Is Orbiter dying a slow death ???

[orb]

Orbiter isn't dying. There are new public betas released (last was at the beginning of November), DirectX 9.0 and DirectX 11/10 graphics clients are being developed. I can't see how Orbiter is dying, at all. :shrug:

 

[Moach]

wanna hear a story?

back in '03, i was desperately searching for a proper 737 addon for FS2004... there wasn't any... (there was PMDG, but it had quite a brutal price tag)

so i waited.... me and my brother HarvesteR, we waited....

then patience ran out....


we fired up gMax (3dsMax's little brother) and started modelling - with very little clue of what we were doing, really - to such an extent that things i model today in 10 minutes required several days of work to achieve...

about a year later - the "737 experience" was out...

and at the time - it was heralded as a formidable addon, to which countless repaints were made (i tried to collect them all, but things got way outta hand eventually)



i didn't know what i was doing - not even how on earth i'd tackle the next big thing that had to be done.... but one hurdle at a time, it got done - even if sometimes i'm amazed that it did, looking back at it


and then guess what - me and HarvesteR discovered a talent for making things for games... when we found out that there was a university where we could major in game design - it was a no-brainer! - two weeks after, we were enrolled!


and today - we made our carreers out of it - right now i'm at work programming games (well, i'm actually writing this, but i'll get back to coding shortly), and HarvesteR is out in Mexico making KSP - which was half my own idea (tho i'm still trying to squeeze him for a proper acknoledgement)


so if you ever find yourself thinking "ah, this whatever could be better if someone made whatever addon" or anything of that sort -- just remember

that someone might as well be YOU


and you may end up enjoying it quite a lot

 

[Notebook]

Must say, I don't any impression of Orbiter dying, just the converse. Its the only thing that motivates me to attempt any kind of programming, graphics, physics, maths.

One program can bring all those together, how can you get bored with it?
I'll admit all my add-ons are for personal interest, but if not for Orbiter, I'd just be reading books about the early UK space program, not trying to simulate it.

N.

 

[agentgonzo]

I don't see why you'd say US spaceflight is over.

Unfortunately, for most people US Spaceflight ≡ Space Shuttle.

Whilst this is a terrible understanding of the situation, the ending of the STS program has resulted in a lack of excitement among many (including me) with space exploration.

Nasa has a much better publicity machine for the English speaking world than Roscomos, JAXA, China (I don't know what their space agency is called) and spaceflight will always be more exciting for humans than sending probes/automated vehicles into space because you know there are people on board which you can imagine are like you and this is more engaging than a bunch of wires and metal. Nasa launches are easier to watch via NasaTV and the various web channels devoted to it than Roscomos launches and make more camera angles etc available for launches making it more exciting to watch.

With the end of the space shuttle programme, all this will be drastically reduced for the next n years, which means people's lack of excitement. Also, the shuttle is more exciting to watch because you can see it fly like an aeroplane and glide to landing, rather than a capsule which just kind of falls. Bottom line, the space shuttle was the most exciting thing to watch launch/fly barring probably Apollo and without it spaceflight just isn't as exciting for the general public. This translates to less excitement in orbiter. And people want (in part) to play orbiter to fly the shuttle as flying a capsule isn't as exciting and not something the general populous can appreciate (as the see shuttle as aeroplane in space and can relate to aeroplanes).

In short, spaceflight will get more exciting again in future, but there is no way that it's as exciting right now as it was 6 months ago when the shuttle was still flying.

 

[Urwumpe]

In short, spaceflight will get more exciting again in future, but there is no way that it's as exciting right now as it was 6 months ago when the shuttle was still flying.

We'll talk about that in the future. :thumbup:

 

[Yoda]

Yes, Orbiter is dead - at least for Yoda, who can complain about other people not producing enough add-ons per month, regardless that his own output is pretty marginal.

Really, I really lack the proper words here to describe what I am thinking. I don't want to say that all should be making add-ons. I know that this will only end in much more repaints of the XR2. But I think that the Orbiter community lives and dies by the actions of the people inside it. And this involves you (the person on the other side of the screen). If you want high quality add-ons, you either have to wait patiently for them to come around, or make them yourself. The first step is always the hardest.

Leave it up to Urwumpe to turn a general question into a personal attack........

I agree with your overall point but not all of us have the skills, time or know-how to produce add-ons ( or post negative responses to every thread on Orbiter Forum).......
Many of us are dependend on the great skills that some of us posses and are truly thankfull for the work they produce !

 

[Urwumpe]

Leave it up to Urwumpe to turn a general question into a personal attack........

Read it as a personal criticism. It was at least not meant to be a direct attack against your person, since your user name is pretty replaceable in the past years of such posts appearing. It could have been somebody else and it had been other people already in the past.

Die größten Kritiker der Elche waren früher selber welche.

PS: Skills can be acquired. 99% of what I can do in Orbiter are not a gift of my parents, but what I had to do because it had to be done one day... I was simply forced to learn.

 

[T.Neo]

If Orbiter is supposedly dying:

1. Where are the statistics that show the "population" of Orbinauts is declining?

2. Where are the statistics that show that activity on the forums and such is declining?

3. Where are the statistics that show that less effort and time are being put into addon creation?

4. Where are the statistics that show that the popularity of Orbiter is declining?

5. What indicates that the devleopment of Orbiter is lagging or has ceased?

Sorry, but without these, I don't know how you can say "Orbiter is dying a slow death". Apart from the yearly cycle of changing inactivity (motivated primarily because of the fact that most orbinauts hail from countries in the northern hemisphere) and the fact that not much is happening in the spaceflight arena leading to perhaps a decrease in enthusiasm, there is nothing to suggest that interest in or effort towards Orbiter is waning.

new Orion capsule for dep space exploration,

Yes, in 6 years when NASA starts redoing Apollo 8 every year or so, I am sure it will be very exciting... :dry:

We don't even know what the Orbiter community will be like in 5-6 years. 6 years ago, Orbiter 2006 hadn't even been released yet.

 

[N_Molson]

I agree with your overall point but not all of us have the skills, time or know-how to produce add-ons

No, no no. :nono:This is where a lot of people are wrong. Everything can be learnt, it's a matter of time, dedication of patience. This is one of the main characteristics of Homo Sapiens : it has very few innate behaviors and has to learn almost everything. This applies to making add-ons too. You aren't gifted or not gifted about this.

Now of course, if you are following computer science or 3D modelling applications studies, it helps a lot. But it is a "plus", not a requirement. It think that at some point it is a matter of self-confidence. Don't be afraid to throw yourself in.

when NASA starts redoing Apollo 8 every year or so, I am sure it will be very exciting...

Well, it will be for me. If it happens.

Also, about the graphics client, Jarmonik's one is almost as stable as the original on its last releases.

 

[Codz]

Yes, in 6 years when NASA starts redoing Apollo 8 every year or so, I am sure it will be very exciting... :dry:

Well that would excite me and many others on O-F.:tiphat:

 

[n72.75]

In a year and a half, I'll be out of school with a Bachelors of Science in Aeronautical Engineering.

At this point, I'll be working only 40 hours a week with no girlfriend, and living in a small apartment in the Connecticut suburbs.

And then my friends, many an add-on will be published...

 

[Pipcard]

Can't people realize that XR2 repaints =/= Orbiter is dying? Are people here making an attack on those who make such skins? Not everyone is a spacecraft add-on developer (modeling/programming/texturing) or has the time to learn it. And you shouldn't pressure the Orbiter community to make spacecraft add-ons.

 

[Izack]

Not everyone is a spacecraft add-on developer (modeling/programming/texturing) or has the time to learn it.

True, but there are also many who take a look at a tutorial or two and immediately dismiss it as "Nope, too hard, can't do" when really all it takes is a few hours here and there to get a basic feel for it.

And hey, X-mas break is coming. I'm sure there are a few things in the pipe.

 

[Pipcard]

True, but there are also many who take a look at a tutorial or two and immediately dismiss it as "Nope, too hard, can't do" when really all it takes is a few hours here and there to get a basic feel for it.

And hey, X-mas break is coming. I'm sure there are a few things in the pipe.

But not every vessel made would be as high of a caliber as the XR2 (the ship itself), the DGIV, the UCGO Arrow, etc. That takes lots of skill and time, and I commend the developers of such add-ons, but I don't think everyone should be pressured into making high-quality vessel add-ons.

 

[Izack]

But not every vessel made would be as high of a caliber as the XR2 (the ship itself), the DGIV, the UCGO Arrow, etc. That takes lots of skill and time, and I commend the developers of such add-ons, but I don't think everyone should be pressured into making high-quality vessel add-ons.

Gracious, no. Hopefully no one expects professional-grade addons for free. Those are typically made by people educated in software engineering, anyway. It's nice to learn to put together a decent mesh with some cool functions, though. The freedom it allows to make your own ideas tangible is a great one.

 

[Donamy]

There are plenty of addons already for Orbiter, no one could use them all. Addons are not just for the sake of making addons.

 

[Urwumpe]

There are plenty of addons already for Orbiter, no one could use them all. Addons are not just for the sake of making addons.

Not? :rofl::tiphat:

 

[Cras]

I can speak only for me, but I am just not able to put any idea I have for an add-on vessel into a working add-on for Orbiter. I lack the time, the know how for mesh and C++ coding to produce. I do have the ideas. And when I can, I implement them. I have used velcro rockets to build mockups of launch vehicles for the XR2. I have done skins for the XR2 that are what I want them to be.

To to actually create something like the XR2 out of thin air from scratch? That is beyond my know how. All I can do is suggest to those that make these what I feel would be very useful features and ideas, and hope they agree and hope they would incorporate them into their project. It is theirs after all.

Sure I would love to sit down and learn the necessary skills in C++ to put some of my ideas into a working add-on. And I do have baseline skills in C++, I would not be starting from scratch. But at the moment I just don't have the time to commit to learning what is required. In the future that may change, but in the mean time, I can only help where I can, enjoy what others are willing to share of their hard work, and enjoy flying them in Orbiter.

 

[MikeB]

I'd like to reinforce two points already explicit or implicit in the earlier comments:

1. Orbiter is not the same as NASA. NASA's political/funding/planning problems don't mean anything to Orbiter. We can be pessimistic or optimistic about the prospects for NASA or any of the world's other space agencies and commercial enterprises to advance the state of the art and REALLY fly. And then we can turn to Orbiter and perform our own simulated feats of engineering and imagination.

2. Martin's great achievement has been to create the core of an ecosystem. The simulator is surrounded by layers upon layers of Orbiter-stuff (for lack of a better term). I have in mind the following non-exhaustive examples:
a. Truly realistic engineering, such as NASSP, SSU and Vostok (so realistic that I can't fly them as well as they deserve).
b. "Imagineering" (to borrow a Disney word), such as DG IV and XR-series. These let our imaginations fly where nobody can really go.
c. "Platform" add-ons that allow others to continue to create new stuff without hard-core engineering, such as Velcro Rockets, SpaceCraft3.
d. A community of people with various roles and interests: making new instruments (TransX, IMFD, and many other MFDs that make flying easier); making models on those layers of platforms; making scenery for bases and planets; making re-paints of other models; making scenarios of historical/challenging/interesting missions; writing manuals (Go Play In Space, IMFD Full Manual); sharing experience and wisdom on the forum to help bring newcomers into the community; and surely many others (add your own).
e. Through the varied interests of the orbinauts, connections to the science fiction literature, television and film media; and connections to the hard reality of spaceflight through actual historical and engineering literature. These serve as inspiration for numerous add-ons and scenarios or simply remind us why we love to think about spaceflight.

There's plenty more to say, but this post is already too long. And if you haven't yet figured out why I hang out in this "dying" Orbiter place, more words won't help.

 

[Urwumpe]

well, the main problem that I see for beginning add-on makers, is adopting a suitable workflow and see where they can take stuff instead of having to invent it again.

Take for example this historic rocket:

http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/gnom.htm

Sure something different and unusual. But hard to do?

How to do it in Orbiter?

That little is known is first of all an advantage - it means artistic freedom.

You need a Ramjet. The Deltaglider example in the SDK has one. So this problem is done.

You need the meshes. But something ugly could be done quickly in any editor, and you won't learn to make good meshes by sitting around. You need to make meshes.

You need to do separations from carrier vehicle or of the warhead. Still not hard since you can use attachments.

A keyboard interface would be enough. Simple aerodynamics would be enough. You don't need to make an autopilot.

The biggest problem you have at the beginning is your own fear too look stupid, when your first add-on is no second AMSO. It is a stupid fear, because even making an add-on that is not completely crappy (= done without heart) is making you better than 99% of all Orbiter users in that context.

And that is my personal idea of add-on making: Love what you do. If you have no fun writing the add-on, you won't keep on fighting with the challenges for long.