Just wondering when there might be some more progress on MSTS style cam configuration for ORTS using the Cam.dat file?
Robert
Page 1 of 1
Time frame for Cam.dat implementation?
#2
Posted 18 October 2017 - 12:41 PM
Chris Jakeman says he is working on an enhanced camera configuration that should really open things up.
Between 2010 and the present I've posted 28 times advocating the development of Camera Sets -- essentially multiple camfig files that a user can switch between while running a route where both sets could each have as many as 10 cameras defined.
I wrote this 3 years ago and it outlines a few key points:
IOW if you want to define 10 tracking cameras you can. If you want those camera definitions to be near ground level and the same configuration set 30m higher you can have both; You could repeat all those positions but change the basic operation to be like the current f4 camera... and you could switch between those 4 sets whenever you wanted. That's potentially 40 different camera positions and behavior definitions.
There is an expectation that one set will match the standard MSTS specifications so if people only want to use the familiar they can.
This post from 4 years ago includes some images as examples.
Between 2010 and the present I've posted 28 times advocating the development of Camera Sets -- essentially multiple camfig files that a user can switch between while running a route where both sets could each have as many as 10 cameras defined.
I wrote this 3 years ago and it outlines a few key points:
- Multiple sets of camfigs each defining 1-10 cameras.
- User can change from one camfig / camera set to another in-game.
- Route specific camfig / camera sets.
- Addition of ramp up/down movement, meaning start slow, increase speed to max, finish by slowing down.
IOW if you want to define 10 tracking cameras you can. If you want those camera definitions to be near ground level and the same configuration set 30m higher you can have both; You could repeat all those positions but change the basic operation to be like the current f4 camera... and you could switch between those 4 sets whenever you wanted. That's potentially 40 different camera positions and behavior definitions.
There is an expectation that one set will match the standard MSTS specifications so if people only want to use the familiar they can.
This post from 4 years ago includes some images as examples.
#3
Posted 21 October 2017 - 10:13 PM
An option to center the camera on the target car/locomotive would be nice. The current forward coupler/aft coupler setup is excruciatingly annoying.
Page 1 of 1