Newbie Query: 3D Engines

[Heathen]

Just a little query on the flexibility of a modern 3D engine. How much effort would it be to say convert an engine powering a fps to one powering a flight sim? I understand that all the physics would be different (aircraft don't quite bahve the same way as people), but how much other work would have to be done?

 

[flf]

I think one thing you need to look at when examining any engine is how it stores it's data structures. Many FPS engines use a BSP tree type structure since most FPS play areas are neatly sectioned rooms. However, while you might be able to use such structures for a flight sim engine, it wouldn't be optimal by any means.

As always, there are millions of solutions to any one coding problem, but only a few optimal solutions. When it comes to a 3D engine, you have to tailor your engine to match your problem for the most part. Someday we may have enough slack processing such that we can brute force any solution, but today you still need to look for the best fit.

flf

 

[KimB]

It may be possible that an engine like the latest incarnation of the Unreal engine may work pretty well. UT2k3 and Unreal2 are supposed to have very large outdoor areas, so it seems conceivable that they may have data structures that are designed for optimal rendering of large outdoor regions.

Other than that, I think the main differences will be control and physics.

 

[Tahir2]

Yes.. or the large outdoor arena's of Croteams Serious Sam engine. But these engines are focused on high detail close up (eye level). A flight sim requires a high detail level but far away.

Both engines are doing very different things to achieve essentially the same thing... realism (er I wouldnt call Serious Sam's Egyptian world or UT distopia realistic per se though.. realistic fantasy maybe!)

 

[KimB]

From what I've seen, Serious Sam's engine isn't much like what we'll see in UT/Unreal.

Regardless, I think the only thing that might be necessary is range-based drawing, where instead of wanting to draw everything in the world, the engine should only draw things within a certain range for effective performance in a flight sim. I'm not sure any FPS's currently do this.

As for the detail preference, I'm reasonably certain that's mostly up to the artists.

 

[Kaizer]

I think the Norwegian company Innerloop did exactly that (or the opposite), converting their flight-sim engine from JSF (Joint Strike Fighter) for use in their FPS "Project IGI"..

I'll see if I can find any statements backing this theory..


With Regards
Kjetil

 

[Thowllly]

I think the Norwegian company Innerloop did exactly that (or the opposite), converting their flight-sim engine from JSF (Joint Strike Fighter) for use in their FPS "Project IGI"..

I'll see if I can find any statements backing this theory..


With Regards
Kjetil

Ah, IGI, that was a great game. Yeah, they took the flight-sim engine and put it in IGI. That terrain engine was very good, actually, you could see for miles, and it even supported overhangs and stuff. And it used geo-morphing to hide lod changes, unfortunately the lod was far to low, even when you set the lod to max in the options, it was still very obvious that a lot of morphing was going on. But when you stood still, it looked great.

Oh, and Kaizers Orchestra rulez, if that’s what your handle refers too