Jump to content

DCS Mods structure : How to create your plugin from scratch


Recommended Posts

Don't worry, everything work and cool, just use this row:

fileMenuName = _("Hornet"),

in entry.lua

Atop the midnight tarmac,

a metal beast awaits.

To be flown below the radar,

to bring the enemy his fate.

 

HAVE A BANDIT DAY !

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

"When I'm working on a problem, I never think about beauty. I think only how to solve the problem. But when I have finished, if the solution is not beautiful, I know it is wrong." - R. Buckminster Fuller (1895 - 1983), American Architect, Author, Designer, Inventor, and Futurist

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure what you're talking about, HJ. Just to be sure, I added that line-- but to no effect.

 

Ok, Aaron ! Check your dcs.log and me.log in your "your name"\Saved Games\DCS\Logs folder.

Where R errors ?

Probably near end of files with name of your aircraft.

Atop the midnight tarmac,

a metal beast awaits.

To be flown below the radar,

to bring the enemy his fate.

 

HAVE A BANDIT DAY !

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

"When I'm working on a problem, I never think about beauty. I think only how to solve the problem. But when I have finished, if the solution is not beautiful, I know it is wrong." - R. Buckminster Fuller (1895 - 1983), American Architect, Author, Designer, Inventor, and Futurist

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we're not understanding each other! :) I have no aircraft name related errors in my dcs.log... my aircraft loads just fine using the name "Hornet."

 

I'm just interested in being able to use the name "F/A-18C" instead of "Hornet..." but it doesn't seem to work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we're not understanding each other! :) I have no aircraft name related errors in my dcs.log... my aircraft loads just fine using the name "Hornet."

 

I'm just interested in being able to use the name "F/A-18C" instead of "Hornet..." but it doesn't seem to work.

 

:megalol: oh, yes we do

So, you cannot use "/" sign in name of folders: this is a Windows restriction

4xmpl:

fileMenuName = _("FA-18D"),

InputProfiles =

{

["f-18d"] = current_mod_path .. '/Input/f-18d',

since LOMAC planetable.sht also not use "/" sign in plane names

 

 

but you can use in DCS names (this will show ingame > DisplayName )

4xmpl:

 

declare_plugin("F/A-18D by Someone",

LogBook =

... name = _("F/A-18D"),

... type = "F/A-18D",

make_flyable('F/A-18D')

Name = 'F/A-18D',

DisplayName = _('F/A-18D'),

return plane( "F/A-18D", _("F/A-18D"),

 

so, you can use the name "F/A-18C" ingame (in logbook too)

old screenshot - i did not deal with icons

(5t9th VAB made by Ducky)

screen120819072840.png


Edited by HungaroJET

Atop the midnight tarmac,

a metal beast awaits.

To be flown below the radar,

to bring the enemy his fate.

 

HAVE A BANDIT DAY !

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

"When I'm working on a problem, I never think about beauty. I think only how to solve the problem. But when I have finished, if the solution is not beautiful, I know it is wrong." - R. Buckminster Fuller (1895 - 1983), American Architect, Author, Designer, Inventor, and Futurist

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having a proposition, maybe this looks like Cap Obvious speech, but anyway.

 

As I can see now, VEAO and VPJT is most skilled and actively 3rd party devs team.

Don`t you want to make more less readable ("watchable") SDK? I mean to make some summary document where is different forum-posts will be collected together. Maybe some short video tutorials "How to": button, gauge, system connection etc.

First this is nice for beginners and of course for ourselves to not forget what and how to do.

I am not 3rd party dev now, but hope will be soon, generally now I working on my 3d model. In ~September I can make tutorial how to make working button, 2 position-switch with 3ds Max, lua, and game screenshots. Like I did in russian forum - http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1527361&postcount=16 Actualy in russian forum nothing to do. There is no one interested in 3rd party module creation, I don`t know why...

I can make video also but without commenting it due to language barrier.

I think would be nice if we share our results and knowledge to each other.

One of the important thing now I think is how to defense code by using dll connection.

 

Thanks

 

UPD. I am agree knowledge is private, but we can share at least principles how-to.


Edited by BR=55=Sevas
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, knowledge is private when it comes to some things, but there are a few how-to style topics in the private 3rd party devs forum that were created when people asked for helped. While it has gone quiet for now, the old messages are sufficient to get someone started on a module.

 

However, there is a reason that information remains in private forums and has not been open for all to see. 3rd party developers need to know this information, but it isn't crucial that it is available to everyone at this point. I don't know what ED's plans are for future 3rd party development and whether they will open it up to those not wanting to create full products for the community or not.

 

As far as creating formal documentation in the form of tutorials and videos, these do not exist, as they are very time consuming to produce. If someone wanted to spend the time to document these processes, it would surely help out, but there is a LOT of information to pass on from one person to another and it takes time to learn these things, especially if a developer is moving from another sim over to this platform. VEAO, beczl, and ourselves have been fortunate to have many many years of previous LOMAC/DCS modding experience. We are not opposed to passing on some of this knowledge to other developers, but 3rd party development hasn't really reached that stage, yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Eagle! Totally agree. I didn't know about private threads.

I just think that "information vacuum" is biggest obstacle for newbie modders and their motivation. Now for starting creation any vehicle need to search much threads and posts, but maybe its good, cause its like filtering of possibly low quality mods.

Well, all I need now is accelerate my work and then I`ll get answers for my questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An actual step-by-step tutorial is not only time consuming to make(diverting time away from projects) , but also inevitably comes with the "moral" obligation to follow up with assistance when someone runs into problems when following it. So I can I understand why individual 3rd party developers might be reluctant to make such tutorials.

 

But I don't see any reason why general know-how needs to be secret or why "how-to" subjects should be scattered all over the forum or kept inside closed forum sections - this very thread(and forum section actually) also seems to contradict that notion.

 

Nor do I see why anyone with a mod project needs to be granted "3rd party developer" status to be privy to documentation in regards to how the sim works. As I understand it, such a status is only necessary for developers who intend to charge for their work and as such become subject to quality control by Eagle.

 

One thing is to have the skills for making a quality mod - another is to see it through. As is evident to anyone reading the forum, there are many announced mod projects that have stalled due to time constraints on the part of the authors - this might be less of an issue for "professional" mod teams, but at the end of the day there is no guarentee that even the most dedicated and well funded teams won't run aground for one reason or another.

 

Lack of information does not help to prevent "low quality mods" - quite the contrary. If anything more open access might actaully provide Eagle with a better outset to judge the skill level as well as the prospect of completing a project when a person/team applies for 3rd party dev status - i.e the more functional contents you can present and the more progressed the project, the better the basis for evaluation.

JJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nor do I see why anyone with a mod project needs to be granted "3rd party developer" status to be privy to documentation in regards to how the sim works. As I understand it, such a status is only necessary for developers who intend to charge for their work and as such become subject to quality control by Eagle.

 

 

In some ways it may be in ED's best interest to keep things somewhat private. In the long run, the ability for someone to make a flyable aircraft available for free would not be good for ED. World is free and if free aircraft become too readily available there become less of a need for someone to buy an ED product.

ASUS ROG Maximus VIII Hero, i7-6700K, Noctua NH-D14 Cooler, Crucial 32GB DDR4 2133, Samsung 950 Pro NVMe 256GB, Samsung EVO 250GB & 500GB SSD, 2TB Caviar Black, Zotac GTX 1080 AMP! Extreme 8GB, Corsair HX1000i, Phillips BDM4065UC 40" 4k monitor, VX2258 TouchScreen, TIR 5 w/ProClip, TM Warthog, VKB Gladiator Pro, Saitek X56, et. al., MFG Crosswind Pedals #1199, VolairSim Pit, Rift CV1 :thumbup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In some ways it may be in ED's best interest to keep things somewhat private. In the long run, the ability for someone to make a flyable aircraft available for free would not be good for ED. World is free and if free aircraft become too readily available there become less of a need for someone to buy an ED product.

 

I don't agree with that argument cichlidfan - given the level of work required for a decent flyable aircraft mod, I don't think there is much risk of DCS World being flooded with free ones....and if they aren't "decent" then they would hardly be a threat to pay-ware ones that are :) .

JJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't agree with that argument cichlidfan - given the level of work required for a decent flyable aircraft mod, I don't think there is much risk of DCS World being flooded with free ones....and if they aren't "decent" then they would hardly be a threat to pay-ware ones that are :) .

 

I would not be so sure about that. It would seem that FC level aircraft are quite popular and quite doable. It also does not take a 'flood' to have a significant impact on already slim profit margins from a fairly small user base.

ASUS ROG Maximus VIII Hero, i7-6700K, Noctua NH-D14 Cooler, Crucial 32GB DDR4 2133, Samsung 950 Pro NVMe 256GB, Samsung EVO 250GB & 500GB SSD, 2TB Caviar Black, Zotac GTX 1080 AMP! Extreme 8GB, Corsair HX1000i, Phillips BDM4065UC 40" 4k monitor, VX2258 TouchScreen, TIR 5 w/ProClip, TM Warthog, VKB Gladiator Pro, Saitek X56, et. al., MFG Crosswind Pedals #1199, VolairSim Pit, Rift CV1 :thumbup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lack of information does not help to prevent "low quality mods" - quite the contrary.

 

I think you're wrong. This may sound rude but hear me out... Lack of information discourages those who would not be willing to put out the effort to create quality work. Those who would fight through and make things work via skill and brute force are the ones who will do good work. The people who throw up their hands and start pleading for help at the first sign of trouble aren't dedicated enough to get the job done.

 

Let's not pretend this stuff doesn't take some skill with computers, either. A lot of the information/tools available for modding in ED's sims are either poorly documented or not at all. Open the doors too wide, and you'll just get every Joe without an ounce of know-how who is asking too many questions and showing little for it.

 

Sounds bitter and callous but all that to say I think ED's conservative approach has its merits.


Edited by aaron886
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I second aaron886's comments. Developing a sim of any accuracy requires more than an API from ED. Even we 3rd party devs get minimal help - we are expected to figure out what we are given 95% of the time.

 

ED will say "use this" - after that it is up to us to figure it out. It is not for the faint-hearted either - it requires serious engineering and mathematical knowledge to produce a complete simulation of DCS standards (or higher, if you are that way inclined).

 

Best regards,

Tango.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would not be so sure about that. It would seem that FC level aircraft are quite popular and quite doable. It also does not take a 'flood' to have a significant impact on already slim profit margins from a fairly small user base.

 

I don't see how e.g. a free "FC level" F-18 mod would be a serious commercial threat to an official DCS level release from ED for the same aircraft.

 

If you look at it from that perspective, then "semi-DCS level" stuff from 3rd party developers would seem to be a much bigger concern - partly because it is pay-ware and partly because the fidelity level between FC and DCS becomes less distinct.

JJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you're wrong. This may sound rude but hear me out... Lack of information discourages those who would not be willing to put out the effort to create quality work. Those who would fight through and make things work via skill and brute force are the ones who will do good work. The people who throw up their hands and start pleading for help at the first sign of trouble aren't dedicated enough to get the job done.Let's not pretend this stuff doesn't take some skill with computers, either. A lot of the information/tools available for modding in ED's sims are either poorly documented or not at all. Open the doors too wide, and you'll just get every Joe without an ounce of know-how who is asking too many questions and showing little for it

 

Well in my humble opinion thats an idiotic notion - there is a difference between having the necessary information available and having the tenasity to figure out how to use it.

JJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I second aaron886's comments. Developing a sim of any accuracy requires more than an API from ED. Even we 3rd party devs get minimal help - we are expected to figure out what we are given 95% of the time.

 

ED will say "use this" - after that it is up to us to figure it out. It is not for the faint-hearted either - it requires serious engineering and mathematical knowledge to produce a complete simulation of DCS standards (or higher, if you are that way inclined).

 

Exactly, so what? - are you saying that the rest of the community aren't willing to put up with these conditions(as if it was something new) and therefore shouldn't even attempt to make mods?

 

I may no understand the point you guys are trying to make, but it all sounds pretty arrogant to me.

JJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team

This stuff is very difficult to figure out, I am working at understanding it all, and with that I hope a mod cleans up this thread, because its supposed to be about Mods Structure, not the merits of different fidelity levels of add-ons ;)

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...