How to build a FDM for DCS?

[SkateZilla]

You would be suprised what talent is hidden in the world wide web, i think ED is slowing the process by keeping it locked.

 

I still say open up documetations about it. Give the collective mind a chance. We're missing out on alot of luxury regarding mods. + more free mods draw more customers that potentialy buy payware.

 

@Sobek: I doubt Acer ment that ED is not capable.... You people allways feel attacked lol

 

 

The DCS community strikes again, backwards oriented as allways. :)

 

 

ED isnt restricting anything.

 

You have everything you need to start, from there you can provide proof of concept or sign on with a team to get whatever they get w/ 3rd Party Developer Access, and further develop on your own or with 3rd party access.

 

Cpt. Smiley did everything without 3rd party perks.

 

You cant goto the end of Level 2 and use Tubes to warp to level 9.

Edited May 30, 2013 by SkateZilla

[SkateZilla]

If not having to sieve through a bucketload of abysmally bad add ons to find one that is at least decent is backwards oriented, then fine, call me backwards oriented. Obvious stereotype thinker is obvious, though. ;)

 

I'm starting to suspect that you don't have any grasp of how open DCS really is, so from a more objective standpoint, not backwards oriented at all. Just a tad steeper in the learning curve department. I thought people here would appreciate a challenge if the reward is an immensely powerful interface to the sim.

 

Quality Control :megalol:

[ericoh]

ED isnt restricting anything.

 

You have everything you need to start, from there you can provide proof of concept or sign on with a team to get whatever they get w/ 3rd Party Developer Access, and further develop on your own or with 3rd party access.

 

Cpt. Smiley did everything without 3rd party perks.

 

You cant goto the end of Level 2 and use Tubes to warp to level 9.

 

 

:doh:

 

You guys simply fly throught lines to then only bring across your point of how much you hate casual players. No word was ever lost that anybody without any coding background or simillar wants to make their own modules. I for example only spoke about Documentation. And THAT gentleman, is exactly what is backwards oriented.

 

P.S.: It would be so terrible to have bad Modifications because you are FORCED to use them, right?

Edited May 30, 2013 by ericoh

[sobek]

You guys simply fly throught lines to then only bring across your point of how much you hate casual players. No word was ever lost that anybody without any coding background or simillar wants to make their own modules.

 

?!?!?WTH?!?

 

There is no need for you to be so defensive, we want different things, so what? That doesn't mean we hate casual players.

 

Powerful tools will always be harder to use, that's the harsh reality. Right now, ED don't seem to be interested to become the X-Plane of Combat flight sims. Since they would have to spend an exorbitant amount of ressources on creating an SDK that would really enable people without coding skills whatsoever to create some sort of flyable contraption, i think their point of view is valid, even more so when you look at the fact that World is free. The only financially valid option would be to charge for the SDK, which is again stupid because you don't want to penalize the people that are creating content for the sim. Long story short, with how things are right now, there's nothing in it for ED but potentially damaging the brand (DCS) they have so carefully nursed to life.

 

I for example only spoke about Documentation. And THAT gentleman, is exactly what is backwards oriented.

 

As was stated before, CptSmiley's work would be a good starting point to dive into the API, but as things are right now, without some knowledge of C you're outta luck. There are tutorials for that though (IMHO learning at least the most basic of skills in at least one programming language should be as obligatory as learning a foreign language nowadays, but then again, i am biased, a man can dream :)).

Edited May 30, 2013 by sobek

[SilentEagle]

So much talk, so little action. It may not be easy to develop for DCS, but it certainly isnt impossible if you put forth the effort to learn a programming language and some physics. I can't say that anything I have learned while developing for DCS has been a waste of my time or brain power.

 

ED has obviously made a decision to not put forth the effort to make an easy to use SDK that any Joe Schmo could use, not because they can't or because they hate the "casual developer", but because it would take a lot of resources away from their products. As has been said before, the sim architecture is so open that an SDK to output cookie cutter aircraft wouldn't really make sense or be possible. Everything is built from the ground up on your first aircraft. Subsequent aircraft you develop could use a sort of template that you created for your first aircraft. That is what I am doing, building up a code base, just in case i ever decide to work on another in the future.

[Silver_Dragon]

some physics docs here (continue update): http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=105906

[NineLine]

ED helps those that help themselves...

 

And this is an example of a project moving forward without 3rd Party status: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=93302

 

Its all about how much work you want to put into it I suppose... if the documentation isnt enough for you right now, then maybe you need to seek 3rd Party status, I am sure that will illuminate things further, of course I am sure there is hard work to get that status as well... and we are back to my initial statement.

 

To the poor OPer lost in all this fun, if your friend has created stuff for other sims, maybe he can approach ED with those examples and what he has in mind for DCS and I am sure they will point you in what direction to go from there.... I am sure they will tell him what he needs to go further. Or possible approach one of the existing 3rd Party teams and maybe there would be a position for him to join them?

 

:doh:

 

You guys simply fly throught lines to then only bring across your point of how much you hate casual players. No word was ever lost that anybody without any coding background or simillar wants to make their own modules. I for example only spoke about Documentation. And THAT gentleman, is exactly what is backwards oriented.

 

P.S.: It would be so terrible to have bad Modifications because you are FORCED to use them, right?

[SkateZilla]

VRC has Projects going without the ED 3rd Party Status too, and my endless begging for help when i hit a snag.

 

But yeah, OP, The Friend should seek 3rd party status and work on some PoC stuff to help with learning.

[aaron886]

Actually Aaron, they don't have to teach it, all they would have to do is release the source code for one of their AFMs.

Laughable. In what world of entitlement do you expect a software developer to hand out their work for free? You do understand this is their livelihood and they do not owe you, right?

 

but lets not try and pretend that there aren't some extremely talented people in this and other communities that could program circles around the guys at ED.

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. I mean, really, this just plainly displays your ignorance. I can't even dignify it with an answer.

 

If you think you are capable of making something of quality for this simulator, get off your ass and learn from the examples and work done by others. You're wasting our time and yours.

[Mode1961]

Laughable. In what world of entitlement do you expect a software developer to hand out their work for free? You do understand this is their livelihood and they do not owe you, right?

 

 

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. I mean, really, this just plainly displays your ignorance. I can't even dignify it with an answer.

 

If you think you are capable of making something of quality for this simulator, get off your ass and learn from the examples and work done by others. You're wasting our time and yours.

 

 

Lets see

 

Id Software

Crytek

Valve

Bi Studio (to a lesser extent)

 

 

And I wasn't talking about releasing the source code to the game itself (like the companies above), only to one of the AFMs for reference which is what I said above.

[Anatoli-Kagari9]

Well, thank you for all your posts.

 

It wasn't really my intention to start a discussion of the hows & whys of EDs strategy regarding 3pds.

 

I think that the right to restrict the access to the physics SDK used in DCS World assists naturally to ED. I understand that requiring a potential developer to register, and even pay for the rights to use that platform will at least filter a lot of noise, and I wouldn't really like to see all sorts of add-on vehicles starting to become available without any type of "quality control"!

 

I will be rather selective on the add-ons I plan to buy. I know that Belsimtek and the team behind the other aircraft and helicopter modules are certainly a guarantee of quality. Time and experience will show what other players will be able to achieve...

[karambiatos]

Lets see

 

Id Software

Crytek

Valve

Bi Studio (to a lesser extent)

Id Software - they only release the source code after they are done with an engine, every 5 years or so.

Crytek - need to pay for the source code, and for free you get a pretty limited SDK

Valve -i dont know, but im pretty sure you dont have access to the source code

Bi Studio - im pretty sure they havent released the source code.

 

so basically they arent giving you anything more than what EDs giving you for free, they just make it shinier, and their engines still cant have maps big maps in multiplayer.

The AFM ED is using is pretty secretive, and allows them to have an edge over the rest of the competition, they arent going to give it out for free, at least not until they find a better more realistic way to do it.

Edited May 31, 2013 by karambiatos

[sobek]

And I wasn't talking about releasing the source code to the game itself (like the companies above), only to one of the AFMs for reference which is what I said above.

 

 

Every single FM takes considerable R&D work, the know how they need for the creation is based on 20 years of experience in the field, you think they would simply open that up and make it available to the public? They could just as well close the studio down right now.

[Tango]

:doh:

No word was ever lost that anybody without any coding background or simillar wants to make their own modules. I for example only spoke about Documentation. And THAT gentleman, is exactly what is backwards oriented.

If ED spent their time creating documents, it would detract from creating the best simulation platform.

 

If however they did create a document, it would read something like:

 

Use functions x y and z for the flight model, and functions a and b for the systems. The rest is up to you.

...and frankly - nothing we didn't already know. ;)

 

P.S.: It would be so terrible to have bad Modifications because you are FORCED to use them, right?

Bad add-ons are inexcusable.

 

They say a free market is a good thing, but sometimes progress is made by having standards dictated. Eventually those who require SDKs and hand-holding to produce add-ons, will realize what they need to do to create add-ons for "free form" simulation platforms like DCS, then eventually they will create them. This isn't "programming by numbers".

 

I highly commend ED for maintaining quality control and oversight on the process. In too many areas of life things are reduced to the lowest common denominator - at least here when you see a product for DCS you can be CERTAIN of a high minimum standard (good for developers, great for consumers).

 

Best regards,

Tango.

Edited May 31, 2013 by Tango

[Mode1961]

Every single FM takes considerable R&D work, the know how they need for the creation is based on 20 years of experience in the field, you think they would simply open that up and make it available to the public? They could just as well close the studio down right now.

 

That is so true, Valve, Id Software, Crytek all shutdown because they released the source code to their games. oh, wait, they are among the most successful development houses in history.

[SkateZilla]

^ None of which are in the simulation market or even offer any type of flight modeling close to the fidelity of a AFM from ED.

 

They release, license and sell their Graphics engines and source code for a reason, they want to.

 

AFAIK, Every Studio's AFM Coder will have to build everything from scratch using their own Docs/Data, and their own coding ability. It's not as Plug N Play as SFM would be, you dont just enter a few Physical Dimensions and some Thrust Curve / lift data into a bunch of lines in a LUA.

[NineLine]

That is so true, Valve, Id Software, Crytek all shutdown because they released the source code to their games. oh, wait, they are among the most successful development houses in history.

 

So your plan is for them to give up all their code in order for them to get as big as a company like Valve? I think you are in la la land now. You are comparing apples to oranges... And lets be honest, companies now give out less and less than what they used to anyways. Look at CoD franchise, the biggest part of that game used to be custom maps and private servers... neither of which exists beyond their control now... so dont use the FPS market to skew your point, it makes no sense...

 

The way I understand ED's plan is they give you enough to get started on your own, if you are good at what you do, you can go to the next level, which is the 3rd Party step... they are maintaining the integrity of their World, I think, as a customer, I am happy to know there is some form of quality control over the future of add ons and its not just a giant cash grab for anyone.

[ericoh]

Laughable. In what world of entitlement do you expect a software developer to hand out their work for free? You do understand this is their livelihood and they do not owe you, right?

 

 

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. I mean, really, this just plainly displays your ignorance. I can't even dignify it with an answer.

 

If you think you are capable of making something of quality for this simulator, get off your ass and learn from the examples and work done by others. You're wasting our time and yours.

 

 

A prime example on not trying to understand AT ALL, but hey, everyone in the internet is a specialist right?

 

Maybe next time you manage to leave the curse words out?

 

 

P.S.: It is so damn obvious that the market outran you guys by far allready. I wish ED the most possible success, but this community wont be pushing anything forward sadly.

[sobek]

That is so true, Valve, Id Software, Crytek all shutdown because they released the source code to their games. oh, wait, they are among the most successful development houses in history.

 

This is just utter nonsense.

 

I don't know of any game from the Crysis series where the source code is available, neither have i ever heard of the Source engine being open source. The CryEngine and an SDK are available to non commercial game developers, but not the sources of the engine. They wouldn't spend years and years and millions on developing the technology for that engine just to give it away for free.

 

By the way, since you obvioulsy didn't notice, ED is doing the same thing, giving DCS World away for free. That doesn't mean they need to give you the source code to anything.

[ericoh]

This is just utter nonsense.

 

I don't know of any game from the Crysis series where the source code is available, neither have i ever heard of the Source engine being open source. The CryEngine and an SDK are available to non commercial game developers, but not the sources of the engine. They wouldn't spend years and years and millions on developing the technology for that engine just to give it away for free.

 

By the way, since you obvioulsy didn't notice, ED is doing the same thing, giving DCS World away for free. That doesn't mean they need to give you the source code to anything.

 

 

No they did not release any source code, still you got access to the engines functionalities, infact so easy that you do not need a load of documentation on it (which you can get btw).

 

And no, ED isnt doing anything close to it.

 

 

P.S.: Thanks aaron for negative proping me because i dissagree with your cursing approach to people =) But obviously, your exactly the kind of person that would do such weak things.

Edited May 31, 2013 by ericoh

[NineLine]

No they did not release any source code, still you got access to the engines functionalities, infact so easy that you do not need a load of documentation on it (which you can get btw).

 

And no, ED isnt doing anything close to it.

 

 

P.S.: Thanks aaron for negative proping me because i dissagree with your cursing approach to people =)

 

That engine is suitable for cookie cutter games, its probably no where near the complexity of a flight simulation and the data required to be input into ED's FM... again apples to oranges...

[ericoh]

That engine is suitable for cookie cutter games, its probably no where near the complexity of a flight simulation and the data required to be input into ED's FM... again apples to oranges...

 

 

While i wish you were right since EA swallowed this awesome studio, you are wrong, Cryengine 3 is probably even more complex then ED's engine, they just have a focus on different things. Besides the possibilities are infinite aswell...

Edited May 31, 2013 by ericoh

[NineLine]

While i wish you were right since EA swallowed this awesome studio, you are wrong, Cryengine 3 is probably even more complex then ED's engine, they just have a focus on different things. Besides the possibilities are infinite aswell...

 

 

Ok, granted their graphics are quite impressive, its only one part, you have to look at the whole, I dont think you can even compare the 2, all the stuff going on under the hood for ED is probably more than most of us understand. ED's engine couldnt do everything the Cryengine does, as well the Cryengine couldnt do everything ED's does... so its really not a good comparison. I stand by my statement of the Cryengine being for cookie cutter games, and thats not a bad thing for them, thats what they are probably shooting for, ED isn't in the same market.

 

You would be better comparing it to something like IL2:CoD than a FPS engine. But havent we drifted off the path far enough yet :)

[ericoh]

Ok, granted their graphics are quite impressive, its only one part, you have to look at the whole, I dont think you can even compare the 2, all the stuff going on under the hood for ED is probably more than most of us understand. ED's engine couldnt do everything the Cryengine does, as well the Cryengine couldnt do everything ED's does... so its really not a good comparison. I stand by my statement of the Cryengine being for cookie cutter games, and thats not a bad thing for them, thats what they are probably shooting for, ED isn't in the same market.

 

You would be better comparing it to something like IL2:CoD than a FPS engine. But havent we drifted off the path far enough yet :)

 

 

I agree that you cannot compare them (i didnt even bring it up :D) but you cant say they are less complex. The graphical AND physical possibilities with the cryengine are mad. It is not just what surfaces on your major gaming site.

 

I think it is obvious that ED wouldnt release their source code.

 

I stand by my oppinion that they should not restrict any access to accepted 3rd party developers but to the public, if some of you guys think the people are to stupid to filter out the ridiculous modifications themselfs then you simply insult their intelligence.

[NineLine]

Ok, I will give you that, its not less complex, its just night and day different complex :) Sure the physics are great if the map is the size of a small city, but try running that engine with a large portion of a country... I think your puter would melt :) I mean if I was dreaming I would love to see the destruction of a BF3 map in DCS World, but the flight across the map would be short :)

 

But more on topic... the Cryengine was probably created with the idea that they could license it... I dont think in this case this is something ED wants to do as they want all creations to be built in and for their World, and maintain a certain level of quality.

 

I agree that you cannot compare them (i didnt even bring it up :D) but you cant say they are less complex. The graphical AND physical possibilities with the cryengine are mad. It is not just what surfaces on your major gaming site.

 

I think it is obvious that ED wouldnt release their source code.

 

I stand by my oppinion that they should not restrict any access to accepted 3rd party developers but to the public, if some of you guys think the people are to stupid to filter out the ridiculous modifications themselfs then you simply insult their intelligence.