I'm sorry if I've hit a sore spot with some by bringing up dogfighting
development.
I still intend to investigate the possibility more, but I will completely
make the capability an "opt-in" type.
I'm thinking along the lines of a 3 command line option set. (see only
non-dogfighters, see only dogfighters, and see dogfighters but don't
participate, with see only non-dogfighters being default)
Regardless of whether or not you agree with the capability the method of
restructuring (for parallelism) will be a benefit for all (and for future
development).
Over the next several weeks or so, I'll be doing alot of reading (and asking
alot questions too). I plan to come up with a more comprehensive proposal
to discuss with the development community. I plan to iron out some of the
details of the approach and set out the phases of development. (At that
point I expect you all to poke as many holes as you can in it ;-)
Again, thanks to all for the input. It is greatly appreciated. This is what
drives OSS IMHO.
Regards,
James
On 5/11/07, Gene Buckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I heavily doubt. The simple fact that already these small kids are so
> > much influenced by depiction of war/crime, that they consider taking
> > the flute for a rifle (even resp. especially if it's just a game) as
> > common practice, should scare us - and certainly this doesn't justify
> > turning serious flight simulation into a shoot-em game !
>
Horsepucky. Combat in Flight Gear would _never_ be a "shoot-em game".
Virtual != Real. EVER. If your little linoleum lizard can't understand
that, it's YOUR fault. Don't nanny-state me because you can't grow a
pair.
>
> For what it's worth, the R/C modeling community apparently has this same
> basic problem ...
>
> http://www2.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXJDU1&P=ML
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gh5ekEu9G3o
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3XHOqgd8hY
>
Now I've seen some irresponsible behavior before, but wow. That's just
beyond the pale. Jerks like these give all of us R/C fliers bad names.
> Oh, and I'm surprised that no one has brought up the notion of building
more
> spectacular crashes. Search youtube for R/C jet crashes and you'll find
> some spectacular ones. The R/C community is way ahead of us on that
one.
> Also you might want to search youtube for "bill hempel". Or you might
not
> like youtube and not want to search at all. :-)
>
Hehe. Mechanically accurate crashes would be great eye-candy for sure.
Bill Hempel is probably the best model pilot I've ever seen.
Here's unassailable proof:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZaXMrFh3n7M
g.
--
"I'm not crazy, I'm plausibly off-nominal!"
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
--
James Palmer
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
