next »

[EvilDingo]

So I've started writing this combat flight sim that I wanted to sort of bring back to the roots of sims in the 80s and 90s. Although today we have higher fidelity simulation games like Rise of Flight and IL2, they seem to have abandoned what made those kinds of games truly great.

The early flight sims all had a sort of RPG progression which made them more fun. You weren't just flying around completing a single mission, but a character in war. Falcon 3 took this to the extreme and allowed you to fight a virtual war with a squadron. No one topped Falcon 3 before or since.

The heart of any simulation game is a dynamic campaign, in my opinion. I want varied and interesting missions and not a roll of canned pre-made objectives.

So my goals are:

- Dynamic campaign.
- Some kind of RPG progression. Possibly perma-death option.
- Early inter-war aircraft to start and progressing through the 1940s and possibly beyond.

What I'm stuck on now is the art style. Originally, I thought it would be fun to create Aces of the Pacific style 3D models that look like this:



Or instead of flat shaded. Texture mapped like Pacific Air War:



I'm finding it difficult to create aircraft in Aces of the Pacific style. I find I'm always adding too much detail. I don't like the wings to be single planes (geometry wise). I want to have many types of aircraft and objects so I don't way too much detail either!

Being the sole developer, I can't spend weeks modeling a single aircraft so I think I need to stylize my aircraft so they're not so detailed. I think my options are: Low resolution 3D (like PS1 320x240 and old DOS games) or simple geometry and high resolutions.

What do you prefer? What would you play?

Here are a some aircraft I've modeled and are flyable:

This is a Hurricane Mk1 in low resolution:



This is P-40b in low resolution:



I don't have any simple geometry examples but imagine these aircraft in the above Aces screenshot. Is that enough detail? Is it charming and fun? Or too low detail to be fun? Trying to find the sweet spot for detail and content.

Thanks for any feedback!

[darklight]

Yes!  Yes to all of this.  I love my retro flight sims from the early 8 bit ones onwards.  The dynamic campaign is also very interesting.  I've tried to do the same thing but in a 2d side scrolling view.

Personally I find the high-res non-texture mapped style the nicest.  I really don't like low res texture mapping, game in this style I don't think have aged well visually.  Check out YS flight for a modern (ish) sim in the same style.  The community (which is / was large) may even have models already done that you can use?

[EvilDingo]

That's a good point. I suppose the biggest worry I have now is looking dated or not aging well. I think I could make highly detailed models, but I'm worried about the time required to complete them. I wouldn't be able to compete with the visual fidelity of a modern sim like Rise of Flight (which I believe the development costs were in the millions.)

Corncob 3D was an early flight sim and it looked terrible, even by contemporary standards, but it more than made up for it in imagination and creativity. I fondly remember it. It didn't have a dynamic campaign, but the missions were really inventive.

I'll post a side-by-side of my current low poly style with a flat shaded version and see how it looks.

By the way, I tried to go to your website, but it looks like you have some PHP errors. I watched your last development video on your side scrolling sim. That's something I've thought a lot about as well. Making a side-scrolling sim. It looked to me that your game would have benefited from full 3d models. It probably would have been less difficult for you in the long run (with changing orientation, etc.)

[EvilDingo]

Here are few more flyable aircraft. I have yet to make a flat shaded and simplified version of these.

PZL P.7

This was the predecessor to Poland's excellent (by 1930's standards) P.11 and P.24.



Seversky P-35

An early US design that was devastated by Japanese fighters. Most were replaced by P-40s before the outbreak of the war. Those that weren't were nearly all destroyed by enemy action.

[GalaethGames]

They look really nice!

[EvilDingo]

Still investigating art styles. I think I'm going to drop the low-resolution look. It just seems arbitrary.

So now I'm seeing I can get a nice flat shaded look.

I've found a few screenshots of an old Sega game called Wing War. I like the look of it. Its flat shaded (plus some dithering - why did they do that anyway? Cheap transparency? Wing War seems to be able to render transparent geometry, so not sure.)

Wing War examples:



I thought this cockpit was artistic:



So for my first try at flat-shading, I created a Curtiss Goshawk F11C:



Here is the cockpit view (no gauges yet):



I could make cockpits for every aircraft using Wing War's concept - low poly gauges and flat shading.

I think this art style is growing on me.

BUT - I'm using realistic colors. Wing War looks more fun. Is it because the colors have higher saturation?

[woodsmoke]

YEAH!! I love flight sims/games.
Wing Wars does look more fun, but yours looks more realistic.
I can imagine it looking just as good or even better with the instruments implemented.

[darklight]

...By the way, I tried to go to your website, but it looks like you have some PHP errors. I watched your last development video on your side scrolling sim. That's something I've thought a lot about as well. Making a side-scrolling sim. It looked to me that your game would have benefited from full 3d models. It probably would have been less difficult for you in the long run (with changing orientation, etc.)

Hi EvilDingo - only just saw your reply.  Website is working now, its just a bit dead at the moment.  The main reason why I chose 2D was I am much better at it than 3D, and could knock out *many* more assets.  Yes 3D would have made for better visuals, but I have the stretch goal to model every plane ever made, and no way I could do that in 3D.

[EvilDingo]

I've modeled some flat shaded gauges and put them in the Goshawk. I've also added damage states (wings, wheels, and things breaking off.) I need to change the environment to be a flat shaded terrain too. That means I won't be able to use Unity's terrain tools. Might not be a bad thing though.

I've placed the gauges in roughly their historical location on the Goshawk. References of cockpits aren't always available though, so for many others I'll just guess.

[EvilDingo]

Here is the Goshawk with flat shaded gauges. I still need to work out how to show the gunsite. The gunsite reticle appears to move with the pilot's head and always points to the same location regardless. This was the beginning of the illuminated gunsites used on most aircraft in World War 2.

[EvilDingo]

I've discovered a few things about this aircraft by simulating it. For one, it has a fairly poor roll rate. Most likely due to only having ailerons on the top wings. It has a great turn, like most bi-planes, but it handles like a bear when loaded.

It can carry a drop tank, two 120 pound bombs, or a 500 pound bomb. Particularly with the 500 pound loadout, it is very sluggish and the already poor roll rate is even worse. I guess I expected it to handle better just because it was a biplane, but that didn't turn out to be true. Even with the extra wing, it's a heavy plane, and feels like one.

Things I've added:

Fuel weight - As the aircraft uses fuel, it gets lighter.
Guns and round weight - Aircraft guns were designed to be light, but carrying ammunition can add a lot of weight. As the rounds are depleted, the aircraft gets lighter.
External stores - Drop tanks and bombs are modeled now.
Fuel tanks - Drop tanks are drained first. When dropped or empty, fuel starts being used in main tank.
Machine guns - Guns fire rounds at their specified muzzle velocity and rate of fire. Rounds striking the ground kick up dirt.

Strafing test:



Bomb test: