Using OSM Vector Data in FlightGear: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
→‎Background: http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=16083&hilit=&start=15#p155789
m (→‎Random Buildings Scripting Interface (Hooray, Thorsten): http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=16083&hilit=random+nail+hit#p155781)
m (→‎Background: http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=16083&hilit=&start=15#p155789)
Line 3: Line 3:


The probem is that (as usual) people pull into different directions.
The probem is that (as usual) people pull into different directions.
Actually, we've seen a number of related developments - such as IntelQube's "Instant City" addon, or the more recent effort by Rickbritto. So people are clearly interested in this.
Like Thorsten also rightly pointed out, people are pulling into different directions, which are unfortunately somewhat conflicting. But overall, it's pretty obvious that people are interested in extending the scenery and populating it with buildings in particular.
Stuart has a 'random with certain moderately simple rules' algorithm with the aim to be as fast as possible without generating nonsense like overlapping or floating buildings. This probably means you can't have fancy night illumination, too much individual configuration or realistic arrangements beyond a point, and all placement info is encoded in the texture sheet (that's not a bad feature, because that means random buildings stay in sync with the underlying sheet!)
Stuart has a 'random with certain moderately simple rules' algorithm with the aim to be as fast as possible without generating nonsense like overlapping or floating buildings. This probably means you can't have fancy night illumination, too much individual configuration or realistic arrangements beyond a point, and all placement info is encoded in the texture sheet (that's not a bad feature, because that means random buildings stay in sync with the underlying sheet!)


Navigation menu