- Messages
- 814
- Country
Yes, I have considered fx approach. there are 2 ways (as far as I know) of attaching and controlling fx:
1: Attachpoint. Great concept - actually I have small Reaction Control Thrusters around the spacecraft that have fx "flames". However, the problem with attachpoints is that they don't appear to spatially stay fixed to a point where they are defined, but deviate by quite a bit, as you view spacecraft from different angles. This has been a bug present in FSX since day one, and I asked dovetail to consider addressing this problem in their next build.
2: Smoke system - when fx is used through smoke system, it DOES stay locked to position where it was defined. The down side is, designing a multi-cloud thruster flame is a bit of a nightmare since I have thrusters pointing in various directions, and every "cloud" (round-looking, omnidirectional sprite) has to be positioned explicitly in relation to the spacecraft datum.
I actually might end up using smoke system (I think I can add up to 98 effects, smoke.0, smoke.1, etc...) Although I would prefer using attachpoints since they are so much more easier to define and "shape"
To clarify what I'm talking about, here is the setup I have in MAX:
These are pitch and roll RCS thrusters on top of the spacecraft. The little cones sticking from the nozzles are actual thruster flames, whose visibility is controlled through the code (works well). The small cubes are attachpoints for exhaust fx (each cube defines a position of a single "cloud") Works in theory, but as I rotate view around the spacecraft, their position wildly changes. (BTW, do you know if that is fixable?)
Here is how the effect looks like in FSX: I like it, except, the "cloud" doesn't stick to the position at which it was attached. If I change the viewing angle, the "cloud" will drift away from the position in the screenshot. Really really annoying
1: Attachpoint. Great concept - actually I have small Reaction Control Thrusters around the spacecraft that have fx "flames". However, the problem with attachpoints is that they don't appear to spatially stay fixed to a point where they are defined, but deviate by quite a bit, as you view spacecraft from different angles. This has been a bug present in FSX since day one, and I asked dovetail to consider addressing this problem in their next build.
2: Smoke system - when fx is used through smoke system, it DOES stay locked to position where it was defined. The down side is, designing a multi-cloud thruster flame is a bit of a nightmare since I have thrusters pointing in various directions, and every "cloud" (round-looking, omnidirectional sprite) has to be positioned explicitly in relation to the spacecraft datum.
I actually might end up using smoke system (I think I can add up to 98 effects, smoke.0, smoke.1, etc...) Although I would prefer using attachpoints since they are so much more easier to define and "shape"
To clarify what I'm talking about, here is the setup I have in MAX:
These are pitch and roll RCS thrusters on top of the spacecraft. The little cones sticking from the nozzles are actual thruster flames, whose visibility is controlled through the code (works well). The small cubes are attachpoints for exhaust fx (each cube defines a position of a single "cloud") Works in theory, but as I rotate view around the spacecraft, their position wildly changes. (BTW, do you know if that is fixable?)
Here is how the effect looks like in FSX: I like it, except, the "cloud" doesn't stick to the position at which it was attached. If I change the viewing angle, the "cloud" will drift away from the position in the screenshot. Really really annoying