Jump to content
The simFlight Network Forums
FeelThere

TOWER! XX WISHLIST

Recommended Posts

 
 
 
1
On 10/24/2019 at 12:13 PM, Pedantic G said:

GAME GRAPHICS

I am sure those long in the tooth forum members are aware of this game, so apologies if I am going over old ground, but I came across this game and a lot of related YT videos the other day. It's a Tablet/Phone based game but with some cleaver downloadable software you can play it on PC.

 

Now as a game this has a LOT of things wrong with it (ruddy expensive to get the different liveries and made up airports etc) and in many aspects not a patch on what we currently have and improvements that we WILL have in TOWER XX but what I do like are the much improved graphics on what we have now (clearer, sharper, one off liveries, more custom views and tugs not doing the twist and shout shuffle on push back ) and serves as the basis of what we should get as a minimum in the next version.

Particular likes are the flaps and reversers operating on touchdown (even to the extent of only the inner 2 engine reversers operating on the A380!), wheels up on take off giving a cleaner line and also the fact that when the aircraft turns in the air it actually "banks" to mirror the turn and on approach it does seem to follow some waypoint turns, not straight in from 20 miles away. IF we ever get to the point in the next version of actually landing and taking off using designated RNAV points at airports his would look cool. Proves it is possible but time will tell.🤨

 

It's a pretty game for what it is, but lacks the complexity of a serious ATC sim, and the pace is like molasses.  If we are going to compare phone games, then perhaps the upcoming XXXXXXXXXXX might be a better point of comparison.   Granted, the game is yet unreleased, and once again is more game than sim, but it seems closer in spirit than the above title.

 

Andrew

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 
 
1
On 10/24/2019 at 1:35 PM, Avwriter said:

It's a pretty game for what it is, but lacks the complexity of a serious ATC sim, and the pace is like molasses.  If we are going to compare phone games, then perhaps the upcoming XXXXXXXXXXX  might be a better point of comparison.   Granted, the game is yet unreleased, and once again is more game than sim, but it seems closer in spirit than the above title.

 

Andrew

Thanks Andrew

Yep agreed. Not a game I would buy as it doesn't come close to what we have but some learning from it for aircraft graphics etc in it

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For sure the airplanes will be remodeled from scratch. Currently, we are running tests how many polygons can we squeeze with LOD without major fps loss. We plan to add the following animations:
-flaps
-gears
-reversers
-PAX doors
-cargo doors
In T!3D we use 2 pieces of 512x512 textures per plane. The new planes will receive 5 pieces of 2K textures and PBR. I think this will be the first thing that I can preview for you. What I saw is amazing already.

Thank you

 

Vic

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Folks,

 

Please refrain from mentioning other products here. I know you had no bad intentions, no harms done but I still ask you.

 

thank you

 

Vic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, pete_agreatguy said:

I like what I am hearing so far Vic.

Will we "potential" users be able to create our own texture kits?

 

i.e. Paint Skins

Without officially answering it: 

download.jpeg

🙂 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, FeelThere said:

For sure the airplanes will be remodeled from scratch. Currently, we are running tests how many polygons can we squeeze with LOD without major fps loss. We plan to add the following animations:
-flaps
-gears
-reversers
-PAX doors
-cargo doors
In T!3D we use 2 pieces of 512x512 textures per plane. The new planes will receive 5 pieces of 2K textures and PBR. I think this will be the first thing that I can preview for you. What I saw is amazing already.

Thank you

 

Vic

Wow, impressive. Conceptually this is more than I was hoping for. Exceeding expectations at this point!

Now - what can you tell us about the Strip, DBrite, and ADIRS (or their replacements)? 😀

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/25/2019 at 11:12 PM, crbascott said:

Wow, impressive. Conceptually this is more than I was hoping for. Exceeding expectations at this point!

Now - what can you tell us about the Strip, DBrite, and ADIRS (or their replacements)? 😀

So far that's all that I can say. 🙂 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vic,

Have the ability to edit your aircraft:

Takeoff Length

Landing Length

Aircraft Livery

Wind effects

Plan Spotting camera movement, or more control over the camera

An option to separate Ground Control and Tower Control.  Have A.I.  take over depending

See aircraft lights out further 10 mile final, etc

 

Cargo,  More cargo areas.

 

Custom schedules.  

 

Variable aircraft voices.

 

Change the runway config, while in-game

Push aircraft and move to remote parking..... vice-versa

Let me know if you need help testing

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are some wishlist items specific to Real Color and Real Traffic although the game engine would need to be aware also

  • Real Traffic and Real Color should be a single product. In reality you "can't" have one without the other so why are they bundled separately? Current separation seems a little deceiving and causes customer complaints/issues. 
  • Consider non-airport based packaging. Current process is non-beneficial to loyal customers as they repeatedly pay for the same liveries pack after pack.
  • No matter what packaging scheme is used, when a livery is updated in one package it should be updated in all other packages (except if the old livery is considered a special livery - see below). The current loading order of the RC packs determines the livery you see - which is now causing problems since various airports now have different livery versions for the same airline/model.
  • List the liveries included in each package. Currently it's anyone's guess what is included ... unless someone buys it and shares the contents. This is not a good user experience.
  • Create special liveries and allow them to be used in conjunction with RT and/or custom schedules. The special liveries should be just that - special. In other words if the ASA Salmon-Thirty-Salmon II livery (N559AS) is created for the B738, every ASA B738 should not have this livery.
  • Allow for the regional carriers to have liveries for each of the major airlines they serve. For example Skywest flies for American, Delta, United, and Alaska and we currently only have a generic livery. Compass flies for American and Delta but we only have a Delta livery.
  • Start over with the traffic related files. After 8+ years of using the same files it is time for a fresh start - especially when it comes to airlines and airports.
  • In the current scheme of things there is no reason for each airport DLC to have its own set of RT files. Right now it's just an out-of-sync mess. Airlines, airports, and airplanes could be "system wide" while the schedules and terminal files could be airport specific.Theoretically, the same plane model could have different takeoff/landing parameters at different airports based on weight/capacity/etc. but I'm not sure you want to go there. 
  • Differentiate cargo and commercial flights. Thus differentiate windows/non-windows, parking spots, etc.
  • For regional carriers, designate the major airline they are serving. This will help identify liveries and parking spots.
  • Use standard ICAO/IATA codes (nothing made up like we have today). Reduce the use of IATA code (except for maybe airplanes).
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Below is a conceptual "redesign' of the some of traffic files to address some items in my previous post. I'm not advocating/pushing for its use but just feel like "a picture is worth a thousand words". I'm basically trying to visually demonstrate how we could implement cargo/regional carriers, special liveries, and other features without having to compromise ICAO/IATA codes. Again, the purpose its to share a concept and not a solution. I'm sure there's a scenario or two that this doesn't address.  

Airlines file
Added an AIRLINE_ID column to allow for multiple liveries for the same airline, be it passenger, cargo or regional carriers. This would be used in the schedule and terminal file.
Added a LIVERY column mainly for documentation/clarification. It should synch up with "real color". 

//AIRLINE_ID, ICAO, IATA, callsign, LIVERY, airline, country
KAL0001, KAL, KE, KOREAN AIR, KAL, Korean Air Lines, Republic of Korea
KAL0002, KAL, KE, KOREAN AIR, CARGO, Korean Air Lines, Republic of Korea
AMX0001, AMX, AM, AEROMEXICO, AMX, AeroMéxico, Mexico
DAL0001, DAL, DL, DELTA, DAL, Delta Air Lines, United States
SKW0001, SKW, OO, SKY WEST, AAL, SkyWest Airlines, United States
SKW0002, SKW, OO, SKY WEST, ASA, SkyWest Airlines, United States
SKW0003, SKW, OO, SKY WEST, DAL, SkyWest Airlines, United States
SKW0004, SKW, OO, SKY WEST, UAL, SkyWest Airlines, United States
ASA0001, ASA, AS, ALASKA, ASA, Alaska Airlines, United States
ASA0002, ASA, AS, ALASKA, N559AS, Alaska Airlines, United States
QFA0001, QFA, QF, QANTAS, QFA, Qantas Airways, Australia
FDX0001, FDX, FX, FEDEX, FDX, Federal Express, United States
UPS0001, UPS, 5X, UPS, UPS, United Parcel Service, United States

Schedule file
Changed the airports to use the ICAO code.
Where we formerly had the airline IATA code, I've replaced it with new AIRLINE_ID. Again, this allows for cargo/passenger differentiation, regional/operator use, and the incorporation of special liveries.
For now I am using the ICAO code for the aircraft type. Not sure yet if ICAO or IATA would be better.
Added seconds to the times. Currently we can't get arrivals with the same time even with multiple runways. Not sure if this a solution, but more indicative that the issue needs to be addressed. Some people have asked to incorporate delays, etc. Personally, I'd actually like to see the schedule executed as designed instead of no free terminal, dropped flights, etc. 
Got rid of the last two columns because they are not of use.       

//Depart,Arrive,Type,Airline,Flight,Arrival,Departure
RKSI,KLAX,B77L,KAL0001,86,00:01:15,12:00:00
PANC,KLAX,B77L,KAL0002,249,08:39:30,12:00:00
KLAX,MMMX,B738,AMX0001,401,12:00:00,02:21:00
KLAX,KSLC,CRJ7,SKW0004,5704,12:00:00,19:49:29
KDAL,KLAX,E75L,SKW0002,3325,18:59:00,12:00:00
KSJC,KLAX,A320,ASA0001,1466,11:48:48,12:00:00
KLAX,PHOG,B738,ASA0002,813,12:00:00,11:15:47

Liveries 
Internally this could be how the livery files could be named. 

KAL0001_B77L default livery
KAL0002_B77L cargo (no passenger windows) 
AMX0001_B738 default livery
SKW0004_CRJ7 DAL livery
SKW0002_E75L ASA livery
ASA0001_A320 default livery
ASA0001_B738 default livery
ASA0002_B738 N559AS (salmon)

Terminal
For added realism, I would definitely like to see the airport and terminal assignments at a gate level. In the fictitious example below, all AMX (an asterisk indicates all varieties) planes would use terminal 2, gate 1. KAL passenger planes would park at terminal B, gate 1. While KAL cargo planes would park in the cargo 2 area, gate 1. ASA would use all the gates in terminal 6 while the SKW regional planes operating for ASA would use gates 3 and 4. On the other hand, the SKW regional planes operating for UAL would park at gates 3 and 4 in terminal 8.  

The scenario I haven't addressed is airlines arriving in one terminal and departing from another. This could involve towing and other features. Would like to see this incorporated somehow. A specific example of the above is airlines providing both international and domestic service and how certain terminals/gates are designated for that. In real life we see this from SWA at KLAX. They depart all flights from terminal 1 but international arrivals use terminal B.  

//Fictitious Terminal File
T2_01: AMX*
TB_01: KAL0001
TB_02: QFA0001
T6_01: ASA*
T6_02: ASA*
T6_03: ASA*,SKW0002
T6_04: ASA*,SKW0002
T6_05: ASA*
T8_01: UAL*
T8_02: UAL*
T8_03: UAL*,SKW0004
T8_04: UAL*,SKW0004
T8_05: UAL*
C1_01: FDX*
C1_02: FDX*
C1_03: FDX*
C1_04: FDX*
C2_01: KAL0002
C2_02: UPS*

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My wish is have some type of Retro mode. Where you could run traffic control on an airport from the past. Example, LAX during the 60-70's. Have all the legacy airliners with the livery's of the time plus the aircraft they flew.  PanAm, TWA, Northwest, AirWest and Hughes Airwest, Mexicana, Varig, PSA, Air California, Western Airlines, Continental, Eastern, National, Texas International, CP Air, etc. Many of the legacy carriers are gone so it would be nice to pay tribute to the golden age of air transportation. Include planes that have been retried, boeing 707, 720, 727, 737, 747, DC8, DC9, DC10, L1011, and Electra's.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cannot remember if this is on the original (unofficial) discord wishlist ... 

More efficient log files - therefore reducing the size of a log file.

Do we need to know that each aircraft livery / model etc has loaded or just those that haven't?

Where there are issues, use of keywords such as WARNING for non-vital errors (sim loads but with issues or missing content) ... and ... ERROR for vital errors (stopping the sim session from loading).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since the logfiles are primarily for the developers (and I myself am one, which means I use logfiles in debug mode very, very heavily), I'd say: they probably need to know every single livery / model has loaded.

That said, it might make sense to split those up into different tasks, like an init log, a gameplay log, an unloading log, different terminal logs, or whatever might be of the biggest use AND shrink the size of the respective log files...

And it might make sense to add an output window in logging mode for error messages in case something goes wrong, so that we can debug our flightplans etc.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is just a minor add On but still a wish list item. I had already added my list to the pile earlier but thought I would add just this one as well. It would be nice to have more weather options but more importantly it would be cool to have the option to tell airlines to taxi to the decicing station area before they take off. Certain airports that accumulate a lot of snow have planes taxi to that specific area before takeoff. Once again this is just a minor add on. Not too of the list important but would be a nice little feature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To add some additional suggestions to crbascott's post above:

Add a Schedule dropdown menu to the airport select screen that allows the user to select a schedule.  The list would be dynamically generated by reading schedule info files found in the airport directory.  The schedule info files can be a simple text file that lists the Schedule name, schedule maker (FeelThere, ND, user, etc), schedule version, airport file (can be the global file), airlines file (global or custom), terminal file, and the flight schedule file.  This would allow for multiple schedules, terminal files to exist in the airport directory.  When Real Traffic is updated, it won't wipe out custom schedules.  This will allow for users to easily add downloadable custom schedules from the community along with new schedules or historic schedules available as DLC from either FeelThere or ND or other content provider.  This would allow users to switch to other schedules without having to replace game files.  Version info would help resolve mutliplayer schedule issues.  By default there will be the Default or FeelThere Schedule with its airlines.  If you install ND Real Traffic then there would be an option for Real Traffic.  We could get official schedules for different day, historic schedules with Pan Am, TWA, Eastern, etc).  

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would add that a thorough file structure analysis is key. Seems like you are doing that Vic, but it doesn't hurt to emphasize it.

I agree with crbascott on his many points. The whole game package arrangement and inter-related workings needs re-thinking. An eye towards efficiency with regards to how the various  parts underneath the Tower "hood" work, individually and as a whole. Obviously you still need to make enough with the package structure to ensure the Tower series thrives, both in sales and ease of improvements/updates.

1. Aggressive minimization of game parameters/functions duplicated in multiple folders or applications. (To help ease the effort required to both ensure accuracy and troubleshooting)

2. Some way to avoid blatant taxi collisions that under normal weather conditions would be avoided. (i.e., A/C MUST know where other aircraft are on the ground if they could see it IRL). I would like to see a new, improved taxi aspect to Tower with both autonomous critical avoidance as well as more user options for commands.

3. Adequate + % of safety factor in gate/tarmac/ramp design to ensure A/C can fit and pushback properly w/o collisions. Also, built-in gate-specific A/C size restrictions.

4. Voice commands: Either a whole new system of voice recognition, or more time and/or leeway for players to ensure A/C acknowledges a command; on final or at the end of the runway doesn't cut it, too many rejected commands result in bad gameplay and frustration. Current voice command system isn't robust enough.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

2. Some way to avoid blatant taxi collisions that under normal weather conditions would be avoided. (i.e., A/C MUST know where other aircraft are on the ground if they could see it IRL). I would like to see a new, improved taxi aspect to Tower with both autonomous critical avoidance as well as more user options for commands.

Could you please explain in more depth?

Thank you

 

Vic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also think it would be cool if the strobe lights a plane has would actually do what they do in real life by blinking continually instead of just blinking every so often. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, ATC AlaskaGuy said:

I also think it would be cool if the strobe lights a plane has would actually do what they do in real life by blinking continually instead of just blinking every so often. 

If they really wanted to get it right, the white strobes should come on when the aircraft is cleared to the runway as in RL. (LUAW or clear for Take off).

Also remove the tail anticollision light (red) for normal aircraft and the fuseleage  top anticol light on T tail aircraft. Basically normal A/C have one light on the bottom & one on the top . T tail have one on the bottom & one on the top of the tail.

Kev

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just got back into the game and found this forum. Has there been any mention of implementing virtual reality into the next version? With screens/monitors/TVs it seems like there's always  limited real estate. It seems like VR could really expand the viewing real estate for looking out the tower, using the equipment (strips, radar, asde-x), etc.  Just a thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/7/2019 at 3:42 AM, FeelThere said:

Could you please explain in more depth?

Thank you

 

Vic

Vic:

Mostly what I am referring to is when inbound flights are on final touchdown and have ignored or given a "negative" radio response. They then proceed to turn off the runway into a taxiway that is already occupied by an outbound A/C waiting for the inbound A/C to taxi by... they end up nose to nose and a delete is necessary most cases because the runway is obstructed.

I guess what I am asking after is that inbound A/C to have virtual eyes that when the crew decides to turn off, it can (usually) "see" that there is a big honkin' A/C already sitting just off the runway in taxiway X and pointed at the runway- so choose another exit please because following is not possible!

Autonomous meaning the A/C (game) should accomplish this on its own w/o player intervention to avoid a crisis. Perhaps this would work different in fog or storm/rain conditions. I get that humans aren't infallible, but under normal circumstances we manage just fine. This is why I am interested in more time or a different method to assign an A/C on final exit and taxi instructions. Of course the whole 'gate, gate, who has the gate' game must be fixed. Not knowing until very late in the approach/final is not helping matters with all this stuff above.

Does that make sense? Let me know if not. Sorry it took so long to get back to you Vic.

Cheers!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Late to this topic and won’t claim to have read all of the very impressive list that had been compiled so thought I would just do a couple of additional bits I’d really value and some refinements to the existing ways it works. 

- Gate assignment - I find it very frustrating that planes always go to the first gate available in their terminal. When you play snippets in places like Philadelphia or this morning I was doing an early shift at Atlanta with big arrival banks they always go to gates in the same order. The gate assignment should be a random gate in the relevant terminal.

- It would be good to have an option to do the delivery channel as well as tower and ground, especially to add some interest to some of the less busy airports. Maybe as something that can be turned on and off.

- Ground movements - whenever I go to Heathrow, which is my local, there are regular movements of planes to and from the maintenance hangars or between terminals. It would be good to be able to replicate similar movements to hangars and remote parking bays. 

- Progressive taxi and a cross runway command.

- Would love the ability to be able to develop our own airports locally but do realise the developers have been very good at getting a lot of add-ons released and this could take away from the revenues they make from that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. Guidelines Privacy Policy We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.