I Wanna Make A FlatShaded 3D Polygonal World War II Flight Simulator

[CaryMG]

Hey!


I accidently stumbled onto this most cool website & it's a good thing I did 'cause I can think of no place better ta get the info I'm looking for ....

See these ?

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c144/forumepix/A-10Attack6.jpg
"A-10 Attack!"

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c144/forumepix/Sentrya.jpg
"Sentry"

I think there's something to be said for flatshaded 3D polygonal graphics -- clean .... uncumbersome .... clear .... don't you agree?

"ParSoft", the development wizards begind "A-10 Attack!", also did a beautiful flatshaded 3D polygonal World War II flight simulator, but it was in the Pacific & not Europe.

What I'd like ta do is use the same asthetic & make a European-based one.
And I'd like ta have MIDI music & FX.
Keep it nice & simple.
And I'd like it to be playable online for Macintosh computers with "System 6" & up.

Except BASIC, I have no programming experience, so I'd like ta know ....
What engine should a beginner use ta get the kinda graphics in the screenshots?
What programming language should I use?
How would I incorporate MIDI music & FX?


Thanks In Advance!
- CaryMG
cary@easy.com
:) :) :)

P.S. : How do I upload an avatar?

[Taxxodium]

And I'd like it to be playable online for Macintosh computers with "System 6" & up.

Good luck with that :\

[kodex]

Well BASIC is a good start, there are some modern day compliers that still use basic today. Blitz Basic and RealBasic come to mind though I have no experince with either.

The graphics in the screen shot would be fairly easy to do with modern OpenGL, im not sure when you say engine if you are looking to create a game through a mod system if so there are several engines you could go with; Dim3 (not sure if it can do this kind of game) Unity, Torque.

Programming langauge is really up to you, BASIC would work if thats what you know, I personally would recommend some form of C. If you would like to make an engine from scrap you should look into OpenGL or SDL for the graphics, there are forums here for both those options.

Sound Effects are getting easier by the day and there are a few solutions out there. OpenAL, FMOD, Quicktime, ect. I would work more on the graphics and basics before you dive into sound, but once again thats just me. You can find several articles on the pros and cons of the listed above sound librarys.

Its becomming harder to support OS Classic systems and the user base for these is fading quickly, not to say that no one uses Classic still but it might not be worth it to support it, that is something you will have to look more deeply into and decide for yourself. Keep in mind the older the computer that you want to support the older librarys you will have to use. So it will limit out a lot of the easy shortcuts you could be taking.

For network and muiltplayer functions look into BSD Sockets, but like you said keep it simple, if you get that far then look to adding it in later. Dont overwhelm yourself. Game programming is a lot harder then many people think it is.

Welcome to the forum, and goodluck

[NCarter]

That's actually A-10 Cuba, which was a much nicer sim than A-10 Attack. I loved that game. :)

I'm doing a game with flat shaded visuals with Unity (http://www.unity3d.com/). I'd generally recommend Unity as a high quality, nice to use engine with lots of features. It's flexible enough to do something like a flight sim with stylised visuals. On the other hand, it doesn't really do MIDI... if you want minimal audio, you'd have to fake it by recording it to OGG files or something. It's also not good for compatibility with very old systems, although I'd say that's a blind alley that you shouldn't waste your time with anyway.

One important thing: make no mistake, flight sims are difficult to program no matter what engine you use. There's a lot of really hairy maths to deal with, and if you have no prior experience and only a basic understanding of maths you'll have a hard time with it. It's not a great first project.

Another thought on the use of flat shading in flight sims... it makes it very difficult to tell where the ground is, even if you use lots of ground detail objects. I couldn't tell you how often I ploughed into the ground in A-10 Cuba because I couldn't see that I was only feet away from it. ;)

[OneSadCookie]

Trying to make a 3D game work on 16 year old hardware doesn't seem like a sensible goal to me :blink:

If you want it to be reasonably easy to get decent performance, you'll probably find that machines with Rage 128s are the minimum sensible spec. You might as well limit yourself to Mac OS X, since AFAIK everything with a Rage 128 runs Mac OS X.

[CaryMG]

The graphics in the screen shot would be fairly easy to do with modern OpenGL ....
WOOT !

I personally would recommend some form of C ....
mHM -- that's what I've been hearing, but would a flatshaded 3D polygonal Macintosh computer flightsimulator be do-able in BASIC?

Sound Effects are getting easier by the day and .... you can find several articles on the pros and cons of the listed above sound librarys.
kk -- I'll look for that!

Keep in mind the older the computer that you want to support the older librarys you will have to use.
I so didn't consider that ....
kk -- "Tiger" it is, then ....

For network and muiltplayer functions look into BSD Sockets ....
Will do!

Welcome to the forum, and goodluck
Thank you, thank you!


Later!
:) :) :)

[CaryMG]

That's actually "A-10 Attack!Cuba".
It is indeed. lol
Sorry I mislabled it.

I'd generally recommend "Unity" as a high quality, nice to use engine with lots of features. It's flexible enough to do something like a flight sim with stylised visuals. On the other hand, it doesn't really do MIDI ....
Dang ....
I so love that digital "MIDI Feel" ....
And "Unity" was also rcommended by "kodex", so I'll definately have a look !

One important thing: make no mistake, flight sims are difficult to program no matter what engine you use.
There's a lot of really hairy maths to deal with, and if you have no prior experience and only a basic understanding of maths you'll have a hard time with it.
Understood ....

Another thought on the use of flat shading in flight sims...
it makes it very difficult to tell where the ground is, even if you use lots of ground detail objects.
I couldn't tell you how often I ploughed into the ground in "A-10 Attack! Cuba" because I couldn't see that I was only feet away from it.
Never thought of that .....
I'll figure somethin' out ....

Thanks for all the info, Carter!


Later!
:) :) :)

[kodex]

mHM -- that's what I've been hearing, but would a flatshaded 3D polygonal Macintosh computer flightsimulator be do-able in BASIC?


Yes, When you are working with OpenGL it dosnt matter what langauge you are using. Anything to display Graphics will be an OpenGL call, Anything to play a sound will be an OpenAL call (example).

You will use BASIC or whatever you go with to setup the windows, handle mouse and keyboard input, handle math functions and loops for the game, ect.

[akb825]

If you find a BASIC derivative that supports OpenGL calls (through whatever API they use as a layer), it's possible. Actually, I think RealBasic does have such a layer.

However, supporting down to System 6 is utterly impossible. Having full 3D graphics of the level you want on a computer from 1989? Hah, I'd love to see that tried. OS 9 is the farthest back you'll be able to support. You wouldn't get native Intel Mac support, though. They may have universal binary support for RealBasic in an update, but you won't be able to support OS 9.

That said, though it's possible to get something like this done in RealBasic, you will probably find it better overall if you learn C/C++/ObjectiveC (any of those, really) and coding it in that. RealBasic is rather limiting, and I know from experience that it's buggy. When I first started programming, I got RealBasic, but I ran into some walls because of bugs that RealBasic put in my program. That's when I decided to stop using it and hold off programming until the next year (last school year) when I started learning programming in school. I think that overall, if you want to continue programming, your best option would be to learn a less limiting programming language.

[CaryMG]

Trying to make a 3D game work on 16 year old hardware doesn't seem like a sensible goal to me.
Here's my inspiration ....
http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c144/forumepix/ChuckYeagersAirCombat3.jpg http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c144/forumepix/ChuckYeagersAirCombat2.jpg
"Chuck Yeager's Air Combat"

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c144/forumepix/ChuckYeagersAirCombatManual.jpg
"Chuck Yeager's Air Combat" Macintosh Computer Manual
Classic boxmac Macintosh computers .... "System 6" .... flatshaded 3D polygonal graphics World War II flight simulator ....
WOOT !


Later!
:) :) :)

[kodex]

Chuck Yeager was a great game, and if you wanted to clone it, it would be possible. But you have to remember that you would be writing what at the time was a top of the line game. To use the library, formats, speed restrictions ect of a system 6 machine takes an incredible amount of skill.

I am doubtful I could draw a triangle to the screen on a System 6 Machine in less then 10 seconds, but with todays technology and hardware I can draw it 2000 times a second easy.

Im sure all of us here have recreated our favorite childhood games, but copy the concept and gameplay, not the graphics =), take advantage of the technology available to you, Remake it for OSX with better graphics and maybe even some color =p.

[diordna]

First project?

Flight simulator?

I hate to burst your bubble, but the chances are next to nil. Sure, it's great that you want to clone a game you love, but practicality is a real concern here. I doubt that anyone here could really recommend jumping into this as a first project, mostly because of the things involved:
1. Learning a new language (C!)
2. Learning OpenGL
3. Learning 3D in OpenGL
4. Trying to use MIDI with it all (blech! We have GarageBand now, and it can do the same thing (and style) but better!)
5. Spontaneously learning how to model planes really well
6. Getting some non-sucky flight physics together
7. $$$ - buy an engine, buy some modeling software
8. Time

My advice: pick up a book on introductory programming, or go get BlitzMax (http://www.blitzmax.com), which is...sorta like BASIC and sorta like C++, and is made specifically for game making (but has native GUI stuff too). Then make Pong, and go from there.

If you don't mind me asking...how old are you?

P.S. Please don't double post. It's annoying. It's like drumming your fingers on the table when there is no other noise in the room.

[Duane]

I am doubtful I could draw a triangle to the screen on a System 6 Machine in less then 10 seconds, but with todays technology and hardware I can draw it 2000 times a second easy.

I believe that would be 'easily' :P

but anyway, I would only bother supporting OSX, or OS 9 at the earliest. Anyone on earlier computers prolly wouldn't get your game in the first place (I'd be surprised if they knew what the internet was). If you take a look at Blitz Max, it supports OpenGL easily, though it cost $80 the last time I checked. It might support classic, I'm not sure, you'd have to check.

[kodex]

I believe that would be 'easily' :P


"As you yourself may fully be presently aware of, my grammar sucks" - Family Guy

Not to go so completly off topic. Ok well maybe but I had to defend myself with humor.

[blobbo]

CaryMG: While Diordna may be being slightly harsh, he's entirely correct. It's great you have so much enthusiasm, and most of us can relate to that, but you'd do better to syphon that energy into a project that you could really realize well. Pong or Tic Tac Toe are good options.

[CaryMG]

If you find a BASIC derivative that supports OpenGL calls (through whatever API they use as a layer), it's possible. Actually, I think RealBasic does have such a layer.
I think I'm gonna go with "Unity".

However, supporting down to System 6 is utterly impossible.
Having full 3D graphics of the level you want on a computer from 1989?
Hah, I'd love to see that tried.
Why wouldn't that be possible?
I mean, I undrstand the software that'd make it playable from "System 6" up'd be bit less easier than using "Unity", but why wouldn't a flatshaded 3d polygonal game work at all on a Macintosh SE/30?


Later!
:) :) :)

[CaryMG]

Chuck Yeager was a great game, and if you wanted to clone it, it would be possible.
I don't wanna clone it.
"Chuck Yeager's Air Combat" is my inspiration.
"ParSoft", who made "HellCats Of The Pacific", "A-10 Attack!", & "F/A-18 Hornet" made absolutely beautiful flatshaded 3D polygonal flight simulators, but they didn't do one for World War II in Europe.
I wanna do that game ....
Remake it for OSX with better graphics and maybe even some color
For "OS X"? Yes.
A remake? No. lol


Later!
:) :) :)

[Zwilnik]

Apart from the problem that there aren't any tools that work on current Macs to do pre system 9 stuff (unless you run them on emulators) the only people playing a system 6 game would be playing it on emulators too.

If you were writing a flatshaded poly game for system 6, you'd have to write your own 3D engine from scratch (GL's only on 9 upwards) and jump through a lot of hoops to give 1 or 2 people about 10 minutes of "cool it works on Basilisk" before they wonder why it's so bad on OS X.

OS 9 and earlier are dead. The only reason for emulators is to run older games that haven't been written to work in OS X and the only reason you might want to consider adding OS 9 compatibility is if you're charging for your coding time by the hour ;)

If you like the look of flat shaded polygon games, then write it as a really good one for OS X rather than wasting your time on dead OS's.

[kodex]

SE/30 dosnt have the processing power to do a game in 3d, what you are looking at is very talented programmers faking 3d with 2d images and art.

[CaryMG]

First project?
Flight simulator?
I hate to burst your bubble, but the chances are next to nil.
Gonna try. lol

I doubt that anyone here could really recommend jumping into this as a first project, mostly because of the things involved:
1. Learning a new language (C!)
2. Learning OpenGL
3. Learning 3D in OpenGL.
Won't using "Unity" cut through that?

4. Trying to use MIDI with it all
(blech! We have GarageBand now, and it can do the same thing (and style) but better!).
My idea was ta make a flatshaded 3D polygonal World War II flight simulator that'd fit on a floppy, but since kodex said that using software to make a game that'd be usable from "System 6" up wouldn't be as shortcutty as using "Unity" -- which won't fit on a floppy -- I'll use "GarageBand".

5. Spontaneously learning how to model planes really well
6. Getting some non-sucky flight physics together.
I so am willing ta learn that.
Here's why ....
Time after time I've read flightsimulator reviews that said "Oh -- the flight model sucks!".
And I'd think -- "Well how tough can it be? Do developers deliberatly make the flight handling not right?
All ya hafta do is write formula XYZ and apply it to the physical forces experienced during whatver flight circumstance."
I think it's called "Emergent Behavior" -- setting a few simple rules & the object acts accordingly to whatever happens to it.

If you don't mind me asking...how old are you?.

Nope, I don't mind.
I'm 25.



Later!
:) :) :)

[CaryMG]

Apart from the problem that there aren't any tools that work on current Macs to do pre system 9 stuff
Absolutely none?

(unless you run them on emulators) the only people playing a system 6 game would be playing it on emulators too.
There's a huge userbase that play "System 6" games on boxmacs.

If you were writing a flatshaded poly game for system 6, you'd have to write your own 3D engine from scratch
Ouch ....
Didn't know that.
I thought there'd be ready-ta-use flatshaded 3D polygonal engine thingies.

.... and jump through a lot of hoops to give 1 or 2 people about 10 minutes of "cool it works on Basilisk" before they wonder why it's so bad on OS X.
Flatshaded polygonal flightsimulators have their appeal.

If you like the look of flat shaded polygon games, then write it as a really good one for OS X rather than wasting your time on dead OS's.
I wantd ta do both, but the the way that'd make it system compatible isn't as quick as just using "OS X" -- so I'll do that.


Latr!
:) :) :)

[CaryMG]

SE/30 dosnt have the processing power to do a game in 3d, what you are looking at is very talented programmers faking 3d with 2d images and art.
Is that the case with these Macintosh SE/30 games?

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c144/forumepix/A-10Attack6.jpg
"A-10 Attack!"

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c144/forumepix/HellCatsOfThePacific3.jpg
"HellCats Of The Pacific"

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c144/forumepix/FA-18Hornet5.jpg
"F/A-18 Hornet"


Later!
:) :) :)

[NCarter]

Won't using "Unity" cut through that?
You'd need to learn JavaScript, C# or Boo (although that's not insurmountable). You don't need to know about low level OpenGL commands, but it doesn't hurt to have some idea of how OpenGL works so you have a realistic understanding of what's possible and what isn't.

My idea was ta make a flatshaded 3D polygonal World War II flight simulator that'd fit on a floppy, but since kodex said that using software to make a game that'd be usable from "System 6" up wouldn't be as shortcutty as using "Unity" -- which won't fit on a floppy -- I'll use "GarageBand".
Unity tends to output large binaries (mine tend to be about 10MB compressed) so adding a few more megabytes won't kill anyone. ;)

For what it's worth, I don't think it's a good idea to set yourself additional restrictions (like 'make it work on ancient computers') just for the sake of it, because it'll just multiply the amount of work you have to do by ten times. Concentrate on the game itself and nothing else until you've got something that's playable.

Time after time I've read flightsimulator reviews that said "Oh -- the flight model sucks!".
And I'd think -- "Well how tough can it be? Do developers deliberatly make the flight handling not right?
All ya hafta do is write formula XYZ and apply it to the physical forces experienced during whatver flight circumstance."
I think it's called "Emergent Behavior" -- setting a few simple rules & the object acts accordingly to whatever happens to it.
You can get emergent behaviour in game programming, and having a proper physics engine (such as the one in Unity) helps to make this happen, but for realistic behaviour, you need a lot of complex rules rather than just a few simple ones.

Unfortunately, before you know it, you'll be deep into physics textbooks reading masses of complex formulae presented in ways which are not directly compatible with games programming. I've had years of experience programming with 3D maths and I still have no idea how to go about doing physically accurate flight dynamics. On the other hand, if you're prepared to go for a more game-like approach, you can cheat with the maths a bit for a reasonably convincing effect.

I don't wish to put you off, but I think you should consider doing some preliminary projects to discover the basics because embarking on something monstrously complex.

Hmm, speaking of WWII flight sims over Europe, did you ever see version 2 of Warbirds? That was all flat shaded, using the old F/A-18 Korea engine. Sadly, I don't think it's possible to get it from anywhere any more, and the latest version has much more realistic visuals.

There's a huge userbase that play "System 6" games on boxmacs.
What's 'boxmacs'?

[kodex]

Unity will cut through a lot of the red-tape here. You will lose some control over your game but it lets you focus more on the art and models then the game itself. Personally im terrible at art so the more time I can spend programming the better.

What I will recommend since you arent a 12 year old kid (most the new people we get who want to take on large projects seem to be kids, no offense) Get Unity I belive they have a demo.

Look at examples of what people have done with Unity in the past. Then start playing around with the sample project tweaking them. Get to learn it for atleast a few weeks before you start work on a real project. I say this because if you jump right into it in the best case you will not include features from the start because you didnt know they were available.

Unity Link (http://otee.dk/unity/)

EDIT: Hey Neil did you know they quoted you on Unitys homepage?

[NCarter]

EDIT: Hey Neil did you know they quoted you on Unitys homepage?
Yes, although I didn't know the quote had migrated to the front page! ;)

[PowerMacX]

Is that the case with these Macintosh SE/30 games?
[...]
"F/A-18 Hornet"


Err... I bought that game a long time ago ('97?), and it used to ran OK-ish but not great on my Performa 6400, 180MHz PPC 603e. The game used a LOT of tricks to even run on that machine, for instance, not updating sections of the screen that remained the same color. A non-optimized engine would get you probably no more than 5 FPS on such old machines, if that much.

I started doing 3D graphics on that mac, using Quickdraw & DrawSprokets (two now-dead technologies) and writing the 3D engine from scratch. It did flat shaded polygons & lighting, but performance was bad - really bad, and very fill-rate limited.

Later I discovered OpenGL, and have never looked back. ;)

[akb825]

Is that the case with these Macintosh SE/30 games?

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c144/forumepix/A-10Cubad.jpg
"A-10 Attack!"

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c144/forumepix/HellCatsOfThePacificb.jpg
"HellCats Of The Pacific"

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c144/forumepix/FA-18Hornet3.jpg
"F/A-18 Hornet"


Later!
:) :) :)
I decided to look these up. A-10 Attack! came out in 1995 and the first F/A-18 Hornet game came out in 1993. (I couldn't find out when HellCats of the Pacific came out) The SE-30 came out in 1989. I highly doubt it could play any of those, since those games were pretty steep with system requirements for the time.

I think you should just give up supporting anything below OS 9. You probably should just support OS X, though, just because it would make it easier on you. Since you're new to programming, you probably shouldn't give yourself all sorts of limitations that will make your life more difficult. Just finding a way to compile for System 6 would be difficult enough.

If you don't want to write your own game engine, suggest that you use Unity or a similar tool. It will make it a lot easier to do this project. If you learn C/C++/ObjectiveC and OpenGL, you will need to write your own graphics and game engine. If you were to try to support System 6, you would likely have to write a 3D graphics engine using only 2D graphics. Believe me, if you just use a modern tool and support modern operating systems, you will have a much higher chance of finishing.

[diordna]

Past experiences have made me the pessimist I am.

Haven't tried Unity, so I can't speak for it. I do have extensive BlitzMax experience, however. (I'm a beta tester.) There is no current easy-to-use 3D engine, but the 2D support is really frickin sweet. Masks every OpenGL call you would ever need to make and wraps it all up in a nice box. Oh, and the syntax is pretty.

Since we seem to be on the topic of old systems...the difference between System 6 and OS X is comparable to the difference between Windows 3.1 and Ubuntu (which, in case you haven't heard, is modern, user-friendly, reasonably-powerful Linux). They are completely different systems. System 6 is based on an old, out-of-date structure, and OS X is based on UNIX, which was sorta-kinda-almost-but-not-really a competitor at the time of its release. Millions of people us OS X; probably under 1,000 still use System 6. In addition to that, you're going to be hard pressed to find any sort of resource that will tell you HOW to write for System 6. MAYBE you can find an old ResEdit manual on eBay, but that'll be about it.

A flat-shaded flight simulator is within your reach. But it's like climbing a mountain - one step at a time. You need to start small! Buy some supplies, pitch your tent at the foot of the mountain. Make a Pong clone. Then make an Asteroids knockoff. Maybe a platformer. After that, perhaps, a bit of dabbling in the 3D world. Do the NeHe tutorials. Then go ahead, make your 3D Polygonal World War II Flight Simulator!

But right now, with your total lack of experience in anything, any sort of 3D game is simply too much. It's like trying to leap from the foot of Everest right to the peak.

Of course, you can probably safely ignore every word I say. After all, I am but a mere 16 years of age.

[blobbo]

CaryMG: I'm amazed at how incredibly polite the forum is being to you. Generally in this situation you'd be lambasted with realism.

You demonstrate a complete lack of knowledge of the basics of game design and programming. You have a lot to learn, and a tough pill to swallow, namely that there is a lot of work and a lot of smaller projects to complete before you can even contemplate completing a flight sim.

You need to fully understand some basics first:

a) What a programming language is.
b) What an API is.
c) How they're related.
d) Basic game theory.
e) 3D Math, Physics.
f) Programatic flight modeling.

This is no small task. The fact that you're getting Garageband and Unity confused as possible tools to the same end indicates to me that you haven't done your research.

Seriously. Pong. It's hard. A lot harder than it looks.

Or Tic Tac Toe.

Start small, ask lots of questions, show us your mind-blowing tic-tac-toe AI, and go from there. Before you know it you'll have a plane flying around in 3D. But let's get something straight: it's not easy, and you won't get there by learning haphazard bits and pieces of technology.

[akb825]

I think the reason why people aren't flaming him is because though he is aiming a bit to high, it isn't as high as the people who do get flamed. I'm talking about the 13 year olds who come in, want to write an MMORPG in 20 days, and only know HTML. At least this guy has some BASIC experience and is trying for something somewhat simple. (as far as 3D games go, I'm not trying to say that this is trivial :p)

Just as a reference, I started a flight action game myself. This was my first major 3D project, and I was writing my own engine. I got somewhat far, but realized it wasn't working out. The main reason: speed. It worked fine on my computer, but I didn't want to have such insane system requirements for such simple graphics. I wasn't experienced enough (I only started programming at the beginning of last school year) to know how to do things very efficiently. I did things that now I wouldn't dream of doing, such as putting each individual particle separately into a linked list. Talk about too much overhead! :wacko: I had some other speed issues, some of which I'm not 100% sure of caused it, but would probably not be there in any engine I'd write now.

[Hog]

Flat shading is not going to run at an acceptable speed on a Mac SE, you might want to go with wireframe instead. I'm sure i've seen a wireframe application run on a Mac SE sometime, but possibly it didn't have very complex geometry (sort of mostly boxes). I don't recall the name however, have to ask a colleague of mine.

[CaryMG]

... speaking of WWII flight sims over Europe, did you ever see version 2 of Warbirds?
That was all flat shaded, using the old F/A-18 Korea engine.
*drool*
Is that "WarBirds v2.0" or "WarBirds II"?
And I'd love ta play a flatshaded 3D polygonal World War II Europe computer flightsimulator!
You said it wasn't available -- but is it still flown online using Macintosh computers?

What's 'boxmacs'?
Boxmacs are the Macintosh, Macintosh 512, Macintosh 512e, MacPlus, MacintoshSE, MacintoshFS/SE, Macintosh SE/30, Mac Classic, Mac Classic II, Macintosh Color Classic & Macintosh Color Classic II computers.
I call 'em "boxmacs" 'cause that's what they are -- Macintosh computers in a box.


Later!
:) :) :)

[socksy]

Nice, I have two of those - an eMac and a Mac Classic.

[CaryMG]

Err... I bought ["F/A-18 Hornet"] a long time ago ('97?), and it used to ran OK-ish but not great on my Performa 6400, 180MHz PPC 603e.
The game used a LOT of tricks to even run on that machine ....
I'm trying ta find the newgroup messages where someone asked for a boxmac computer flightsimulator & was recommended both "A-10 Attack!" and "F/A-18 Hornet" specifically saying they ran flawlessy in "System 6".
Just a sec ....
OK, Got 'em !

First, click this > Flatshaded 3D Polygonal BoxMac Flight Simulator Recommendations (http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.games.flight-sim/browse_thread/thread/ae60bf866e11a03c/0be17a980fa01137?q=macintosh+se%2F30&rnum=12#0be17a980fa01137)

Excerpts ....
Pardi 4 -- Aug 11 1997
A little help here.
Until a new purchase is made i'm using a ["Macintosh IIsi"]
Are there any decent flight sims. for an [Macintosh computer with a Motorola 68030 CPU"] ?

1] The Machine -- Aug 11 1997
["F/A 18 Hornet"]* -- Works on a Mac Classic II**! (Tried it myself) Very realistic, pretty, qucik [sic] like a bunny
["HellCats Of The Pacific"]* - Never played it, but I know it works on slow Macs.

2] Mike Ash -- Aug 15 1997
Ooh! Ooh! I have some! :)
["A-10 Attack!"]*

3] Mike Forman -- Aug 15 1997
["Dogfight City"]*

4] Dr N.C. Eastmond -- Aug 20 1997
["HellCats Of The Pacific"]* - Never played it, but I know it works on slow Macs.
Well, I can tell you that Hellcats is a blast.
... the game is a deadly smooth barrel roll of fun.
Heartily recommended

* - Emphasis mine.
** - The "Macintosh SE/30" & "Macintosh Color Classic II" computers are identical -- except the color. lol

************************************************** ************************************************** ***************************
Then click this > Flatshaded 3D Polygonal BoxMac Flight Simulator Recommendations2 (http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.games.flight-sim/browse_thread/thread/28bb8bd3aae3ebc7/2dd7503d68373835?q=macintosh+se%2F30&rnum=16#2dd7503d68373835)

Excerpts ....
1] Phoebe Graubard --Jan 16 1996
I have been playing ["A-10 Attack"]* on my IIsi [Motorola 68030 CPU] running at 25Mhz**

2] Mr N.C. Eastmond -- Jan 18 1996
Ever tried to run FA-18 and A-10 on a Colour Classic***?
My machine... is a 68030 with 8 Megs of RAM [& a FPU math co-processor] ... and an extended VRAM chip****.
Top of the range stuff here.
[i]["F/A-18 Hornet"]* will load (hell, it'll load on a blinkin' SE/30)

* - Emphasis mine.
** - The "Macintosh SE/30" computer's more powerful than that -- it has a Motorola 68030 33MHz CPU.
*** - The "Macintosh SE/30" is more powerful than the "Macintosh Color Classic" computer -- except for the color. lol
**** - Those're "Macintosh SE/30" specs with just a tad more RAM.

************************************************** ************************************************** ****************
Lastly, click this > Flatshaded 3D Polygonal BoxMac Flight Simulator Recommendations3 (http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.games.flight-sim/browse_thread/thread/1f11beee5cb8cacd/3c1a08de2afb637f?q=68030%2Bsystem+6&rnum=2#3c1a08de2afb637f)

Excerpt ....
Allen G. Newman -- Aug 7 1995
By booting from a partition containing System 6.0.8, I can run ["F/A-18 Hornet"]
System 6 boots incredibly fast, and frees up a ton of memory ... to give ALL remaining memory to ["F/A-18 Hornet"]
If your machine will run 6.0.8 I whole-heartedly recommend it for ["F/A-18 Hornet"]



Later!
:) :) :)

[CaryMG]

I decided to look these up.
(I couldn't find out when HellCats of the Pacific came out).
1991.

The SE-30 came out in 1989.
I highly doubt it could play any of those, since those games were pretty steep with system requirements for the time..
See my "WHOAness !" entry.

I think you should just give up supporting anything below OS 9.
It'll be ore difficult, but it so is my dream ta play a flatshaded 3D polygonal flightsimulator online with a "Macintosh SE/30" computer..


Later!
:) :) :)

[CaryMG]

... before you can even contemplate completing a flight sim .... You need to fully understand some basics first:

a) What a programming language is.
b) What an API is.
c) How they're related.
d) Basic game theory.
e) 3D Math, Physics.
f) Programatic flight modeling.
kk -- so it's "OS X"/"Unity"/"GarageBand" & "System 6"/C++.API.3D Math & Physics.Programatic Flightmodeling
Is that it?


Later!
:) :) :)

[CaryMG]

Flat shading is not going to run at an acceptable speed on a Mac SE ....
See my "WHOAness!" entry.lol


Later!
:) :) :)

[TomorrowPlusX]

I just want to point out -- those old games were real-time because the programmers wrote some seriously tight c/asm to push pixels.

If you were to try to do this in a high-level language, without GL, ( e.g., your own primitive rasterizer ) god-help you if you're targeting anything less than a high-end g4.

I know this -- I wrote a software 3d "engine" in college ( in C ), with guarad shading, texturing, lighting, a z-buffer, etc. It required a decent pentium 2 to get a decent framerate even on moderate models.

[akb825]

This is what I gathered from the links you provided:
System 6 uses very little memory. Since the games in question don't require any of the newer libraries required in System 7, System 6 would be better since you can allocate more memory to the game.

The games will run on an SE/30. However, they mentioned that after 15 minutes of waiting, the game hardly progressed. Even with black and white graphics, it wouldn't be playable. For a Color Classic II, it will run but not too well. They in fact said that in order to get the most out of these games, you'd need an '040 or PPC. This is with probably hundreds of man hours with a large team spent otpimizing assembly for the 68k processors for their graphics engines. I'm sure 90% (maybe even 100%) of the lighting was static. They would have hundreds of little optimizations, a part that can be pre-calculated here, something that doesn't need to be drawn there. Any corner that could be cut would be cut. Even then, it would barely work on an SE/30. This is not something you'll be able to tackle as your first project. You could do something like this for modern computers after doing a few smaller projects and learning the basics first, but not for 16 year old hardware. And for most of the optimizations, you would need to write most your code over again, a lot of it in 68k assembly.

[CaryMG]

The games will run on an SE/30.
However, they mentioned that after 15 minutes of waiting, the game hardly progressed. Even with black and white graphics, it wouldn't be playable.
For a Color Classic II, it will run but not too well.
They in fact said that in order to get the most out of these games, you'd need an '040 or PPC.
This is with probably hundreds of man hours with a large team spent otpimizing assembly for the 68k processors for their graphics engines.
I'm sure 90% (maybe even 100%) of the lighting was static.
They would have hundreds of little optimizations, a part that can be pre-calculated here, something that doesn't need to be drawn there.
Any corner that could be cut would be cut.
Even then, it would barely work on an SE/30.
Allow me to re-iterate ....
*sigh*

You could do something like this for modern computers after doing a few smaller projects and learning the basics first, but not for 16 year old hardware.
I think I'll go the "OS X"/"Unity"/"GarageBand" route lol


Later!
:) :) :)

[akb825]

Since you kept on arguing the point, I assumed that you were still adamant on getting the game to run on System 6. My mistake on that part. :)

[blobbo]

CaryMG: Ok, this is my last post in this thread.

You are being incredibly annoying.

1. Stop quintuple-posting. It's lazy. Move it all into a single post.
2. Start reading. Going from zero coding knowledge to a flight sim that will work in OS 6 is basically impossible. Even the best coders on this board would have a lot of trouble doing it.
3. Start small. Download Unity and try making something in it, rather than continually re-iterating your insistence on persuing an ends that is, in effect, completely unrealistic.

There's a lot of smart people giving you good advice. Go back and read your thread again, and post when you have something to show, or a constructive question.

[akb825]

To be fair, he said he was going to use Unity on OS X. (maybe read his last post? :sneaky:)

[diordna]

I'm probably going to stop posting here too, maybe even stop reading. The double-triple-quadruple-quintouple posting is getting very irritating. And so are the excessive quotation marks.

Someone called me "slightly harsh" before. Well, now I'm going to go all-out iGame3D on you.

You cannot magically grow these skills. You cannot suddenly become a master of physics, and 3D modeling, and coding, and music making. Each of these by itself would take at least a year's worth of work to master enough to make this kind of game.

If you try to pursue this immediately, as your first project outside of BASIC, you will only end up frustrated. I doubt that at this point you even understand what sort of tool Unity is, what technology it is built on, and what knowledge prerequisites it has. The transition from BASIC to C(++) is rather painful.

Going from BASIC straight to a flight sim is like being a 10-year-old trying to join an NFL team...tomorrow. It simply cannot be done.

If at this point I haven't convinced you, then there is nothing more I can do. Feel free to frustrate yourself.

[Nick]

I've kinda been following this and I wondered something. Even though you (CaryMG) don't seem to have any intention to do so anymore, why did you ever want to support System 6? Seems to me to be as useful as programming TI-82 games :).

Anyway, welcome to the forum, good luck on your path to game creation. Again, start small and work your way up. If you take your time, you could probably do this, from scratch, in under a year and a half (assuming you learn as slow as I :p). With Unity it should be a bit quicker. I can't wait to see what you come up with.

[EvolPenguin]

Seems to me to be as useful as programming TI-82 games :).

Except TI-82 game programming is a great waste of math classes etc, when there isn't access to a computer.

Alex

[akb825]

True, but there's TI-83 and TI-89 for that. :p

[Nick]

True, but there's TI-83 and TI-89 for that. :p
Personally I've always wanted to play with a TI-92. 3D graphing abilities and multiple colors always sounded fun to play with :).

[akb825]

I TI-92 is basically a TI-89 but with more pixels and memory. (and a QUERTY keyboard) The TI-89 is also capable of 3D, BTW. AFAIK, none of the TI calculators had color support...

[blobbo]

The TI-83 ruined my math education. I just wrote programs that, when given an equation, would shoot out all the steps involved in solving it.

I had a 31% at my midterm. I studied hard that year ;)

[akb825]

You wouldn't imagine how much worse it would have been if you used a TI-89 instead. Judging from the fact that it has a "solve" function where you input a formula and what you're solving for, and it does it all for you. Also, it can do things symbolically, and give you exact answers (like with fractions, sin, cos, etc. not worked out into decimals) It can also do all your calculus for you. It is quite an amazing calculator, but you also need to know when not to use it for those reasons.

[TomorrowPlusX]

I wasted too many class hours in high school writing tank wars for my TI-86, back in '94. It just drove me crazy that their language had no local variables... everything was global.

[diordna]

Hehe, I hold the all-time high score for my school in a sidescroller for TI-83/84 called Phantom Star. A tad over 7,300. (And I still have a 97 math average :) ) At one point, I was writing a text adventure for it.

Did you know they have snood for these things? Snood!

[CaryMG]

Since you kept on arguing the point, I assumed that you were still adamant on getting the game to run on System 6. My mistake on that part. :)
I do -- it's just that apparently it's not gonna be possible to be scaleable from "System 6" to "OS X" lol

So I've the "OS X"/"Unity"/"GarageBand" part down.

And with all the suggestions that I've been getting for what ta do for "system 6", can ya give it to me in a nutshell, akb?
Is this right ....
1] Learn C++
2] 3D Math & Physics
3] Programatic Flightmodeling


Later!
:) :) :)

[kodex]

I have been pretty straight forward and even fairly optimistic about your ideas. Let me make this as clear as possible.

You have a better chance of going to a moon in the next 12 months then of writing a flight sim to work on System 6. Scaleable or not, it dosnt matter. If you had a budget of $200,000 and a team of people who have a background in OS 6 programming it would still take you months. As a single person with almost no programming background it is as near impossible as anything ever has been.

Do yourself a Favor, forgot Classic, Forget System 6. Focus on OS X and never think about anything else. Get Unity and start small.

Take it or leave it but its good advice.

[CaryMG]

I've kinda been following this and I wondered something.
Even though you (CaryMG) don't seem to have any intention to do so anymore ...
I do lol

.... why did you ever want to support System 6? .... good luck on your path to game creation.
When Steve Jobs introduced the Macintosh -- I've seen the video -- it was incredibly sexy.
An all-in-one computer in a design that, when most people think of "computer" envision precisely that -- an all-in-one box-ish device.

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c144/forumepix/AppleMacintosh2.jpg
Apple Macintosh
*sigh* ....

Sure, the AMIGA's superior graphically.
But I think for whatever reason, people've given the Macintosh computer short shrift.
And it's Apple!

"System 6" is the pinnacle of the boxmac OS, that's why I wanna use that -- using a Golden Age system [the world's first 16-bit computer] with the Golden Age's best Macintosh computer OS.

Thank you for the well wishes -- and when I win the "OMG Cup 2007" for "Eagles Of Honor", I'll be sure ya get a free copy!


Later!
:) :) :)

[akb825]

I was cutting you some slack because I thought you finally decided that supporting System 6 at this time was futile, especially considering your lack of experience, but here's the cold, hard facts to get it working on System 6. This is what you'd need to learn:
Learn not only C++, but C and assembly.
Learn the 3D math and physics as you said
Learn how to model the objects, and make them as low poly as possible
Learn how to make everything as fast as possible
Get an ancient computer and compiler

All this would take you years. Learning C/C++ and assembly to a proficient level would take months at best. Learning 3D math and physics, depending on your background, can take anywhere from a month (if you already have the basics down) to maybe as much as a year. (if you don't have much background at all) To learn how to model, maybe a couple of weeks. It would then take you a few months to learn just how to create a 3D engine of your own, and will then probably take you between several months to a year to actually optimize it down as much as you could. Even at that point, it may not even work below a '040 or even a PPC processor. You would likely have to work on various engines for several years in order to get the experience necessary to optimize it down to run on an '030, let alone an SE/30. Keep in mind that all these estimates are most likely rather conservative. If you factor in life/job/etc., it can take you much longer.

If you really want to get a System 6 version done, and take several years in the process, be my guest. Just don't be surprised if you're working on it for the next decade. By then, even PPC support would be more or less phased out. If I were you, I'd stick to just the "OS X part" of using Unity and GarageBand.

[CaryMG]

Scaleable or not, it dosnt matter.
If you had a budget of $200,000 and a team of people who have a background in OS 6 programming it would still take you months.
As a single person with almost no programming background it is as near impossible as anything ever has been.
Do yourself a Favor, forgot Classic, Forget System 6. Focus on OS X and never think about anything else. Get Unity and start small.
My heart's broken -- and you've no idea how much I really mean that lol

If you're absolutely sure that that's the case -- I assumed it wasn't given programming today over that of "System 6". -- then I'll put my dream of making a beautiful "System 6" flatshaded 3D polygonal World War II Macintosh SE/30 computer flightsimulator in storage for a bit ....

kk: "OS X"/"Unity"/"GarageBand" -- that's it ....


Later!
:) :) :)

[akb825]

I'm truly sorry that your dream is shattered, but sometimes we have to make sacrifices. You will just have to amend your dream slightly, so while you won't be able to make a System 6 WW II simulator, at least you can still get the same "feel" along with some other modern enhancements, such as dynamic lighting, higher resolution etc. in place, and still make a cool game. Good luck on getting your project going. If all goes well, hopefully you'll be almost as satisfied with your final product as if you were able to make it work on System 6.

[Byron Clarke]

1] Learn C++
2] 3D Math & Physics
3] Programatic Flightmodeling

And these things we'll no doubt keep you busy for a long while, if you're intent on conquering this mountain you really have to do it one step at a time. That is unless you are a super-ultra-mega genius.

[CaryMG]

... at least you can still get the same "feel" along with some other modern enhancements, such as dynamic lighting, higher resolution etc. in place, and still make a cool game.
Good luck on getting your project going.
If all goes well, hopefully you'll be almost as satisfied with your final product as if you were able to make it work on System 6.
Thanks, akb!

It should be slightly more fulfilling ta see "Eagles Of Honor" running on an Apple eMac instead of a Macintosh SE/30 computer.

You, diordna, kodex, NCarter & TomorrowPlusX've been a H U G E help!
Are you guys with any PC or Apple house I'd've heard of?


Later!
:) :) :)

[NCarter]

You, diordna, kodex, NCarter & TomorrowPlusX've been a H U G E help!
Are you guys with any PC or Apple house I'd've heard of?
No problem. :)

I'm just a hobbyist. You can check out my hackings (from before I got Unity) on my website (http://www.nether.org.uk/bad_mac_code.html) if you want to see what I've been up to. As you can see, I rather like stylised game visuals, which is why I paid attention to this thread in the first place. ;)

[CaryMG]

You can check out my hackings (from before I got Unity) on my website if you want to see what I've been up to.

Your website -- "Nether" (http://www.nether.org.uk/bad_mac_code.html) -- is very, very nice!


Later!
:) :) :)

[EvolPenguin]

Hehe, I hold the all-time high score for my school in a sidescroller for TI-83/84 called Phantom Star. A tad over 7,300. (And I still have a 97 math average :) ) At one point, I was writing a text adventure for it.

Did you know they have snood for these things? Snood!

I got snood for mine. And I wrote a text adventure. Also, I meant 83 earlier, I always get the numbers mixed up :P.

Alex

Edit: Way off topic, sorry guys. Might as well add some advice: Use Google a lot!

[diordna]

You, diordna, kodex, NCarter & TomorrowPlusX've been a H U G E help!
Are you guys with any PC or Apple house I'd've heard of?
No. Every game I have released so far pretty much sucks, except Escort (and, in my opinion, the incomplete Whizbang).

I still say that this will end up one of two ways:
1. It will take freaking FOREVER
2. You will abandon the project within a few months (possibly one year)

[kodex]

You, diordna, kodex, NCarter & TomorrowPlusX've been a H U G E help!
Are you guys with any PC or Apple house I'd've heard of?


I have my own dot com startup, you can find the links in my signature. Plus we are about 2 weeks away from releasing our next product.

[Chris Burkhardt]

Hellcats Over the Pacific is so fun that years having completed all the missions I still play it from time to time on my Color Classic (16 Mhz, System 7.1). I would be happy to play anything similar -- even if it didn't run on old hardware. Good luck.

[akb825]

Thanks, akb!

It should be slightly more fulfilling ta see "Eagles Of Honor" running on an Apple eMac instead of a Macintosh SE/30 computer.

You, diordna, kodex, NCarter & TomorrowPlusX've been a H U G E help!
Are you guys with any PC or Apple house I'd've heard of?


Later!
:) :) :)
Hopefully later. ;) I'm currently in College, and working on my own stuff at the moment. You can check out my first (and only, as of now) released program in my sig. Right now I'm working on a 3D app that will import models, add things such as shadow meshes (to make it easy to cast shadows), collision surfaces, and animations to models, and an API to use those models in future games I'll make. (this app and API will also be released for free so others can use it; I haven't decided yet whether it will be open source or not, but I'd say it's around 50/50 at this point) It may be a while, but you'll eventually see more stuff from me. :)

[TomorrowPlusX]

You, diordna, kodex, NCarter & TomorrowPlusX've been a H U G E help!
Are you guys with any PC or Apple house I'd've heard of?


Not me -- I'm also a hobbyist; by day I work for a PR & Advertising agency in DC as a graphic designer. I got into all this when I was developing a framework for developing behavioral AI for robotics. I had a lot of fun writing the GL visuals ( up until that point my work was all low level, writing my own user-space device drivers and such for the hardware -- which I built myself ).

I don't think anybody here wants to be mean. We're just trying to be realistic. Consider, the machines you want to target probably don't even have an FPU. That means you'll have to do *all* your 3D math in bit-shifted integer for float approximation ( I did this for the simple 3D engine I wrote in college ). It's a PITA.

I *do* understand the old school demo scene. It's a respectable goal. But it's for people who already know 68k ASM so well they dream in it.

[unknown]

On my calculator I have programs I wrote to prime factorise, simplify surds, various quadratic factors, and numguess ;)
I also wrote a julia set generator (using zn-1 = sqrt(zn - c)) on my friends calculator.
I dont know how any of you can run games realtime though!

I really dont see how this would be so hard, i'm sure with some clever optimisations you could get a 3D engine running alright, using quickdraw 3d. Running on a 68k machine is really impractical at least a ppc is required, but the maths wont be difficult if you have a peice of paper and a pencil.
The programming side would be though, with no previous experience that is. Learning how to use assembly is definitly going to be of key importance. Look at the Wolf3D source code for some idea's on how that can be done and used.

With opengl and a decent G3 or better you could make a flat shaded flight sim in a day (24h contest anyone :D), good maps and models and story (i.e. game assests) would take a bit longer, but there's a big difference between code that works and code that works well.
Maybe a start would be to write such a game, then developing for slower technology wouldn't be such a daunting task.

A good idea is to play older games to see optimisation techniques used, one very clever one I didnt notice for a while was in Firestorm Thunderhawk 2 for sega saturn. They draw the sky at the top then game's map in 2d on the ground at the midrange then the map in 3d at the bottom of the screen, so there's 3d detail near you but very few tri's are drawn.

I hope you aren't discouraged, because I would enjoy playing another flat shaded flight sim, but if you do write it an additional mac os x version would be a plus.