Is Orbiter dying a slow death ???

[Mantis]

I wouldn't sound the death knell just yet. We have a new AMSO release that is fantastic. We have some amazing new vessels from the Italian Orbiter community and we have an upcomming new release of the Shuttle Fleet complete with an expanded and updated AutoFCS that not only works with Orbiter 2010 but that does more than just land the shuttle. We may be at an "ebb" in the "ebb and flow" of addon development but the software is very much alive and well. Developing a quality addon is a huge undertaking that requires a lot of time and a lot of effort and the only "payment" is the thanks of those who use and enjoy it. Sometimes life can get in the way of such things but I have no doubt that we will see a rebound in the number of new addons being developed before long.

 

[george7378]

rodion_herrera - that's a pretty good story, and it actually reflects what I used to be like in the past couple of years. I would constantly talk about Orbiter to my uninterested friends, telling them about how I 'raised my periapsis by 1.5km to intercept the ISS and come to a perfect hard dock' and how I had downloaded this amazing Apollo addon that actually let you walk on the Moon's surface like they did in the old days. I was the same in flightsim - I would draw my flight plans in my atlas, and spend my time looking at real life pictures of the planes I was flying, listening to their engine sounds in videos, and reading pilot reviews of the airports I hung around at, and then whenever we went on holiday, I would be constantly thinking and talking about what the plane was doing when we flew through turbulence, or when we intercepted the ILS and I would find myself telling my parents about why they extended the gear when they did, or what the flaps were doing, etc...

... however now, all we talk about is our university applications, and we just spend our time waiting nervously for the e-mails saying if we have been accepted or rejected ... so I don't really think about any of my interests at the moment - I am clogged up with other thoughts! It might sound a bit pretentious saying that I don't have time for these things, but I really feel like I don't Ah well, I still have time to hang around here and I still keep up with my interests (space, astronomy, the ocean, computers) even if I don't actively 'do' them much any more!!

Oh yes, I really know what you are talking about when you say that even a basic game can be great - about 5 years ago I was playing the 1998 game 'Half-life' which, compared to today's games, was basic in all respects, but I would spend evenings immersed in the alien-infested black mesa complex, making my way through the corridors, moving through the environments like I was really there - it was quite scary sometimes!!!

Maybe I can start an Orbiter Club at university and kick it off again

 

[rodion_herrera]

... however now, all we talk about is our university applications, and we just spend our time waiting nervously for the e-mails saying if we have been accepted or rejected ... so I don't really think about any of my interests at the moment - I am clogged up with other thoughts! It might sound a bit pretentious saying that I don't have time for these things, but I really feel like I don't

All I can say is, welcome to the wonderful world of "grownups"!

-RODION

 

[Cras]

It is indeed the challenge, or a goal that is important when playing things like Orbiter or flight sim.

When first dived into Orbiter, for me it was get into Orbit. Then get back home from Orbit. Then dock with the ISS. Then dock with the ISS like NASA does it with the Shuttle.

Then get my DGIV to the moon and back.

I have now done these things. Have gone to Mars, to Jupiter, to Titan. I am able with confidence to take a vessel and go off to any of the other bodies in the solar system.

So why do I keep playing Orbiter? I now want to build a space station. I want to try to build a space station in LEO without the space shuttle, and it has been very hard for me to do, figuring out using various launch vehicles and tugs to build the thing.

I want to build a station orbiting the moon. Haven't figured out the best way to do that yet.

Then off to Mars and maybe try to build something over ther. And even bigger challenge.

It's space. It beckons the imagination. It is why I love it so.

And in Orbiter I can run NASA in the manner I see fit.

 

[rodion_herrera]

And in Orbiter I can run NASA in the manner I see fit.

Perhaps you mean "...run NASA with a limitless budget..." sorry couldn't resist hehe

-RODION

 

[Donamy]

My problem is too much on my plate (plus getting over shoulder surgery). It gets overwhelming at times, and I don't accomplish much. But I'll keep plugging.

 

[PeriapsisPrograde]

[:2cents:]

I found Orbiter a few years ago. It was fun, but I was always a bit turned off by how simple bases are, empty environment, etc. I set out to add a base for my city's airport, with tons of bells and whistles. I failed miserably. Since then I've added mediocre at best addons when I get an idea.

Orbiter was never made to be an addon hive. A decline in new addons doesn't kill Orbiter.

[/:2cents:]

 

[Napalm42]

Really, these things just hit stagnation points, but like someone above me said, there are a lot of cool things in the pipes, and even some interesting new things like the XR Rolling Repairs module.

I like making addons, but I'm limited to coding as (1) I can only program well. (2) Textures are not my forte, nor do they look good, and (3) I CANT work with 3D meshing to save my life.

That being said, you can't expect and wait for a golden parachute of good addons to come flying from the heavens. I took matters into my own hands.

For two days I toiled over a hot Notepad++ file, coding TWELVE scenarios (after many migraines), LEARNING how to even make a scenario, DEBUGGING the scenarios, and lastly "repourposing"( ) some of PennyBlack's XR fleet skins, and slapping my 2-minute company logo on them, and now I've nearly built a private space research station/ "space harbor" in orbit over Earth. While it may have been a pain in my butt, I found that that experience was more fun than anything I've done recently in Orbiter. I found myself smiling more, and I actually had the patience to actually DO a proper job of re-entry.

In short, you'll always get as much out of Orbiter as you put in, IMHO, and you'll get an even bigger kick when the stuff you do is of your own genesis.

 

[Keatah]

I don't see why you'd say US spaceflight is over. You've got SpaceX, Orion/SLS, and the Boeing CST. For unmanned missions you've got MSL, Juno, and GRAIL. That doesn't seem very over to me.

That's just too funny. The US manned stuff is over, it's all PowerPoint and prototypes. Before any of it gets built and man-rated and actually carries a man up there, it will be canceled and the cycle will start anew.

The unmanned stuff is real, and in action right now.
MSL is the most capable and cost-effective geologist ever sent to the red planet.

 

[Tex]

...(im pretty sure Tex is like 5,000 years old).

 

[Pipcard]

Picard (my namesake along with the Pokémon, Piplup) is from the 24th century (TNG takes place during the 2360s). That's over 300 years from now. But I see your point.

 

[Keatah]

i often think Orbiter has the potential to become a largely accepted general flight simulation tool, if a few items could be produced (all part of my list of addons-to-do):

- a CFG-based way to create more involved DVC's, even for already existing ships (the universal dynamic virtual cockpit project)

- a proper ingame universal stack configuration tool, to allow users to try their own combinations of launch vehicles and cargo (the starport project)

- a decent realtime photoreal scenery streaming device, that downloads images from geographic imagery servers and composes ground tiles from those - and possibly srtm elevation data (the geo-gen project)

- a volumetric clouds and weather rendering module - to turn that thin cloud layer into something that you can fly through (this could include moving waves on water)

....that last one would require some DX11 graphics client support, particularly for addon shaders access and stuff *hint* :wink:


this weekend, i was even thinking of how one would code an FSX addon compatibility module, to load FlightSim aircraft and stuff right into Orbiter... and i find that this is actually doable :blink:


so yeah, if i had enough able time to have my way with it - i'd code Orbiter into a full-featured alternative for FSX...
but well, i find myself stripped of that most basic requirement much more often than i'd like.... (could anyone spare me a million dollars, please?)

:rofl:
This is even more ridiculous! Orbiter would need a complete re-write in order to become "generally accepted". The core physics is sound and we could leave that alone, aside from incremental evolutionary improvements.

The good Doctor's work is outstanding there! Wonderful detail abounds, and to the causal layman seeing it for the first time, well, simply fantastic.

Now, the core physics module (CPM) needs to remain just that, a module, a separate process. Leave it as-is, and re-build the entire simulation, but not around it.

You're asking for a dynamic game world, well let me tell you, it isn't going to happen with the current architecture.

Eventually, if Orbiter is to grow at the rates we expect, it will need to have multiple programmers working on it.

X-Plane is moving in that direction, and great things have come from it. The X-plane dev team has somebody working on art, sounds, scenery, cockpits, and other major aspects. Initially it just used to be Austin himself. But as it evolved it simply became too much for one individual. One single person cannot know everything there is to know about all sub-systems in a PC, let alone a program as complex as these simulations.

We need to use the CPM to feed data into a completely different world. One with up-to-date rendering. Not these pissant buggy clients floating around now.

I always ask myself what would be better:

1 X-Plane absorbs Orbiter and gains its spaceflight navigation and capabilities.
2 Orbiter absorbs X-Plane and gains its rendering, scenery and aerodynamics.

As it stands we have 2 simulators, one for air and one for space.

 

[Pipcard]

As it stands we have 2 simulators, one for air and one for space.

One is free. And I would rather not be confined to Earth's atmosphere.

 

[Keatah]

Has anyone stopped to think that at this moment, we have satellites/probes around or on their way to Mercury, Venus, Earth, the Moon, Mars, Vesta, Ceres, Jupiter, Saturn, and Pluto. Has there ever been this much activity at one time before?

Problem is, they are unmanned. People are just too stupid to see an unmanned spacecraft as an extension of the senses. Not only a distance extension, but also in variety. Look at ChemCam on MSL. Human eyes can't do that. But we *can* use that data and build good virtual world. And be home in time for supper.

I'm most happy and quite content to sit on my fat duff and read the reports that stream back from the cosmos. Much more happy doing that then spending 4 years stuck inside a tin-can traveling to Mars or something. We can get the same visuals with a nice HD screen and good software.

---------- Post added at 06:02 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:56 PM ----------

I agree that scenery is important, in fact, it is sorely lacking in orbiter. I just don't expect to wander through the halls of a terminal and blow stuff up or explore moon caves or anything.

But arriving at MoonBase Alpha at the end of a journey, that's a great thing!
Then you load up the real MoonBase Alpha game and screw around in it, after you GET THERE with Orbiter.

Same thing with X-plane, it's about the aircraft and how they fly.
When you park your 777 at the gate, the simulation is done with. Next!

 

[T.Neo]

We can get the same visuals with a nice HD screen and good software.

Have you ever stood on Mars?

What qualifies you to make that statment? :huh:

 

[Keatah]

We don't need a ton of vessel add-ons coming out every month. I like my XR2 and Arrow.

Well we certainly *can* have a ton of vessel add-ons coming out every month. In fact the more the merrier.

HOWEVER my 2006 install is like 20 gigs, full of everything and the kitchen sink, trite! My 2010 install is much more svelte and elegant, at 6gigs. With 2010, I am extremely particular about what ships and stations get added in. I like a rich environment in which to play, not something watered down.

It is important to carefully pick and choose what add-ons we install. Too many and you get distracted trying to make them all work together. Too much troubleshooting. Just too much busy-ness going on.

---------- Post added at 06:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:09 PM ----------

Have you ever stood on Mars?

What qualifies you to make that statment? :huh:

I'd rather not stand on Mars, not with all the hassles and danger and time and restrictions involved in getting there. I'd rather experience a hi-fidelity simulation of Mars. Whether it be virtual or re-created in the desert.

I don't think any of us are really qualified to make that statement. But it's good enough for me because that's what I would want to do.

If you can get me to Mars and back in a short time, then sure, why not??

 

[T.Neo]

I'd rather not stand on Mars, not with all the hassles and danger and time and restrictions involved in getting there. I'd rather experience a hi-fidelity simulation of Mars. Whether it be virtual or re-created in the desert.

I would too would likely not bother with going to Mars. But I wouldn't bother with some ersatz Mars either. Why should I waste my time with something that I know isn't the real thing? Something that does not truely represent reality? Something that is fake and conciously so.

I would rather spend 8 months going to Mars, than 8 minutes in some desert somewhere in a fake spacesuit.

If you can get me to Mars and back in a short time, then sure, why not??

What is a "short time"? Warp 0.6? :dry:

 

[David413]

NOW you tell me...

Hate to bring the subject up ( and open up a can of worm), but in lue of the the ever decreasing add-on developments for Orbiter, the departure of many great past add-on developers (and Forum members) and the slow death of the US manned space program there doesn't seem to be a lot to look forward to anymore in regards to Orbiter and it's future.

Damn, and I just spent six hours yesterday updating the GPCMFD and Shuttle Fleet to include a payload bay door with latches operation simulation! I could have spent my free time elsewhere...!

[/sarcasm]

 

[Keatah]

I don't think I have played Orbiter for nearly half a year now - not because it is boring or bad in any way - it's just because I don't have the motivation to sit down and do a proper mission. I will maybe decide to fly to the ISS just because I fancy it, and then I will end up launching and using time acceleration to catch up with it, and then after a bit of thruster firing, I will dock, and then that's it - I will come home after sitting there for a couple of minutes because I have nothing to do now I'm there!

I still love space and astronomy like I always have, but I don't really find Orbiter fun anymore after a couple of years of playing it at an amateur level.

Like many commercial pilots. Like anything. They'll tell you the same thing. It's all procedural. It's exciting at first, then it becomes comfortably routine, then it gets boring and becomes drudgery.

I got bored of Orbiter a while back after accomplishing the major goals like transfer orbits and dockings and aerobraking.. Stuff like that.

I recently learned all about Microsoft Office and found it to be a refreshing stimulation. Something other than TransX. I had risen above it. And then I got bored with Office. And figured how to crack the wga and oga crap.

Yawn..

 

[rodion_herrera]

But arriving at MoonBase Alpha at the end of a journey, that's a great thing!
Then you load up the real MoonBase Alpha game and screw around in it, after you GET THERE with Orbiter.

This reminds me of a rather old idea I had, while making those enhancements for NASSP (landing sites, rover, ALSEP stuff, etc.). I really didn't want to implement a surface mission WITHIN Orbiter, because I was totally aware of the limitations of the sim. However, I was thinking that one could still make a *.dll / MFD which would perhaps allow to "save the state" of the sim, i.e. upon landing on the lunar surface, and record the position of the landed craft, where it is on the moon, etc. Then, in a separate application (or even a virtual world like Second Life or OpenSim), these state values/params would be read, and in that environment, the lander appears exactly where it's supposed to be, and you can then do surface EVA activities in that environment/sim. And to have continuity, once you accomplish (or even fail) your surface mission objectives, then these are all recorded in yet another values/parameters file, so that when you get back into Orbiter, ready to launch the spacecraft, the scenario file where you last left off gets inserted with certain information such as change in spacecraft weight (which would probably depend on how many rocks you collected in that other environment/sim) etc.

I campaigned for this idea for a while back in 2003-2004, but then some people thought BACK THEN that it would be better to incorporate EVERYTHING within Orbiter! So as you can see, now people are saying to push away any "1st Person Shooter/role-playing" elements from Orbiter, but back in 2004, people seemed to actually prefer that more! Too funny. All I can say is, as time goes by, people's tastes change.

-RODION