BoS Mission Editor... any news?

[BlitzPig_EL]

Jaws and Extreme_One nailed it.

 

+10000000000000000000000

 

I sim for enjoyment, it's not my second job.

[Rama]

A potential mission builder doesn't have to do that. If is easy for him to understand the builder and can easily make missions with it, he'll start making missions. If he doesn't find it fun to learn to code, in order to make that mission, he doesn't have to.

His livehood doesn't depend on making that mission.

in other words, if he doesn't find making missions fun, because the tools are too complicted, he won't make them. It's that simple. This is a game. Not a job.

I agree with you.... for casual mission makers wanting to build simple missions, most of them will not take the time to learn the FMB.

.... but... they will probably be able to do what they want (simple missions), with the QMB, if the added features allows to do it.

.... and... for more dedicated mission builders (wanting to design complex missions with a lot of triggered events), they will quickly find that the "complex" FMB is much easier to use than older "user-friendly" IL2-like FMB for complex missions... once you managed to learn a bit of it.

 

We're talking about a game which is globally not easy to get in... even for pure players. Most of the players vaguelly interested by WWII air combat will not take the time to learn how to fly the game "full option", will maybe play with it a bit (or will not even try)...  and then will switch to easier, more arcadish games lake WT or others. Is it a reason not to developp this game.... or to make it "easier" to play, while sacrifacing the realistic feel of it? I'm sure most here will say "no way".

It's the same with the FMB; What's the best: having a FMB calling for a little investment to learn it, in order to build very complex multi-triggered mission with a lot of conditionnal events making it not only fun to play, but also very re-playable?... or a wysiwig easy FMB not allowing a third of the potential the other has?

... especially when you have aside a QMB satisfying most of the casual mission maker needs?

 

Maybe it's possible to design a FMB with all the possibilities and potential of the RoF FMB, and with an intuitive and easy interface.... but this kind of software will probably be incredibly costly. Is it a priority? (when all needs are met with the proposed FMB/QMB)

 

 

A lot of talented skiners didn't bother to make skins for ROF because the aproval process was too much of a pain in the backside.

As far as I know, a skinner isn't obliged to go through the aproval process if he's using the "mods off" mode. He just has to place the skin in the right directory. So it doesn't seems to me a good example.

 

I allways found the approval process to be the best way for the player to have a nice set of quality skins and avoid to dig the gem in a gazillion items of average quality... or worse to have to play online against invisible planes or alike artefacts.

I also know that lots of modders dislike any constraint and want to modd everything they can without any limits and any quality control, even eventually to the detriment to the players... that's what the "mods on" mode is for.

Edited September 11, 2013 by Rama

[BlitzPig_EL]

The QMB is fine for single player, but is useless for building missions for multiplayer.

 

I made a lot of "missions" for the BlitzPigs over the years, now I am out of the loop, and no one is going to take up my place, because it is simply too much work to build with the tool in RoF, and impossible with CloD, even if you could figure out it's editor, because you need a super computer to host CloD.

 

So now those of us BPs that want to fly together are stuck with my old IL2 missions, or are forced to play on open servers in RoF or the one in CloD that actually have people in it.  So, most have put their

joysticks in the closet and won't bother anymore.

 

In the rush that developers have taken to please the "harder is more realistic, even if it isn't really" crowd, lots of regular players have been left in the dust bin.  And before one of you mentions War Thunder, that is no answer.

It's a silly arcade game that none of my guys would touch with someone else's joystick.

Edited September 12, 2013 by ElAurens

[Crow]

You would be surprised what motivated people can do. I participate in a community that plays the ArmA series of sims. In a way it's mission editor is similar to RoF's. It has basic functionality in a WYSIWYG format, but all of the power of the editor comes from scripting in SQF and SQS.

 

What has happened in the ArmA community is a handful of people have created templates for others to use, so that if you want to get into mission design quickly and simply you can do so with just a little reading on how to implement the templates. However, for those that have more patience and creativity some truly fascinating scripts can be created to spawn and command AI, change vehicle damage states, manipulate gear loadouts, and much more. Here's just one example of the crazy stuff you can do through scripting (yes all of those people are actual players, the player count runs over 100 people typically):

 

I wouldn't be surprised to see the RoF editor made much easier by the community if the game can get a strong following.

Edited September 12, 2013 by Crow

[Kaenzdhi]

 In a way it's mission editor is similar to RoF's. It has basic functionality in a WYSIWYG format, but all of the power of the editor comes from scripting in SQF and SQS.

 

Interesting. I would like to know if ROF ME support scripts. If yes, in what language? 

Thanks

Edited September 12, 2013 by Scorlhov

[SYN_Vander]

Interesting. I would like to know if ROF ME support scripts. If yes, in what language? 

Thanks

 

This holds for RoF, but will probably be the same fro BoS:

No, there is no scripting language available in the ME, at least not as in ArmA or CloD. However, there is a Flash based GUI sdk. With this it is possible to execute a script that interfaces with the mission logic (results can be passed back). The "script" can read different values from the game, ie plane speed, attitude etc. See here: http://riseofflight.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=45&t=28550  There are some threads on the RoF forum where community members are discussing it.

The best application so far is a camera button by AnKor that works in MP so players can simulate making photos of certain areas and the results can be used in the mission to trigger other stuff (success conditions).

[Kaenzdhi]

Ok, many thx for your answer SYN_Vander, i will take a look at your link.

[bolox]

 

The QMB is fine for single player

I beg to disagree- quite strongly.

The ability to create user generated missions etc was a very important part of IL2's success- there were far more SP players than MP after all

M4T was very important to the success of IL2- hundreds of campaigns/missions created (and available in a central place). It also catered for a great variety of how users  played with it, SP , MP and a whole host of user created utilities

 

 

I was really dismayed when I realised I'd have to learn to code in C (or was it C+?) in order to get the best from it.

It's C# actually- initially I felt the same- however after a little trial (-and lots of errors )- I think having 'the complicated stuff' in a separate layer is a really good idea- you build the mission, then worry about the scripting (IF needed- and quite often it isn't)..

 

Seriously, splitting it is a really good idea as you can add stuff in 'baby steps', not have to understand the fundamentals before even putting 1 plane in the air. Even better is the fact that any errors are pointed to by code line- so it's easier to trace errors.

Personally I think it was quite useful to learn some minor C#- I now have a glimpse at how computer games work- and the logic aspects may transfer to a degree with BoS ME, that remains to be seen