and weapons systems are orders of magnitude more detailed and "realistic" than any model in Microsoft FSX, complete with a 650 page flight manual h:.

The start up sequence alone is more complicated than almost the entire FSX program combined.

But to the point, the beauty of DCS is that mastering the A-10C is only part of the experience; the full payoff comes when one is able to utilize their hard-earned skills in the exact roll the A-10C was designed to fill.

A flight simulator, weapons simulator, avionics and sensors simulator, and a combat simulator.

After that experience, I find simulators such as Orbiter and FSX lacking in the sense that there is no defined goal beyond mastery of the air/spacecraft. (Don't get me wrong, I LOVE Orbiter )

Addons which allow base and satellite building, as well as UMMU, are a step in that direction, but ultimately do not capture that satisfaction and sense of progress that is difficult for myself to find once I mastered so and so maneuvers.

I know this is a huge thing to propose, (I think). Hence the "idea" tag.... My hope was that someone shared my thoughts and was already thinking about a project in this direction.

P.S. I just checked out that Kerbal thing and it looks interesting, thanks. I assumed it was pure game, with little in the way of physics and simulation. But it seems it might be legit... Do you know much about the simulation side of it as it would compare to Orbiter?

 

[Urwumpe]

A flight simulator, weapons simulator, avionics and sensors simulator, and a combat simulator.

And paid by the DoD or at least Boeing. Keep in mind that this was a lot of work done, that was mostly possible because somebody paid for it.

You can take a look at SSU or Project Apollo, both also go in the A-10C direction, but both are also only slowly getting forward because both are done after work in the free time of too few people.

 

[2Gm over cxc]

And paid by the DoD or at least Boeing. Keep in mind that this was a lot of work done, that was mostly possible because somebody paid for it.

Good point.... lol


I totally forgot about the Apollo addons, thanks. :facepalm:

Maybe this thread would be better suited for a vent thread.... :blush:


I apologize if I came off as callous. I appreciate all the hard work put in by addon developers. My mod-soup Orbiter is 100 times better than when I first installed it vanilla. :tiphat:

 

[Urwumpe]

No deal, I can understand your point, but you are not the first and not the only one... we have also already quite a few scripted missions thanks to Orbiters lua interface.

There are also some add-ons, that shout for some RPG engine behind them, like "World of 2001".

 

[Cras]

Have you heard of Digital Combat Simulator (DCS)? The simulated A-10C Warthog model's avionics, flight dynamic, AI, and weapons systems are orders of magnitude more detailed and "realistic" than any model in Microsoft FSX, complete with a 650 page flight manual h:.

Ever heard of PMDG?

 

[2Gm over cxc]

Ever heard of PMDG?

Yep .

I meant Vanilla vs. Vanilla. Never messed around with it, but I have heard stories.....

My favorite addon for FSX is the Dodosim Bell 206, which has an amazing flight and damage/wear model. Never knew about vortex ring state until it happened my first time landing. Actually, crashing is a better word :blink:

 

[boogabooga]

The line between simulation and game is poorly-defined in this case. Why not attempt to simulate background human elements as well as spacecraft systems? What's the difference? There are already human crews modelled (UMMU.)

On top of being a simulator, Orbiter is a sandbox engine: the user does whatever she wants within the capabilities of the engine. Economic or story elements are IMO within those capabilities.

Let me show you an example of how Orbiter is a simulation and not a "game":

Adding "gaming" elements makes me nervous, because it erodes the ability for Orbiter to be taken more seriously by educators, etc. as an educational tool, or for purposes similar to the video above.

And quite frankly, I see a societal problem when people don't have the attention span to appreciate an educational and (at least semi) realistic piece of software without having an urge to "mine resources" or "upgrade equipment" or whatever else goes on in those MMORPGs.

 

[Urwumpe]

You can also find the slides of the various presentations on the Orbiter homepage:

http://download.orbit.m6.net/news/Human_Mars_Missions_with_Orbiter_MSC_2006.pdf

 

[Pipcard]

I prefer to use Orbiter semi-realistically, not hyper-realistically.
(i.e. perturbations turned off, no complex controls, no complex rendezvous procedures)

 

[Urwumpe]

I prefer the freedom to do both... simulate vibrations in the star tracker door mechanism switch and just fly wild.

 

[2Gm over cxc]

Adding "gaming" elements makes me nervous, because it erodes the ability for Orbiter to be taken more seriously by educators, etc. as an educational tool, or for purposes similar to the video above.

And quite frankly, I see a societal problem when people don't have the attention span to appreciate an educational and (at least semi) realistic piece of software without having an urge to "mine resources" or "upgrade equipment" or whatever else goes on in those MMORPGs.

You must not be a fan of NukeUMmu. :leaving:

What's wrong with combining education and fun? Isn't that the point of a space-flight simulator? Not like the majority of users do it to prepare for their upcoming voyage to Mars (with a notable exception in that video you provided, I'll check it out, thanks). The two do not need to be mutually exclusive. Yes, yes education is fun. But if it was only about learning, we would only need a pencil, paper, and a textbook on orbital mechanics and rocket design.

I upgrade and mine resources all the time in orbiter. I use a cfg. file and a "base refuel"/fuel hatch button.

If anything, the point of certain role-playing elements is to add to the immersion, not to make it more gamey. (At least when implemented properly).

But I do take your point. Please excuse the philosophical digression.:hmm:

 

[Codz]

Adding "gaming" elements makes me nervous, because it erodes the ability for Orbiter to be taken more seriously by educators, etc. as an educational tool, or for purposes similar to the video above.

Do all of the Star Trek addons hurt Orbiter's credibility as an educational tool? There are plenty of completely unrealistic addons for Orbiter already floating around, and I fail to see the harm any of them do to the core purpose or audience of Orbiter. Anyway, why would such a set of features have to be added to the core simulator? It seems like an independent addon(s) could handle such a task for those interested.

And quite frankly, I see a societal problem when people don't have the attention span to appreciate an educational and (at least semi) realistic piece of software without having an urge to "mine resources" or "upgrade equipment" or whatever else goes on in those MMORPGs.

That's a rather callous way to look at it. I'm sure the majority of this community has attempted things in Orbiter that weren't entirely for "purely" educational purposes. Not to mention the large amount of KSP fans around here. I don't see a problem in combining education and recreation, especially in the form of separate addons.

 

[boogabooga]

Do all of the Star Trek addons hurt Orbiter's credibility as an educational tool?

Actually, I can of think that they it do. There, I said it. :hide:

From the perspective of someone that doesn't fully know what Orbiter is, what are they to to make of seeing that most add-ons are from established science fiction franchises where the science is fictional. It doesn't send the message that Orbiter is about accurate physics.

That's a rather callous way to look at it. I'm sure the majority of this community has attempted things in Orbiter that weren't entirely for "purely" educational purposes. Not to mention the large amount of KSP fans around here. I don't see a problem in combining education and recreation, especially in the form of separate addons.

Orbiter is certainly entertaining, that isn't quite what I'm saying. I like KSP, too. But I don't see the need to make Orbiter more KSP like. And I certainly, certainly don't see the need to make it more World-of-Warcraft like. Orbiter...is a different kind of fun. It's more...sophisticated somehow.

I'm thinking more about a teacher that wants to install Orbiter on a school computer, which IMHO is quite legitimate. But schools usually have a "no game" policy. So now the distinction isn't arbitrary. The administration does a google search for Orbiter and turns up Star Trek, "resource management" schemes, etc. Are they going to think that Orbiter is a game, or a simulation?

 

[4throck]

What makes sense for me is some kind of crew / resource management on space-stations or bases. It could be something as simple as keeping a log of your flights, with some planning tool to help you choose where to go next.

Such as system could easily incorporate some RGP elements. For example, once you land on the 4 jovian satellites, you get a "galilean satellite award".

All this would only be accessible to the pilot while docked or landed on a base.
So it wouldn't interfere with the "flying" (that makes orbiter unique) but it would give you something to do once you reach your destination.