PDA

View Full Version : My 2 cents on Time Skip and Real Life...



sd_davis
11-02-2004, 08:30 AM
I have read all the board has to offer on the subject, and as a new user wanted to chime in on my opinion.

First, love the game. Kudos to programmers and devlopment. Without question one of the BEST tru flying sims I have seen. (I have been doing sims since MSFS 1, via keyboard and my 8086). Does that date me or what?! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Second, I have more to say, but I DO want to chime in on the only real complaint I have about PF. The time of missions and the LACK of time compression.

I am a programmer, so I understand constraints, limitations, and trade offs. Additionally as an avid gamer for many years I enjoy many types of games, with differing levels of reality.

However, in my experience, with flight sims, and more over combat flight sims, if you do more flying than you do combat, then something is wrong. Now, don't turn me off yet...

All of us here know the different types fo gamers. The hardcore, the realistic freaks, the arcader, etc... I can be all of them depending on the game, and my time available. Hence my problem with time compression here in PF.

I have patiently played it now for 5 different nights. With 1-2 hours per session. Last night was the first time I had any real combat. Most of that time was spent flying over water. Let me say that again. Flying over water. The first two nights I was insensed! I could not believe that even with the time compression, I was spending 45 mins flying over water to just enjoy 5 minutes of true combat.

If you reply that I can just build a mission you are way off, and not understanding the consumer producer relationship of business.

I WANT to play a campaign. I LIKE the campaign style. However, I do NOT want to fly over water for 45 minutes, even using time compreesion and time skip! There HAS to be a compromise.

As a professinal I am LUCKY if I have an hour a day or even everyother to play a game, so I choose them with much effort. PF is a gme I have waited for with drool, and rightfully so as I posted before. However, as most of us out here that have to make a living first, I would REALLY like to see a change in the time of flying vs combat ratio, via some time warping or greater compression setting(s).

Okay. I know that you have heard this before, and I am sure you do not want to hear it again. However, since I have purchased the game, I feel a need to express this constructive critisism not only because I gave you my money for it, but because I REALLY do like the game.

So thank you for a lovely combat sim that has great eye candy, as well as a great flying model, and is fun too boot. But please, please consider a time compression or warp setting for the rest of us who can not dedicate much if any time to gaming, but still want to enjoy the realism and flavor of campaign gaming in a great game such as your Pacific Fighters.

Sincerely,
Scott

sd_davis
11-02-2004, 08:30 AM
I have read all the board has to offer on the subject, and as a new user wanted to chime in on my opinion.

First, love the game. Kudos to programmers and devlopment. Without question one of the BEST tru flying sims I have seen. (I have been doing sims since MSFS 1, via keyboard and my 8086). Does that date me or what?! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Second, I have more to say, but I DO want to chime in on the only real complaint I have about PF. The time of missions and the LACK of time compression.

I am a programmer, so I understand constraints, limitations, and trade offs. Additionally as an avid gamer for many years I enjoy many types of games, with differing levels of reality.

However, in my experience, with flight sims, and more over combat flight sims, if you do more flying than you do combat, then something is wrong. Now, don't turn me off yet...

All of us here know the different types fo gamers. The hardcore, the realistic freaks, the arcader, etc... I can be all of them depending on the game, and my time available. Hence my problem with time compression here in PF.

I have patiently played it now for 5 different nights. With 1-2 hours per session. Last night was the first time I had any real combat. Most of that time was spent flying over water. Let me say that again. Flying over water. The first two nights I was insensed! I could not believe that even with the time compression, I was spending 45 mins flying over water to just enjoy 5 minutes of true combat.

If you reply that I can just build a mission you are way off, and not understanding the consumer producer relationship of business.

I WANT to play a campaign. I LIKE the campaign style. However, I do NOT want to fly over water for 45 minutes, even using time compreesion and time skip! There HAS to be a compromise.

As a professinal I am LUCKY if I have an hour a day or even everyother to play a game, so I choose them with much effort. PF is a gme I have waited for with drool, and rightfully so as I posted before. However, as most of us out here that have to make a living first, I would REALLY like to see a change in the time of flying vs combat ratio, via some time warping or greater compression setting(s).

Okay. I know that you have heard this before, and I am sure you do not want to hear it again. However, since I have purchased the game, I feel a need to express this constructive critisism not only because I gave you my money for it, but because I REALLY do like the game.

So thank you for a lovely combat sim that has great eye candy, as well as a great flying model, and is fun too boot. But please, please consider a time compression or warp setting for the rest of us who can not dedicate much if any time to gaming, but still want to enjoy the realism and flavor of campaign gaming in a great game such as your Pacific Fighters.

Sincerely,
Scott

Bones--
11-02-2004, 08:45 AM
Yep. Keep hearing the same story over & over. Oleg & Co. need to be sure they remember they are making a game that's supposed to be FUN and not just a flying simulator.

I think this is a huge issue and PF will have very short legs if it's not addressed. You should send your note directly to the developers with the "bug link" at the top of the forum.

LEXX_Luthor
11-02-2004, 08:54 AM
Quick Mission Builder offers fast combat. 3rd Party mission sculptors will offer even better variety and many may be short missions--but that is not realistic over the Pacific WAR. I am thinking that Carrier battles can be moved to closer distances. I have not tried any "campaigns" over this series of flight sims and I never will...working on my own and it will be ready long after the new BoB is releaced next year or so lol.

sd_davis:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>The time of missions and the LACK of time compression.

I could not believe that even with the time compression, I was spending 45 mins flying
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Which is it? A contradiction? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif I ~love~ contradictions.

For fast missions, need to find Eastern Front flight sim, somewhere

TacticalYak3
11-02-2004, 08:57 AM
Sadly you make a very good point. Your reasonableness will be your down fall around these parts mate. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I suggest you take cover as many of the addicts who either have no significant family/work responsibilities, or choose to neglect them, will righteously argue one ought to enjoy hours of flying, " 'cause that's the way it really was." I say go out and buy MS Flight Simulator if you really like flying over water for hours.

Good expression of thought. Trusting the next patch will improve the time skip feature for those few of us who have limited gaming time.

Just purchased the game yesterday and very impressed with it nonetheless. While I have the beta DGEN, I will probably wait until the patch in 2 weeks (2 weeks right? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif) before venturing into a fun campaign.

AirBear
11-02-2004, 08:59 AM
How difficult would it be to implement a "skip to next waypoint" feature?

Coinshooter
11-02-2004, 09:09 AM
Great post sd davis.
The game is really great but just to time consuming. I bought a combat sim to be in the action not to spend hours getting to it!
Chuck

JG51Beolke
11-02-2004, 09:27 AM
Although I'm enjoying the benefit of having a pretty fast computer and able to take advantage of the Time Skip feature, You make a very good point.

kalo456
11-02-2004, 09:40 AM
On the money SD_Davis

Hey I am one of the first pc simmers too! My best friends father was an engineer at IBM in the late 70's early 80's. I used to play MS Flight sim 1 on his dads 8086. Remember the world war I dogfight portion of it? I was the only one who liked it. I was an aviation buff at age 7 or so..... PLayed almost every flight sim since then. Aint it great how far the genre has come? I just wish that programmers knew their stuff as well as some of us buffs do. I don;t understand why they don;t incorperate every good (hopefully important) feature of any sim that has come before it. It's always been a case of this sim got this and this right, but missed the boat on this..... We have reached the level of graphics and computing horsepower that it's less about graphics than just combining all the best features into one cohesive uber sim. Oleg and co. almost have it right with the combined AEP+PF package. hopefully all these relevant issues can get addressed without running into limitations of the program code. S! Oleg and co.

Kalo

TacticalYak3
11-02-2004, 09:53 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JG51Beolke:
Although I'm enjoying the benefit of having a pretty fast computer and able to take advantage of the Time Skip feature, You make a very good point. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Curious mate, are you also using a parameter in your config.ini to shorten the flight distances plus the skip feature? If so, is that helping at all?

Personally I don't mind around 10 minutes to fly to the target area, bag my kills (or die trying anyway) http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif, and then return home (and hopefully land on one of those scarey-looking carriers.

In the span of an hour I get to enjoy 2 missions, maybe more if I have been a good father/husband (subject to the boss's approval of course). http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

jimmie_T
11-02-2004, 09:57 AM
I'm still waiting my copy of PF so I can't tell how it gets boring to have to fly long time for nothing AS A GAME (not illustrating real life).

And please be in mind I will say this with almost no deep understanding of how missions done, but why does it actually have to take time to know what have been going on the course?

I mean the consequence of AI vs AI is not always the same, espcially because the situations given to the AI are different every time. But if you give various situations to AI and record the results, can you not make a rough prediction chart of consequences prior? (who'd win and lose at this condition table) By that, without actually having AIs fight or fly, is it now possible to implement "jump to next waypoint" command instead of 16x time skip?

Of course by doing this, the consequence at a waypoint never be true to the result from "actually flown" (fuel consumption and so on as well can be always the same unless there's some oscilation algorithm is implemented, tho) but do most people really care about it?

I think B-17II did a good job on this. It had "time skip" function but sometimes you cannot "time skip" because "there's an action here." I guess the implementation in B-17II was probably VERY VERY simpler compare with PF, tho. Since calcuration to get a result for "there's an action here" oviously be really complicated for PF (that's why "time skip" in PF depends on CPU power, right?) By simply using "maybe result will be like this" table and ommit actual calulation (simulation) is an idea to consider.

LEXX_Luthor
11-02-2004, 10:07 AM
No...but something like that was done for Rowan's MiG~Alley, with an AI "accruacy" bubble, losing calculations farther from your cockpit. I heard Oleg would do something like that for BoB. If it works fine, if it does not give general results consistent full accurate AI calculations, its a bad move for campaign.

Obviously there are no programmers in this thread, or they would talk about how only AMD and Intel can make Time Compression work faster.

The alternative is HyperSpace Jump, or Space Warp in other flight sims, but they only work for the One Ace Air Force.

Saburo_0
11-02-2004, 10:10 AM
Well put sd_davis!

I agree wholeheartedly.I Love campaigns & won't buy a combat flight sim without them. I do hope some compromises can be developed. It's hard to stay interested when playing time is limited by real life considerations.

Electro_City
11-02-2004, 10:12 AM
Have you tried online coop missions in hyperlobby ?
People such as myself usually run coops that can be finished in 30 minutes or less.

Bones--
11-02-2004, 10:28 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Electro_City:
Have you tried online coop missions in hyperlobby ?
People such as myself usually run coops that can be finished in 30 minutes or less. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah, but that's a coop mission. I was oh-so looking forward to a coop campaign. There's just something about having the missions in a campaign where lost carriers stay lost for future missions and the front lines move depending on your performance.

We are SO CLOSE!! If dgen had some tweaks (or use the 3rd party campaign generator) and time compression worked for coop this would be a reality!

jimmie_T
11-02-2004, 10:30 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
No...but something like that was done for Rowan's MiG~Alley, with an AI "accruacy" bubble, losing calculations farther from your cockpit. I heard Oleg would do something like that for BoB. If it works fine, if it does not give general results consistent full accurate AI calculations, its a bad move for campaign.

Obviously there are no programmers in this thread, or they would talk about how only AMD and Intel can make Time Compression work faster.

The alternative is HyperSpace Jump, or Space Warp in other flight sims, but they only work for the One Ace Air Force. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't understand. If you don't mind enlightening. BYW, the field is very different and I don't do very complicated stuff now, I do programming for my job.

Dash_8
11-02-2004, 10:35 AM
I agree with you there should be various ways to speed up the long flights on campaigns. If someone has the time and wants to experience what the Pacific Theater flights were like, let them sit there and fly or use the 8x time compression. But most of us don't have that kind of time so a faster time compression would be usefull to many users of this simulation.

Although I never have had to wait too long with my P4 3.2 GHz processor, others do have LONG waits.

If you like long flights and ultra realism, great! But if I want to sit in an airplane and look out the window on a long flight, I Just Go To Work! (See sig below, my approach and landing going into State College, PA).

Slingn
11-02-2004, 10:42 AM
i still dont understand what the problem is with the existing time skip. You have the option to just speed up time by 2X, 4X, or 8X, and you also have the skip mode. granted its not a true skip, but it will compress 40 or 50 min of flight time into juat 3 or 4 min. I dont know about you, but 3 or 4 min is not going to kill me. At least I hope it wont.

LEXX_Luthor
11-02-2004, 10:51 AM
Each time you double the Time Compression, you cut in half the number of AI air and surface units the AMD/Intel can handle, especially when in combat when AMD/Intel calculate every bullet path.

I always said for Pacific they need a statistical system for ship anti~aircraft weapons rather than model each anti~aircraft shell fired which kills AMD/Intel.

Now we are talking like programmers. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

jimmie_T
11-02-2004, 11:03 AM
Calculating each bullet for "never seen by the player" is hellva luxurious CPU time, so that's why conjecture table. Of course, for online, it's not possible. This should especially be implemented for ground activity in FB/AEP, IMO. They need to restrict "camera" feature for this though.

owlwatcher
11-02-2004, 11:28 AM
Just started playing with FMB with PF.
Would like to setup from take off to landing.
Making for to long a missions in PF.

You must also remenber (time and distance ) factors are what the Pacific fighting is all about.It starts with the recon flights.

Hope to figure out some ways to speed things along. 8x is to slow.

TacticalYak3
11-02-2004, 12:30 PM
So how does the "short flight path" parameter in config.ini assist in this matter? Or are there no real opportunities to shorten the length?