homepage Forums Read Only Forums Read Only Forums Jet Thunder (Read Only) Interview - Update

Great to see the update with the interview http://www.simhq.com/_air12/air_410a.html

Nice to see things coming along and really hope that a publisher gets in on the act as I'm interested in the level of realism that I've got the feeling you are putting into it.

As for clickable cockpits I personally am not interested in them (I go with HOTAS for most items) but I do see the need for them for such displays as a MFD (which even the harrier didn't have during the conflict and yes it's ironic I go with HOTAS).

As in the interview, I wouldn't see it as being critical to getting it in 1.0 release but I am sure many would appreciate it coming along after 1.0

Here are my reactions to scary_pigeon's interview answers.

1. Thrust vector control really should be via analog axis. The option to assign keys to "nozzle up" and "nozzle down" is good for scalable control options, but an axis is the best way to go for HOTAS users.

2. Campaign - I was quite surprised to hear that the team is pondering a turn-based or RTS-style campaign engine. I don't want to sound like I don't appreciate a new approach, but this sort of things sounds counter to a typical flight sim campaign system (be it linear, semi-dynamic, or fully dynamic) and might impact gameplay. By nature air combat is not turn-based.

3. The graphics look really nice, but I'm concerned over some of the light reflections or bloom. Too many arcade-style games blow this effect way out of proportion, and it looks like JT lighting may be headed in that direction. This effect should be present only to the point where it enhances the image, not overwhelms it, creates a distraction, or makes it hard to read information (such as cockpit gauges).

---

Hi Joe and SC/JG_Oesau

There is no technical problem in getting the thrust vector in an analog axis. As soon as the keymapper/axis mapper is done, the thrust vector could be assigned to any axis as the player wishes.

Personally I'm totally pro the real time dynamic campaign running in background. It is the original design. The turn based approach would be more of a "lifeboat" in case the real time approach gets too technically problematic in terms of software engineering. The flight sim crowd at this point is probably thinking about how many sims started promising dynamic campaigns and ended with a set of canned missions. In truth, Jet Thunder would be already finished if we opted for a set of canned missions.

Oh, the over the top effects may be that we're just started implementing shaders and we got carried away a bit by the difference they do. No worries, they will be tuned down as we progress, and the obvious Effect X: On/Off switch will be present in the options menu.

About clickable cockpits, we know that the Harrier and Sea Harrier in the conflict had not MFDs, but to the contrary to modern HOTAS-based jets like F/A-18 and newer, if you guys see the Sea Harrier FRS.1 flight manual you'll notice how much workload is needed to operate properly the radar and the NAV system. Lots of push buttons, not really ergonomic. 1960s jet fighter technology demanded heavy workload from the pilot, this pushed newer designs like F-16 and F-18 to go HOTAS and ergonomic. I'm totally in favor of clickable cockpits, although at the moment we're just like IL2: press "I" to start engine. I am not very fond of this (except for good accessibility), but as Cliff Bleszinski (famous game designer) said: "Game Development is mostly about figuring out what cool stuff you can do in a limited time period with limited cash."

I am a happy simmer



I am a very very happy simmer



I have just shed a tear of Joy !!! (I wish oleg would have such an epiphany)

I noticed in the interview that the game uses OpenGL. Are you planning on releasing the game on multiple platforms or as a Windows-only title?

Syncerus: yup, it's a possibility. Worked pretty well with Laminar Research's X-Plane.

Cool, now hurry up and get back to work

Just a word about the screenshots : much better to do them with a standard focale, not a wide one which deforms the aircrafts like ugly bananas (first advice I always give to newbie aviation photographers to avoid unpublishable pictures).

3. The graphics look really nice, but I'm concerned over some of the light reflections or bloom.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

To say the truth, I don't think so, I was much more impressed by the astonishing quality of the first in-game videos, two or three years ago, especially for their natural colors of the landscapes and the sky and sea. Here, everything looks far too much "velvia-ish".

And about the cockpit of the Sea Harrier, this level of details was quite correct a few years ago, but now, for an upcoming sim, it's no more enough, we need something at the level, at least of Lock-On. Also the Harrier model needs more polygons.

Oooh yes, coloration is very important. Drab greys and browns of the stormy South Atlantic and barren landscapes are very important. No shiny bright greens and blues, wash out the saturation as much as practical.

A great example of this was the original EF2000 which did a very good Norwegian overcast. IL2 is a little too bright and primary colored (as are the screen shots of BofB).

Dull clag and low-down turbulence gets me much more excited than bright sunshine and smooth skies.

Great to see some news and an interview though, nice work guys!

Cheers, Spinner

I hate to say it, but I agree. A few years back JT looked like a modern flight sim, but with the punishment of time it doesn't look as dazzling as it once did. Maybe you could release the code, let the community develop it, and when you can find a publisher, sell it. Just like they did with EECH2. Maybe even self publish?

Cheers

I think the plane looks good enough, but the carrier is ugly. However, the only graphics issue I'd like to get fixed before initial release is the unrealistic bloom. IMO, it's better to concentrate on the campaign, bug hunting, multiplayer, physics, optimization, avionics, user interface etc. as the graphics aren't that bad. Additional graphics improvements can always be released in addons or patches later on, provided that your engine supports higher definition models and textures.

Yup, this is exactly what we're doing now. All game development books tell that is better to have a very fun game playable with boxes and other abstract test stuff, than to have perfect spot-on models layed over a totally unplayable, buggy foundation. Graphics can be easily changed later. Our models are all 2005-2006ish now, but as History Channel tought they were good enough for a full lenght documentary(as aired this last week), we left them. But seeing Lock On: Black Shark and Rise of Flight, I agree that for a final release as an AAA title we must re-model them all in a higher polygon and texture detail.

One of the things that I personally think is very strange, is the green flight deck of the Argentinean carrier. Our argentinean experts are telling that it is like that, but I still can't get used to that color, because we're so used to grey carrier decks in the jet era. I remember reading some Oleg update or comment, in IL2 Forgotten Battles time, that they received the model of some new russian plane to be added to the game but they had to tone down the cockpit interior colors, because in russian fashion they were painted in full bright blue or lush green - in the final game after toning down the colors it ended looking more towards typical grey with a small tendency towards blue or green...

The shaders were just added, they're overdone indeed, specially the water specular. All to be tweaked and toned down. We're looking more for HDR type lighting and with this, any temporary bloom will be out (bloom is so 2005 isn't?

Focus on the cool stuff

I spend all day with a mouse in my hand. I don't want to come home and click on stuff.

i agree, i sometimes wonder if for artistic reasons the carrier should be made what the colour we expect it to be :-)

but then authenticity is important.

latest screenshots. got shaders for seas which we've been missing in the past.

I've prefer this one:

nice, very nice

Mmmm, I want to swim in that water.

Would you have high-resolution versions of these pictures ? They would make a very fine wallpaper for my desktop...