Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Aviation

862 replies to this topic
reform
  • reform

    Beaten, battered, bruised, Told to get down

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2009

#31

Posted 22 March 2009 - 01:59 PM

Haha, K^2, I can tell you have played a few flight sims in your time!!

I completly agree with the original post.

Booyacasha
  • Booyacasha

    It is time

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2009

#32

Posted 22 March 2009 - 03:05 PM

sounds really good but can anybody answere me this!
if you fly the plane into a building or staright into the ground or land it on the road...will R* be able to make these building explosions?? what about the building the plane like in 9/11 should go right through the building how will R* manage that??? please answere if you have an idea..

reform
  • reform

    Beaten, battered, bruised, Told to get down

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2009

#33

Posted 22 March 2009 - 04:15 PM

I don't think R* will be making destructable environment mechanics on that scale in this console generation.

Most likely it'll just leave a black scorched patch on the impact zone, and the plane will completly disappear in the explosion.

K^2
  • K^2

    Vidi Vici Veni

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Apr 2004
  • United-States

#34

Posted 22 March 2009 - 10:23 PM

Yeah, that'd be a bit too heavy on the engine. A few buildings like that can be simulated, but not an entire city. There are workarounds, but there are bound to be serious artifacts. There are also some gameplay concerns, which are probably even more serious. What are you going to do when you end up leveling the entire city? Or just one building that was critical to the story?

bldrgnslyr
  • bldrgnslyr

    Square Civilian

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Dec 2008

#35

Posted 28 March 2009 - 11:43 AM

its a great idea in terms of adding a whole new dimension to the series, but the chances of it happening are pretty slim for many reasons in which i cant be f*cked listing. monocle.gif

visionist
  • visionist

    Eat A Peach For Hours

  • Members
  • Joined: 06 Dec 2007

#36

Posted 28 March 2009 - 12:38 PM

Bringing back pilotable large scale aircraft will be inpractical till the game features either multiple spread out cities or a city in the middle of a desert/forest with small landing strips out and about. Granted IV's Liberty City is supposed to be similar in size to SA's entire state, and so at least a Shamal should have been pilotable... Sitting there in the airport but you can't do anything with them.. very frustrating.

Tuff Luv Capo
  • Tuff Luv Capo

    We must find Ansama Benlanden

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Oct 2002

#37

Posted 28 March 2009 - 02:46 PM

QUOTE (JoshGTAfreak @ Mar 18 2009, 05:13)
i don't want them to have planes it ain't grand theft aero u know.

Every one of these topics is accompanied by one of these posts:

"This ain't Grand Theft Aero"
"This ain't Grand Theft Aqua"
"This ain't Grand Theft X Games"


GTA isn't just about being diverse and offering more than any other game, it's the skeleton of its very creation. Limiting the game to stealing cars and gun-fire would cease it's need to be carried on and recreated. Go play driver 3 if you don't want all of this "new-fangled" crap.

K^2
  • K^2

    Vidi Vici Veni

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Apr 2004
  • United-States

#38

Posted 28 March 2009 - 08:52 PM

QUOTE (visionist @ Mar 28 2009, 08:38)
Bringing back pilotable large scale aircraft will be inpractical till the game features either multiple spread out cities or a city in the middle of a desert/forest with small landing strips out and about. Granted IV's Liberty City is supposed to be similar in size to SA's entire state, and so at least a Shamal should have been pilotable... Sitting there in the airport but you can't do anything with them.. very frustrating.

Personally, I don't see a reason not to make large planes pilotable either way. Granted, it'd be pointless, but once you have the core airplane code down, and the models for these planes are already there, what's the harm? It would be interesting to see what people come up with to try and steal one and what they'd do with them afterwards.

Something like a Dodo could have been useful even in IV. There are several places scattered around IV that you could use as an impromptu landing strip, and there are a bunch more places where you can perform an emergency landing if you don't expect that Dodo to fly ever again. Add to that the fact that a Dodo doesn't fly any faster than a Maverick and certainly no faster than an Annihilator, and there is no reason not to include it.

Just FYI:

Dodo = Cessna 152 - Cruise 105 knots.
Maverick = Bell 206 JetRanger - Cruise 115 knots.
Annihilator = UH 60 Black Hawk - Cruise 150 knots.

epoxi
  • epoxi

    Your Mother

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 05 Sep 2003
  • None

#39

Posted 08 April 2009 - 12:25 AM

In my opinion, SA nailed it: and I'm glad they kept planes out of IV because I would be disappointed. SA had the perfect size, geography, scaling and plot (i.e. based on an entire state with 3 separate cities) for airplanes...plus the game made you feel like a true pilot, while keeping flight an easy task at the same time. biggrin.gif

Epicohnoes!
  • Epicohnoes!

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 May 2008

#40

Posted 08 April 2009 - 01:10 AM

I was thinking about this earlier today.My idea is that the physics should be slightly improved to match that of the cars in GTA IV. But, you could also add a few new bells and whistles to GTA's aviatation. Like, maybeif you're flying too low, or are in a no-fly zone, the ATC will contact you telling you to shape it up. If you don't, they will assume you're a terrorist and give you a nice 4 Star.

DarrinPA
  • DarrinPA

    Orange Grove Member

  • Members
  • Joined: 31 Mar 2009
  • None

#41

Posted 08 April 2009 - 01:50 AM

I'm a huge fan of the flying in SA and hope that they bring it back. I did not have any problems learning to fly. I 100% all the flying school tasks quite quickly. I would prefer a more difficult and true to life flying system but I know that other gamers had too many problems with flying in SA so it's best that they bring back that flying with the same difficulty as SA, well not much difficulty actually. Or they could have a few more "hidden" and rare planes that the more hardcore gamers could find and use. The simple plans could be used for missions and the difficult ones could be "un-needed" and just for fun. But I'd be happy with any planes, it makes the game much more fun. Even VC had fun missions with planes.

jplip
  • jplip

    PINOY CULTURE WARRIOR

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Apr 2009

#42

Posted 08 April 2009 - 02:02 AM

IF the next gta will have a city to city map again..

I would love to have my own Private JEt..
it has AUTO PILOT features that you can activate or manual controls.

just click and Go and enjoy the Fully functional interiors of the plane

Drunk Russian 9
  • Drunk Russian 9

    Soldier

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Nov 2007

#43

Posted 16 April 2009 - 02:59 AM

How about options for simple and advanced modes of flight?

For instance, like in the game HAWX, you are allowed to turn off the assistance mode, which allows your plane to perform extreme maneuvers through the elimination of stall prevention.

K^2
  • K^2

    Vidi Vici Veni

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Apr 2004
  • United-States

#44

Posted 16 April 2009 - 07:42 AM

QUOTE (Drunk Russian 9 @ Apr 15 2009, 22:59)
How about options for simple and advanced modes of flight?

For instance, like in the game HAWX, you are allowed to turn off the assistance mode, which allows your plane to perform extreme maneuvers through the elimination of stall prevention.

HAWX is an abomination. While I can say that SA's planes are loosely modeled, HAWX developers have never been inside or anywhere near a plane. The HUD is useless, aerodynamics is all wrong, controls are wacky, target selection is irrational, lift equation is based on wrong parameters, control surfaces aren't affected by stalls, and even if none of the other things were there, the simple fact that you can break the sound barrier while going backwards should tell you everything you need about physics of planes in HAWX.

Assistance is the worst part of the game, by the way. You have to options. You can either have Assistance On and have a plane that handles like an old cow, or you can turn Assitance Off, and then you are forced to use a camera that is so far off you cannot tell direction you are flying in. Add to that the fact that camera auto-rotates to an angle that shows you and your target, which can be behind or above you without giving you any choice due to aforementioned irrational targeting system, and you can have situations where you are absolutely literally have no idea where you are flying or how far from the ground you are.

If Rockstar tries to make the planes work like they did in HAWX, I'm quitting GTA. There is no excuse for something that idiotic.

junafani
  • junafani

    Crackhead

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 Jul 2005

#45

Posted 30 April 2009 - 02:19 PM

I like these ideas! They should make better airports. I hate how they have unstoleable airplanes in 3 & VC, but at least they fly, taxi and take-off. In 4 we have two planes, one is flying and never lands and the other is just taxiing in runway and taxiway.
But in SA they didn't have any airplane traffic in airports. Just some random cars driving circles in one corner of airport.
And who desinged CJ's airport? In runway 27 (when you come from LV) we have huge cliff in front of runway, so you need to make some crazy dive to land and that hangar is 1 feet away from runway.
On runway 09 (coming from SF) we have that phone line where you can crash.

And yes, I tested HAWX demo and that "assistance off"-mode is bullsh*t. If it really puts all assistances off it should lock you into cockpit viev, but noooo let's put camera half mile away and let it spin like crazy, so you do not know where you are going.

nerner
  • nerner

    OG

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 05 Jul 2008

#46

Posted 30 April 2009 - 05:06 PM

In VCS and LCS you could get inside the planes at the airport, with ease. But in IV, the planes on the ground never takeoff and teh planes in the air never land, which is awful. Even if they are going to prevent us from nicking planes, at least have them taking off and landing realistically.

TonyClifton
  • TonyClifton

    PR Spokesman for Tony Prince

  • Members
  • Joined: 06 Jun 2008

#47

Posted 01 May 2009 - 10:08 AM

And one of the only few remaining Concordes is found in a remote hangar on a desert airstrip, owned by an eccentric millionaire, where our hero (who just happens to have had supersonic training in the air force some years ago), takes it out for a spin and flies on the "edge" of the Earth.

Count me in....... cool.gif

uNi
  • uNi

    Cyclop 9

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 May 2004
  • None

#48

Posted 02 May 2009 - 04:15 PM

I would love to see:

- Different aircraft landing/taking off.
- Aircraft taxiing.
- The tower having comments towards you, like the ones from the police heli pilots.
- Adding actualy flying paths to the aircrafts instead of having them spawning randomly and out to nowhere.

K^2
  • K^2

    Vidi Vici Veni

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Apr 2004
  • United-States

#49

Posted 02 May 2009 - 09:35 PM

Yeah, ATC chatter, done in the comedic sort of way, like the dispatcher chatter in the police cars, can go a long way. It should mostly sound like a serious communication between ATC and pilots, with exchange on mach number, flight level, and heading information, but with random funny things being requested or overheard. Something along the lines of the Pushing Tin quotes, perhaps.

QUOTE
- I'm personally going to see to it that you go down in flames!
- What?
- Negative, United. That was not to you. Not to you!

QUOTE
- Harrison, that asshole! I'll make sure every seven forty-seven leaving New York tomorrow night blows shingles off his roof!


The only problem I see with this is that some people might still want to listen to the radio. Maybe have ATC work as a separate station accessible only from aircraft and tuned to by default?

Spaghetti Cat
  • Spaghetti Cat

    I Love Pony Farming

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Jan 2009

#50

Posted 02 May 2009 - 11:57 PM

Remember in SA when planes would just spawn in mid-aid? Or worse, crash in a huge explosion while you're calmly walking down the street.

Yeah, they need to fix that.

/my 2 cents

uNi
  • uNi

    Cyclop 9

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 May 2004
  • None

#51

Posted 03 May 2009 - 01:32 AM

QUOTE (K^2 @ May 2 2009, 21:35)
The only problem I see with this is that some people might still want to listen to the radio. Maybe have ATC work as a separate station accessible only from aircraft and tuned to by default?

Shouldn't be too hard to fade the current station out, insert the ATC audio then fade the station back in.


foohy
  • foohy

    New username. Member since 11/30/'07.

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Feb 2009

#52

Posted 03 May 2009 - 07:25 PM

QUOTE (JoshGTAfreak @ Mar 18 2009, 10:13)
i don't want them to have planes it ain't grand theft aero u know.

So it's ONLY 'Grand Theft Auto' then? So you don't want guns, explosives, helicopters, or even the ability to get out of your car? sarcasm.gif Planes in GTA rock! BRING THEM BACK!

Omnia sunt Communia
  • Omnia sunt Communia

    Tierra Y Libertad

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Aug 2008
  • None

#53

Posted 03 May 2009 - 08:02 PM

QUOTE (foohy @ May 3 2009, 20:25)
QUOTE (JoshGTAfreak @ Mar 18 2009, 10:13)
i don't want them to have planes it ain't grand theft aero u know.

So it's ONLY 'Grand Theft Auto' then? So you don't want guns, explosives, helicopters, or even the ability to get out of your car? sarcasm.gif Planes in GTA rock! BRING THEM BACK!

Don't forget that Rockstar (then DMA) were originally going to call Grand Theft Auto 2 - Grievous Bodily Harm. Shows how much the name Grand Theft Auto really means to them. It's just that. A name.

K^2
  • K^2

    Vidi Vici Veni

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Apr 2004
  • United-States

#54

Posted 05 May 2009 - 07:46 PM

Wasn't GTA even supposed to be called APB at some point in development? The name comes from the era when stealing cars was so important due to the fact that it was pretty much the only way to travel the huge world of original GTA. Now, with the number of modes of transportation rapidly increasing, it's just a nod to the past.

reform
  • reform

    Beaten, battered, bruised, Told to get down

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2009

#55

Posted 05 May 2009 - 10:04 PM

QUOTE (K^2 @ May 5 2009, 19:46)
Wasn't GTA even supposed to be called APB at some point in development? The name comes from the era when stealing cars was so important due to the fact that it was pretty much the only way to travel the huge world of original GTA. Now, with the number of modes of transportation rapidly increasing, it's just a nod to the past.

Hmmm

http://en.wikipedia....PB_(video_game)

You led me to something I didn't know about. Cheers.

Melchior
  • Melchior

    come on and tell me twice

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 16 May 2009
  • United-Nations

#56

Posted 19 May 2009 - 09:24 AM

QUOTE (K^2 @ May 2 2009, 21:35)
Yeah, ATC chatter, done in the comedic sort of way, like the dispatcher chatter in the police cars, can go a long way. It should mostly sound like a serious communication between ATC and pilots, with exchange on mach number, flight level, and heading information, but with random funny things being requested or overheard. Something along the lines of the Pushing Tin quotes, perhaps.

QUOTE
- I'm personally going to see to it that you go down in flames!
- What?
- Negative, United. That was not to you. Not to you!

QUOTE
- Harrison, that asshole! I'll make sure every seven forty-seven leaving New York tomorrow night blows shingles off his roof!


The only problem I see with this is that some people might still want to listen to the radio. Maybe have ATC work as a separate station accessible only from aircraft and tuned to by default?

Ha, those made me laugh.

Anyway, some good ideas up there. Who knows where planes could go in the future of GTA...

uNi
  • uNi

    Cyclop 9

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 May 2004
  • None

#57

Posted 25 May 2009 - 07:41 AM

If the next GTA has active military aircraft would be nice having them issuing a warning first, or a wanted star until you get of that area.

K^2
  • K^2

    Vidi Vici Veni

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Apr 2004
  • United-States

#58

Posted 03 June 2009 - 12:17 AM

If you cross a border or enter a prohibited zone, you will be escorted by F16s or shot down. You won't be allowed to simply fly out. Though, normally, someone will give you a heads up as you approach such an area.

bobgtafan
  • bobgtafan

    The last thing you never see

  • Members
  • Joined: 21 Apr 2009

#59

Posted 03 July 2009 - 10:24 PM

QUOTE (K^2 @ Jun 3 2009, 00:17)
If you cross a border or enter a prohibited zone, you will be escorted by F16s or shot down. You won't be allowed to simply fly out. Though, normally, someone will give you a heads up as you approach such an area.

I like the idea of bring escrted instead of jsut shoot out the sky.

bluesboyjr
  • bluesboyjr

    Founder of the Zee Memorial Foundation

  • Members
  • Joined: 01 Jul 2009

#60

Posted 04 July 2009 - 09:59 PM

I think I know why they didn't want you to fly in GTA IV:

Someone would post a video on Youtube of Niko hijacking a 747 and crashing it into a building, "GTA IS A 9/11 SIMULATOR" would be all over the media (Liberty City is heavily based on New York), the likes of Hilary Clinton would have a field day and Rockstar would be in deeper s**t than the Hot Coffee scandal.

But in a place with large open areas like San Andreas it works well.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users