Copilots

[dogfish]

I'm not sure if this has been brought up before, but one thing that bothers Me is the lack of a copilot or any other crewmembers when I'm in virtual cockpit mode. I imagine it would add to the build time and also the price, however with computer technology where it is now, I believe the systems being built now can handle the extra visuals, also animation would really add to the immersion factor.

 

[peter12213]

if I'm honest I'm the complete opposite, I like an aircraft to have no copilot, I don't mind the odd well modeled passenger but I hate it when you get low poly crew members it just looks so poor! Some companies do a crew that is clickable so you can add remove them like A2A with the Cub and Iris with there Christen Eagle which does look good but you can't beat A2A for the interactiveness (Is that a word?) of there aircraft. Its just mind blowing

 

[Snave]

if I'm honest I'm the complete opposite, I like an aircraft to ahve no copilot, I don't mind the odd well modled passenger but I hate it when you get low poly crew members it just looks so poor! some companies do a crew that is clickable so you can add remove them like A2Awith the Cub and Iris with there Christen Eagle.

Agree, but what is the POINT of them unless they also DO something..? :salute:

 

[dogfish]

the next level

Agree, but what is the POINT of them unless they also DO something..? :salute:

i know this is just a dream, dont see it happening, but would'nt it be amazing to have an aircraft with a complete interior and crew that were animated doing something. We already have designers who include very detailed pilots in the external view. I'm sure if they wanted to they could build an equally detailed and realistic virtual version. I am pretty sure though that not many would be willing to pay the extra price, and the developers know this, so sadly I dont see this happening. I believe this would be the next level.

 

[MCDesigns]

I'm not sure if this has been brought up before, but one thing that bothers Me is the lack of a copilot or any other crewmembers when I'm in virtual cockpit mode. I imagine it would add to the build time and also the price, however with computer technology where it is now, I believe the systems being built now can handle the extra visuals, also animation would really add to the immersion factor.

I COULDN'T AGREE MORE!!!! It's the main reason I love the nemeth helis. One cool thing about FSX, it the ability to create different camera angles and you can move you eye point to an area in the exterior model to allow for the copilot from the exterior model to be visable, not perfect, but helps with the immersion.

The main obstacle from a developers POV is many don't have the modeling skill to produce a believable model while keeping the polys to a reasonable number. Organic modeling tends to be a bit harder.

 

[spotlope]

One huge drawback to modeling people (and why we don't like them a lot of the time when devs do) is our familiarity with the real thing. Most of us have spent exponentially more time studying other people than we have with planes, plus our brains are hard-wired to recognize our own species with all their nuances. So when a dev tries to model a human, our eyes immediately go to the areas that aren't quite right, and we're almost universally dissatisfied with the result. I can count on one hand the number of 3D-modeled people I've ever seen in games that didn't look cartoonish. The best examples are also well over the number of polys that FS can handle, which is another drawback.

 

[Bjoern]

Agree, but what is the POINT of them unless they also DO something..? :salute:

Well, I have this idea for an interactive co-pilot coupled with a checklist...

You have your co-pilot guy/gal sitting next to you, you have your checklist. You click an item on the checklist and he/she flicks the appropriate switch for you. You tell him to take controls, he keeps the crate on course (or flighplan).

It's doable (XML controlled animations, skinned mesh and a few tricks under the hood here and there).

FSX offers endless possibilities, the question is just whether it's feasible to explore and exploit them all.

Maybe one day...

 

[bazzar]

In the end it comes down to choice. To accomodate a reasonable well modeled, animated figure in a cockpit, something else would need to go.

For a figure to look half-way reasonable, the poly count could be as much as an engineer's station, nav bench full of working gear or maybe wings and engines out the passenger or crew station views.

Although FSX is far and away better than the old FS9 for limits on models, nevertheless, there are limits. It isn't just the ability of a video card and memory or a processor to handle them.

For a believable figure of the type you suggest, the count could be maybe 40-50,000 polys out of a total budget of 150,000. Game figures are matched to their environment so lower budgets don't notice so much. You can't expect laser accurate modeling of controls and systems, gauges and controls and then introduce a CGI figure. At least not in anything bigger than a light single engine basic aeroplane.

Maybe in FS11.....

 

[kilo delta]

no offence...but

No poly-crew for me thanks, it's a flight sim after all...if I wanted people I'd play the Sims series!

:d

 

[MCDesigns]

In the end it comes down to choice. To accomodate a reasonable well modeled, animated figure in a cockpit, something else would need to go.

For a figure to look half-way reasonable, the poly count could be as much as an engineer's station, nav bench full of working gear or maybe wings and engines out the passenger or crew station views.

Although FSX is far and away better than the old FS9 for limits on models, nevertheless, there are limits. It isn't just the ability of a video card and memory or a processor to handle them.

For a believable figure of the type you suggest, the count could be maybe 40-50,000 polys out of a total budget of 150,000. Game figures are matched to their environment so lower budgets don't notice so much. You can't expect laser accurate modeling of controls and systems, gauges and controls and then introduce a CGI figure. At least not in anything bigger than a light single engine basic aeroplane.

Maybe in FS11.....

While true, it's a trade off, one thing for another, I have seen plenty of figure mesh examples under 20k of polys. The detail really only needs to be focused on the hands/head area since they'll be wearing clothes and good textures can take the believability much further. As an example I doubt many would kick this mesh out of the cockpit, LOL

http://www.turbosquid.com/FullPreview/Index.cfm?id=360220

With bones supported in FSX, I really feel this is an area that needs to be explored more and with the ability to toggle the figure on off, everyone wins..

 

[srgalahad]

<<--- drops a couple of ducats in the pot...

If I have to reduce my range for some screaming, terrified ride-along who starts whimpering every time I do a steep turn, I'd want him to wear a 'chute and be prepared to jump. If it was some 800 hr wannabee who thought he was a gift to aviation, he'd better be able to fly half the legs, tune the radios, share the cabin attendants on a lay-over and not grab my copy of the newspaper once we are at cruise (oh, and buy the odd dinner).
Now if he were a skilled RIO who wanted to save my a$$ because it meant saving his too.. well, maybe..
Otherwise I'll take his account and would rather it be applied to some useful polys...

My attention is most often on a map, a VOR, a weather/winds aloft chart and not looking around at some white-knuckled cojo so he can quite nicely be invisible so I can see out his side of the plane when I'm trying to do a tight approach. I might change my mind if it were Fifi LeStue bringing me coffee, a pastry and lingering with her hand resting on my shoulder , talking about where we were going after we land but it's not as much fun in a Cub, on the deck in 1/2 mile vis.

 

[TeaSea]

Heh-Heh....

Clearly this is an issue of personal preference. I do agree with the observation that the human form is probably one of the hardest to model.....well, mine is mostly round now so all you need are some good ovals...but you get my meaning.

 

[tigisfat]

I'm not sure if this has been brought up before, but one thing that bothers Me is the lack of a copilot or any other crewmembers when I'm in virtual cockpit mode. I imagine it would add to the build time and also the price, however with computer technology where it is now, I believe the systems being built now can handle the extra visuals, also animation would really add to the immersion factor.

I agree whole heartedly, and good or photoreal textures can replace the need for jillions of polys.

I have hated that you look around and there's noone home for a while. We've had planes with copilots before, and it helps a lot IMO.

 

[Bjoern]

I might change my mind if it were Fifi LeStue bringing me coffee, a pastry and lingering with her hand resting on my shoulder , talking about where we were going after we land

Well, it's possible but would it be worth the time investment?

 

[pilottj]

I think A2A is going in the right direction with the passenger/crew concept. Keep them invisible in the VC but have them 'there' to do their functions as they would in a real aircraft. One pilot can not realistically 'solo' a large aircraft like a B-17 so the immersion factor of a 'crew' is very nice.

I hope we see more aircraft with Lotus's philosphy in his L-39C of a fully shared cockpit. Imagine flying a leg of a trip B-17 with your mates over multiplayer, one person flying, one operating the engine controls, the other navigating...then switch roles for the next leg or somthing. I would imagine the tubeliner fans would love a plane that could share the Capt/FO functions. I believe PMDG is working on somthing like that for the 737NG series.

 

[PRB]

So why shouldn't I add my two pesos to this one? No co-pilots for me. Every time I look behind me in the T-6 I have I see that creepy looking bug-eyed dude staring at me. He makes me nervous! And co-pilot figures block view and access to switches that he/she won't push for me anyway. But all points of view are valid, in this case.

 

[bazzar]

While true, it's a trade off, one thing for another, I have seen plenty of figure mesh examples under 20k of polys. The detail really only needs to be focused on the hands/head area since they'll be wearing clothes and good textures can take the believability much further. As an example I doubt many would kick this mesh out of the cockpit, LOL

http://www.turbosquid.com/FullPreview/Index.cfm?id=360220

With bones supported in FSX, I really feel this is an area that needs to be explored more and with the ability to toggle the figure on off, everyone wins..

You have to be very care there Michael. Many, many models, free or pay are described as low poly. They are indeed, but to get the representation one sees in the previews, you turn meshsmooth on and bingo you're up to 40,000 before you know it...

The lady in question is subdivided. You notice the note in the description? She probably is 9,500 underneath it all but you probably wouldn't want her in FS8 let alone FSX, without her meshsmooth makeup!

Bones don't work very well in FS. We find it easier to animate separate limbs as the exporter falls over more often than not, wasting even more time.

 

[anthony31]

Co pilots and the Tiger Moth:

The front passenger is so intergral to the Tiger Moth that I just had to make one. Even though she blocks the view but then that is part of the Tiger Moth flying experience. Originally I had considered making her visible depending on the weights set by the user (passenger weight =0 means no passenger model) but in the end I set it so the user could switch the passenger on or off.

If the passenger gets in the way of the players view and they don't like then they can just switch the passenger off.

Once I made a view for the front seat it seemed ridiculous to look around and see no pilot flying so I made the pilot switchable in the VC as well. This also came in handy for the VC startup view where you can see the prop and are looking back at the cockpit. There should be a pilot visible in this situation.

Then when I added the wheel chocks and tie downs I had to make the pilot and passenger switchable in the external views as well. Again, it seemed silly to have a plane tied down but still have the pilot sitting in it.

 

[Mathias]

While true, it's a trade off, one thing for another, I have seen plenty of figure mesh examples under 20k of polys. The detail really only needs to be focused on the hands/head area since they'll be wearing clothes and good textures can take the believability much further. As an example I doubt many would kick this mesh out of the cockpit, LOL

http://www.turbosquid.com/FullPreview/Index.cfm?id=360220

With bones supported in FSX, I really feel this is an area that needs to be explored more and with the ability to toggle the figure on off, everyone wins..

Using lower poli organics has some advantages anyway since skinned meshes in FSX don't support weightet vertices as it should be. You basically just have an on/off switch (1/0) per vertex. Makes smooth animation of a face for instance quite challenging.