PDA

View Full Version : Garbage IN Garbage OUT vs BUGS



XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 02:08 AM
Garbage in Garbage out... An old computer saying with regards to computer usage. Taking that and making it specific to flight sims, you should say UN-REALISTIC ACTIONS in UN-REALISTIC ACTIONS out. Thus all bugs can fall within one of two categories

1) UN-REALISTIC ACTIONS in UN-REALISTIC ACTIONS out
2) REALISTIC ACTIONS in UN-REALISTIC ACTIONS out

Ill give you an example of each, for anyone who is still not following.

Example for UN-REALISTIC ACTIONS in UN-REALISTIC ACTIONS out
Ill never forget a few years back when some guy was going on and on about how EAW had a BUG in it and was not very REALISTIC. He said that one day he got board and decided to start shooting his own wing man (UN-REALISTIC ACTION IN) and proceeded to shoot down all the AC in his squadron. He felt this was a BUG and NEEDED TO BE FIXED because he felt the AI should be smart enough to FIGURE IT OUT that he decided to become a BAD guy and thus they should started treating him like one. Well on further investigation it came out that this guy had recently made the TRANSITION to REALISTIC FLIGHT SIMS because he became board of the WING COMMANDER types of games out there and wanted a real challenge. Well, it was clear to me his only challenge was to get beyond his GEN-X mind set and grow up a bit before he could appreciate an ADULT GAME that trys to simulate a REAL world.

Example for REALISTIC ACTIONS in UN-REALISTIC ACTIONS out
Tons of examples here, but one that comes to mind is the BUG in the IL2 FB AI. Where a Me262 pilot preps for take off, and where he only starts one of the two engines. In reality he wouldn't attempt a take off, but in IL2 not only does he attempt it, but never stops trying! That is he will go right off the end of the run way and go 4x4 in his Me262 for the whole mission and or the fist good bump which ever comes first.

Thus, I for one would like to see ALL the "REALISTIC ACTIONS in UN-REALISTIC ACTIONS out" BUGS fixed before ANY of the "UN-REALISTIC ACTIONS in UN-REALISTIC ACTIONS out" even get considered to be added to the list of getting fixed!!! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif


TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 02:08 AM
Garbage in Garbage out... An old computer saying with regards to computer usage. Taking that and making it specific to flight sims, you should say UN-REALISTIC ACTIONS in UN-REALISTIC ACTIONS out. Thus all bugs can fall within one of two categories

1) UN-REALISTIC ACTIONS in UN-REALISTIC ACTIONS out
2) REALISTIC ACTIONS in UN-REALISTIC ACTIONS out

Ill give you an example of each, for anyone who is still not following.

Example for UN-REALISTIC ACTIONS in UN-REALISTIC ACTIONS out
Ill never forget a few years back when some guy was going on and on about how EAW had a BUG in it and was not very REALISTIC. He said that one day he got board and decided to start shooting his own wing man (UN-REALISTIC ACTION IN) and proceeded to shoot down all the AC in his squadron. He felt this was a BUG and NEEDED TO BE FIXED because he felt the AI should be smart enough to FIGURE IT OUT that he decided to become a BAD guy and thus they should started treating him like one. Well on further investigation it came out that this guy had recently made the TRANSITION to REALISTIC FLIGHT SIMS because he became board of the WING COMMANDER types of games out there and wanted a real challenge. Well, it was clear to me his only challenge was to get beyond his GEN-X mind set and grow up a bit before he could appreciate an ADULT GAME that trys to simulate a REAL world.

Example for REALISTIC ACTIONS in UN-REALISTIC ACTIONS out
Tons of examples here, but one that comes to mind is the BUG in the IL2 FB AI. Where a Me262 pilot preps for take off, and where he only starts one of the two engines. In reality he wouldn't attempt a take off, but in IL2 not only does he attempt it, but never stops trying! That is he will go right off the end of the run way and go 4x4 in his Me262 for the whole mission and or the fist good bump which ever comes first.

Thus, I for one would like to see ALL the "REALISTIC ACTIONS in UN-REALISTIC ACTIONS out" BUGS fixed before ANY of the "UN-REALISTIC ACTIONS in UN-REALISTIC ACTIONS out" even get considered to be added to the list of getting fixed!!! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif


TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 04:13 AM
One has nothing to do with the other.

If you start shooting down wingmen, it would be realistic for them to defend themselves. You know, just like they do in real war.

This is not a bug (because for it to be a bug, there would have to be an error in the AI code) but rather an oversight, as it was never programmed into the AI in the first place. Nor is it an unforseeable or unrealistic action, as it happens in real combat.

Some examples would be combat between Russian and American fighters, or combat between American bombers and captured fighters flown by Germans and Italians.



Message Edited on 07/28/0309:27PM by StG77_Fennec

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 04:23 AM
StG77_Fennec wrote:
- nt

nt = Nit Twit?

Ok, we can add a 3rd catagory, nt IN dork OUT but do you think it will help the masses or just you?



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 04:24 AM
StG77_Fennec LATER wrote:
- One has nothing to do with the other.

Is why I made two catagorys! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif




TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 04:28 AM
Team killing is not a desired action, but it would be realistic (and beneficial for online play) for the AI to destroy the offenders. Wing Commander had this "feature", as well as Falcon 4.0, etc.


<div align=center>http://www.members.shaw.ca/fennec/plane.jpg </div><font size=-9>

Message Edited on 07/28/03 09:29PM by StG77_Fennec

Message Edited on 07/28/0309:31PM by StG77_Fennec

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 04:35 AM
StG77_Fennec wrote:
- Team killing is not a desired action,

Desired action? Ok.

- but it would be realistic

Nope! Not at all! Not like I described it to be. Is that to say no guy acedently shot his buddy? No, not at all.. Is that to say no enmy never went up in a captured enmys plane? No, not at all. But it is what I said it is.

- (and beneficial for online play) for
- the AI to destroy the offenders.

Huh?

- But what does that have to do with the Me-262 AI
- bug?

Exactally! I think you really need to give it one more read, granted my spellin and gramer is not that of a un-employed English teacher, but I think you can fill in the blanks.. If not let me know, Ill clear it up.

In a nut shell, if you expect the SIM to respond REALISTICLY to UNREALISTIC ACTIONS then you expect TOO MUCH!



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 04:39 AM
StG77_Fennec LATER wrote:
- Wing Commander had this "feature",

EXACTALLY! And speaks volumes for the folks that complain about such things! With that said, I dont give a RAT A$$ about how the AI would react to UNREALISTIC INPUTS, because I dont fly it UNREALISTICLY. And I hope they dont spend one second adding something in like that, when there are MORE IMPORTANT REALISTIC things that dont work correctly


TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 04:48 AM
StG77_Fennec EVEN LATER wrote:
- If you start shooting down wingmen, it would be
- realistic for them to defend themselves.

See, it becomes endless now... Better to just stop it at the FIRST UN-REALISTIC action, ie YOU SHOOTING your WINGMEN then they wont have to WAIST development time of making the AI account for childish inputs.

- You know, just like they do in real war.

HEHEHAHEHAAHHAHEHAHHahaahaha... Oh.. man, that was a good one, thank you!

- This is not a bug (because for it to be a bug, there
- would have to be an error in the AI code) but rather
- an oversight,as it was never programmed into the AI
- in the first place.

NOPE! Not an oversight at all! Intentinal! In that they knew the bulk of the sales would goto people who would fly it realisticly. That and they realised their time and money would be beter spent worriing about REALISTIC things instead of UN-REALISTIC things like that.

- Nor is it an unforseeable or unrealistic action,
- as it happens in real combat.

NOPE! Not like I orginally described it, but if you want to get into the RARE once in a BLUE MOON case where the Lw took captured P51s or B17s an tried to sneak up on the enmy with their own AC.. well that would not be a case of FRIENDLY deciding to change into ENEMY, it would be ENMY from the get go.

- Some examples would be combat between Russian and
- American fighters, or combat between American
- bombers and captured fighters flown by Germans and
- Italians.

See above. This is not the case I orginally described where a FRIENDLY flying along decided to go to the dark side... You have been playing too many CAT KILL sims an watching too many STAR WARS movies! We are talking about realism



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 04:51 AM
Just because a person wouldn't do it in real life doesn't make the action itself unrealistic. A realistic action is anything that is possible in real life. I'm sure few people in real life would try to fly upside down under bridges, but its perfectly realistic to do so in the game.

Realisticaly a person could very well try to shoot down his entire squadron. It's not an ethical thing to do, nor is is very probable, but its perfectly realistic. It would work great, until the squadies caught on and kicked his ***. There is no rule written is stone that says the player is only allowed to do things that a real life pilot would do.

It's just a matter of if the developer feels like coding an AI response to that player action, or doesn't bother because they feel the action would be too improbable.

I just don't understand the seperation of actions that you think are unrealitic and realistic, based on your percieved likelihood or morality of the action.

Ie. I want the MFing TKs to die.



Message Edited on 07/28/03 09:56PM by StG77_Fennec

Message Edited on 07/28/0309:56PM by StG77_Fennec

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 05:04 AM
StG77_Fennec wrote:
- Just because a person wouldn't do it in real life
- doesn't make the action itself unrealistic.
- A realistic action is anything that is possible
- in real life.

Huh? Bud.. how many easter egg senarios do you want them to put in there? I mean with that kind of logic, the next thing some noob will come along and ask for a VOLCANO erruption... because it could happen... TRUE.. but dont you think it would be better to FOCUS on the things you do 9999999999 out of 10000000000 time over that kind of junk?

- I'm sure few people in real life
- would try to fly upside down under bridges, but its
- perfectly realistic to do so in the game.

Well who can argue with reasoning like that! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif Your missing my POINT.. It takes time an money to make AI account for the noobs that might want to play the A$$.. I for one would rather have the noob upset that the AI didnt teat him like an enmy then to have something that is used by everyone remain broke because they ran out of time and money developig that portion of the AI

- Realisticaly a person could very well try to shoot
- down his entire squadron. It's not an ethical thing
- to do, nor is is very probable, but its perfectly
- realistic.
- It would work great, until the squadies
- caught on and kicked his ***.

LOL! I get it now... You dont really belive what your saying... You just trying to have fun with Old Tagert... HA HA GOOD ONE!!! You had me going for a second there, I really started to belive that you were serious.. But it is clear NOBODY in thier right mind would really want to see time spent on such childish things as apposed to fine tuning the flight model. GOOD ONE! YOU GOT ME!!


- It's just a matter of if the developer feels like
- coding an AI response to that, or doesn't bother
- because they feel the action would be too
- improbable.

Not that they feel it is improbable, just too dang silly to even bothe with, in that most people that spend money on these simulations of REAL WARS typically fly them as such.

- I just don't understand the seperation of actions
- that you think are unrealitic and realistic, when
- both are possible.

And you never will understand!



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 05:11 AM
uh tagert.. is the ME262 pilot AI or human?

cause if he's human, it's not so much an unrealistic out, but more of an unrealistic in, cause the player's doing unrealistic actions to the game... it's not the game's fault the player wants to be a moron and be unrealistic.

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 05:12 AM
MOH_TRACKER wrote:
- uh tagert.. is the ME262 pilot AI or human?

AI!

- cause if he's human, it's not so much an unrealistic
- out, but more of an unrealistic in,

Agreed.

- cause the player's doing unrealistic actions to
- the game...

Exactally.

- it's not the game's fault the player wants to be a
- moron and be unrealistic.

DING!



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 05:46 AM
What you guys talking about in short words?


"Never forget the past so we dont make the same mistakes in the future"

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 06:38 AM
Aztek_Eagle wrote:
- What you guys talking about in short words?

Shot... Hmmm.. Ok,

It is crazy to expect realistic responce to an un-realistic act.

Not to say it couldnt be done, only not necessary in a combat flight sim that simulates WWII... It is necessary in a space sim that simulates a world where cats take over earth and there aint enough kitty litter to go around! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif




TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 07:20 AM
tagert wrote:
- Aztek_Eagle wrote:
-- What you guys talking about in short words?
-
- Shot... Hmmm.. Ok,
-
- It is crazy to expect realistic responce to an
- un-realistic act.
-
- Not to say it couldnt be done, only not necessary in
- a combat flight sim that simulates WWII... It is
- necessary in a space sim that simulates a world
- where cats take over earth and there aint enough
- kitty litter to go around! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
-
-
-
-
-
- TAGERT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your
- QUESTION?



WOW i see it clear now, as clear as the water we have down here in mexico.

Thanks target


"Never forget the past so we dont make the same mistakes in the future"

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 09:03 AM
I found the original post quite interesting...had not read about that concept for a while, but it makes sense.

As for shooting teammates...accidents do happen, I would not want the AI trying to trash me just because two MG Bullets went astray.

It's simple outside the scope of a SIMULATION and should be left to action games.

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 04:52 PM
I think the words you're looking for are:

Bug fixes to address appropriate actions to appropriate circumstances.

You cannot address blue on blue scenarios. The game does not, will not address role playing elements by the id-10T interface between the monitor and the chair.

If you decide to go "EVIL" on your squad in an ONLINE game, then the best thing that Oleg can do is allow for 2 TK in a 5 minute period, and then auto-kick you. Or allow the server to kick/ban at the first TK.

The game logic, for AI, only recognizes red vs. blue (not to be confused with http://www.redvsblue.com (http://www.redvsblue.com).)). If you shoot your own AI wingmen, the game already responds by saying "Knock it off, you're shooting me, *******."

This thread is borderline pointless and circular in its logic. Tagert keeps restating his desires, and the other guy keeps restating a rebuttle and his desires.

What this thread needs is some RayBanJockey love.



Message Edited on 07/29/0308:53AM by tolwyn.com

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 07:19 PM
Aztek_Eagle wrote:
-WOW i see it clear now, as clear as the water
-we have down here in mexico.

Hmmm but they tell us in the US not to drink the water! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

-Thanks target

NP!




TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 07:25 PM
tolwyn.com wrote:
- I think the words you're looking for are:
-
- Bug fixes to address appropriate actions to
- appropriate circumstances.

Think again. What Im saying is a UN-REALISTIC OUTPUT due to a UN-REALISTIC INPUT is not a BUG in my BOOK! In that it is crazy to expect the sim to take into account every dumb a$$ move by the user. Therefore I think all the time, money and effort should be devoted to fixing the REAL BUGS. Where I define a REAL BUG to be something that results in an UN-REALISTIC OUTPUT due to a *REALISTIC* INPUT.

- This thread is borderline pointless and circular in
- its logic. Tagert keeps restating his desires, and
- the other guy keeps restating a rebuttle and his
- desires.

Not stating desires, just definitions

- What this thread needs is some RayBanJockey love.

What ever!


TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 08:01 PM
tagert wrote:
- Aztek_Eagle wrote:
--WOW i see it clear now, as clear as the water
--we have down here in mexico.
-
- Hmmm but they tell us in the US not to drink the
- water! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
-
--Thanks target
-
- NP!
-
-
-
-
-
- TAGERT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your
- QUESTION?



It is just a complot of the USa goverment

"Never forget the past so we dont make the same mistakes in the future"