An Interview with Scot Bayless of Sierra on Aces: X Fighters - Page 1/1
Created on 2005-01-07
Title: An Interview with Scot Bayless of Sierra on Aces: X Fighters By: Author Unknown Date: August 30th, 1997 875 Flashback:Orig. Multipage Version Hard Copy:Printer Friendly
Click the image for a larger shot..
Aces: X Fighters is one of the interesting prop sims on the
horizon for this fall. Likely you've already read a preview
in Computer Gaming World or somewhere on the net. This sim
is looking hot! I know, you hear that often, but perhaps
that is because the level of complexity and detail in so
many sims this year has achieved new heights.
Remember too that Dynamix has been "part of the Sierra
Family" since just after Red Baron. Dynamix was responsible
for Aces of the Pacific, the 1946 add-on, and Aces Over
Europe, so they are far from newcomers to this field. The
programmer who is doing the flight model for Aces:XF work,
was the flight model programmer for AOE and worked on the
original conversion of the Red Baron Flight model to AOTP.
Recently we had a chance to talk to the producer about this
sim. Here is the result:
CSim: Scot, the life of a sim producer is a busy and
stressful one. I bet you don't fly on the PC much for
fun....What do you do when you need a break?
Scot: A fine question. I guess it depends mostly on what
time of day we're talking about. I'm an early riser, so the
4:30 to 6:30AM slot is usually my game time. I've been
playing a bit of everything lately - from Warbirds (t_rex)
and a little of Jane's Long bow to Diablo, MOO2, History of
the World, Dungeon Master and a sprinkling of old Sid Meier
favorites.
Other times, it's usually golf or playing with my 9 month
old son who's by far the most entertaining hobby I've
found.
Csim: What is your role in the production of Aces: X
Fighters?
Scot: In a nutshell, I'm the guy who has to make the tough
calls. We've got an outstanding team on this gig. They
don't need to have their hands held on the day-to-day
stuff. Now that we're in full production, mostly what I do
is play "keeper of the vision" to help the team stay
focused on what makes X-Fighters special - and fun.
Csim: Give us some background, how did this project get
started?
Scot: I left Sega in late 1994 to partner with a couple of
industry veterans who'd opened a small development house in
Oregon. After two years there, it was clear that things
weren't working out the way we'd all hoped and I was
looking around for other opportunities.
I was considering a couple of executive positions in the
Bay Area when, pretty much out of the blue, my brother
Graeme called me to let me know that Dynamix was looking
for directors. After five minutes with Jeff Tunnell and
Randy Dersham I knew I'd found a home. The chemistry was
astounding. We were literally brainstorming projects in the
interview.
X-Fighters was one of three or four ideas I threw at them
in the course of that discussion. I said something like,
"You've got this awesome sim engine. You've got one of the
most flexible flight models around. Why not give people a
chance to fly all those really cool planes from WWII that
nobody ever puts in a sim?" I remember Randy's eyes kind of
lighting up as I said it.
That was almost exactly a year ago and three weeks later I
was sitting in my office at Dynamix, working on the
preliminary design doc for X-Fighters.
Csim: Do you have a favorite WWII sim on the PC, and why?
Scot: Two part answer:
"Their Finest Hour" for pretty much the same reasons that
CGW put it in their Hall of Fame. It broke new ground
technologically, creating a more immersive air combat sim
than anyone had ever done before, but more importantly, it
was just plain fun to fly.
"Warbirds" because it effectively re-invented the WWII air
combat sim as a huge multiplayer experience. There's a
culture growing up around the game that I think a lot of
people may have vaguely anticipated, but the ICI guys
actually revealed. My hat's off to them.
A nice cockpit shot...
Csim: Can you tell us something about the design goals of
Aces:XF?
Scot: X-Fighters has three goals:
1) Give players a fresh perspective on one of the most
amazing periods in aviation history. Think about it.
Between 1936 and 1945 aviation went from 150hp piston
engines, doped canvas and .30 cal machine guns to 2000lb
thrust axial flow jets, stressed aluminum laminar flow
wings and guided missiles. I still get kind of starry-eyed
when I think about it.
2) Give players a chance to find out for themselves whether
all those legendary exotic planes that nearly made it into
the war were really what they were cracked up to be.
Imagine what it'll be like to put a P-80 up against the Go
229.
3) (and this is really the big one) Give players the chance
to make their own design decisions and then try their
handiwork out against other pilots. You're a boom 'n zoom
fan? No problem. Slam a couple of high powered turboprops
in your P-38 airframe, load that baby up with 20mm cannons
and go hunting bear. Just watch your airspeed...
Csim: What areas in Aces are ground breaking?
Scot: The obvious answer is the aircraft design component
of the game. It's something nobody's really tried in a WWII
air combat sim. It's one thing to offer vehicle design in a
fictional context where internal consistency and game
balance are the only issues you have to deal with. Doing
the same thing in a well documented historical situation is
far more challenging. We've put tremendous effort into
researching the technologies of the period and their
effects on the flight and combat characteristics of the
planes that used them.
The somewhat subtler answer has to do with the technology
behind the game. Aces: the X-Fighters uses Dynamix's newest
sim engine, the one being used to develop "Earthsiege 3"
and "Fear". It's 3D card support, multiplayer capabilites
and tremendously flexible open architecture put it far
ahead of anything else I've seen.
Csim: What aircraft will we be flying?
Scot: As you might imagine, the list is still a bit fluid,
so forgive me if I don't give you a definitive answer. I
can say, though, that, in addition to the usual complement
of well known fighters, the list of player flyable
airframes will definitely include the following:
USAAF
Curtis P55 Ascender
Northrop P56 Black Bullet
Lockheed P80 Shooting Star
RAF
Gloster Meteor
de Havilland Vampire
Luftwaffe
Focke Wulf Ta 152
Gotha Go 229
Dornier Do 335
Heinkel He 162
Heinkel He 178
Csim: X Fighters seems to be an interesting mix of history
and "what if?" Tell us about the "what if" factor and how
its modelled in the sim.
Scot: This has been simultaneously the most exciting and
most difficult part of the project. Starting with the
Sierra ProPilot flight model, which was exceptionally
robust to begin with, we've gone far beyond what it was
originally designed to do. We've had to literally rewrite
parts of the model in order to extend its already
considerable dynamic range.
We're also making a deliberate choice in the aircraft
designer portion of the game to couch the player's
understanding of the predicted performance of a design in
the knowledge of the period. All of the predictive
computations are based on Von Mises' landmark text from
1936. This book was actually a classified document under
the 3rd Reich and represented the state of the art in
aeronautical engineering at the time.
That's the good news. The bad news is that Von Mises wasn't
always right. There were aspects of fluid dynamics that
were poorly understood in the 30's and 40's and made for
some unexpected behaviors when planes went from the drawing
board to the wind tunnel. In game terms, the net effect of
this is that the player will need to develop, through
experience, an intuitive sense of how to "read" the
performance predictions.
The other aspect of "what if" has to do with the course of
the war. One of the things I've always found frustrating
about slavishly accurate historical simulations is the
sense that, no matter what I do, things will come out the
same in the end. While this may be true in the real world,
it doesn't necessarily make for a good game.
What we do in X-Fighters is steer the war on the basis of
your squadron's performance. If you make a strong showing
for the RAF in 1940, you'll see victory in the Battle of
Britain and find yourself contributing to the Allied
bombing campaign over Europe. Blow it, and you'll be
intercepting ground attack missions and strafing landing
craft in Operation Sea Lion. X-Fighters isn't so much about
recreation of historical events as it is a recreation of
historical conditions. What happens after that is up to
you...
Csim: Will X Fighters use the RBII engine or has a new
engine been developed? What about 3d hardware?
Scot: X-Fighters is based on our newest sim engine (see
above) and, yes, we do offer native support for the most
popular 3D chipsets. Performance is awesome. As long as
we're not blowing the texture cache, we can push tremendous
frame rates on fast chipsets like the 3DFX.
Csim: What level of detail will we see in the terrain and
ground objects?
Scot: This is always a tough one to answer because there
are so many axes to the question. The short answer, though,
is that we're modeling a huge chunk of the Western Front
(from just east of Penzance to just east of Berlin and just
north of Dijon to just south of Odense) on 128 meter
intervals. We're using mip-mapped, lit, shaded, textured
terrain with a highest level of detail that give us a
resolution of 1/2 meter per pixel. Ground objects are
textured at considerably higher detail.
The effect of this is extraordinary. When you're flying
down in the mud, you can actually "see" how high you are
above the ground. I think this is the first time I've ever
been able to fly within 50 feet of the dirt without having
to watch my altimeter constantly.
Csim: What level of detailing will we see in avionics? For
example, will prop pitch be adjustable in the appropriate
aircraft?
Scot: From the outset, one of our secondary design goals
has been to give players the most realistic cockpits anyone
has ever seen in a WWII flight sim. The cockpits are 3D
objects that include the wings and other visible surfaces
of the aircraft. The instruments have been carefully
researched and, to the extent possible, accurately reflect
the performance and capabilities of the real thing.
This kind of cuts both ways, though. For example, many of
the earlier fighters didn't have an artificial horizon.
They used separate pitch, heading and roll indicators. In
X-Fighters, that's what you'll see.
As to controlling the pitch of your prop, it turns out that
virtually all of the propeller-driven aircraft in use by
1940 used constant speed props. Pilots typically had very
little direct control of pitch and, partly as a concession
to game play, we decided to model all props as constant
speed.
Csim: How advanced is the flight modelling?
Scot: We've got some pretty savvy aviation guys here. Our
principal flight model engineer did the flight models for
both "Aces Over the Pacific" and "Aces Over Europe". The
ProPilot flight model is a major update of the flight model
developed by Sublogic for their line of civilian flight
sims, a model that's been respected for years for its
fidelity. In short, our model's as accurate as we know how
to make it.
I think, however, that a lot of inexperienced players will
be surprised at how twitchy some of these planes are. For
years, flight sims have trained people to think of high
performance WWII fighters as kind of "air cars" that you
just point at a target.
In truth, they were far more demanding than that. Every
airframe had its own quirks and instabilities and
X-Fighters will reflect that (assuming you have all the
realism settings turned on).
Csim: Will the AI pilots use the same flight model as the
virtual pilot?
Scot: Yes they will and there are some other things we're
doing with the AI that I think will surprise a lot of
people. Because of the huge variety of airframes and
configurations in the game, we couldn't use the traditional
approach of writing specific AI for each plane. Instead,
we're using techniques that are still hot news in the
academic community. Hint: check out
Carnegie-Mellon's website.
Csim: Physics modelling is another area where technology is
improving, and Activision/Parsoft have done some great work
there. What will Aces give us in this area?
Scot: Aside from real projectile physics, ground physics,
low altitude turbulence, foggy clouds, real flight model
effects of damage, real weapon penetration and damage
effects, debris from damaged aircraft, highly realistic
visual and fatigue effects of extended periods at high g's?
Hmmm... not much. ;)
Csim: Other than suspension of disbelief the area that
keeps virtual pilots coming back for more is identifying
with the pilots they fly. How will X Fighters involve the
player personally?
Scot: In X-Fighters campaign, you're a squadron commander.
You fly with your boys, mission after mission, watching
them learn to survive or watching them make the mistake
that kills them. They have faces and names. They have
unique skills and styles of combat. They learn from their
errors and improve over time. You're responsible for
assigning them their positions in the squadron, for
decorating them, for promoting them, for replacing them
when they're killed.
Obviously, this is a bit of a departure from the typical
"player as one of the rank and file" approach. We felt very
strongly that the interplay of resources and technology
with the skill and daring of individual pilots was brought
much more sharply into focus by casting the player in the
role of commander. It's a hard job, but a compelling one.
Csim: An aircraft designer module is bound to add loads of
interest and entertainment value. Tell us more about this
feature in X Fighters?
Scot: In short, the designer lets you make the high level
decisions that real aircraft designers were faced with.
What kind of airframe do we use? What skin do we put on it?
How rugged should it be? How many hardpoints should it
have? What kind of propulsion should we use? How much fuel?
What kind of weapons? Where should we mount them? How much
ammo? Self-sealing fuel tanks? Non-strategic materials?
The list is a long one and the number of possible choices
is astronomical. We don't burden the player with arcane
engineering issues like propeller geometery, but we give
him more than enough flexibility to pursue his personal
philosophy of air combat. Whether you're into heavily
armored gun platforms or supremely agile eggshells, you can
put your personal theories to the test.
Csim: The designer feature is integrated with the pilots
performance in the sim. How is this implemented?
Scot: The currency you use in the campaign is "influence".
Put simply, it's a measure of how Fighter Command rates
your squadron's performance and virtually everything you do
in command of your squadron costs you some of that
influence. Requisitioning a new pilot, replacing a pilot
you don't like, decorating a pilot (which then earns you a
little extra influence each week), repairing planes,
replacing planes, recommending changes in air doctrine all
come with some influence cost. In short, you earn influence
by flying successful missions and spend it keeping yourself
and your pilots in the air.
In the campaign, the designer is available at any time. You
can design whatever you like, whenever you like, but to be
able to *implement* a design, you need to accumulate enough
influence with Fighter Command to get them to build what
you've cooked up. The influence cost of pitching a design
to the big boys depends on the newness of the technologies
and components it uses as well as the simple quantities of
those components.
The net effect of all this is that simple mods like
switching a couple of MG's for cannons or moving up to a
slightly more powerful engine can be really easy to get
approved, but talking Fighter Command into building a new
fighter based on a recently developed airframe loaded with
the very latest jet engines and brace of brand new 55mm
guns is likely to take every last bit of pull you've got!
Csim: Will virtual pilots be able to share the aircraft
they create with others?
Scot: Yep. We're externalizing aircraft designs so you can
move them around as you see fit. Of course, *I'm* not
giving away my pet designs...
Csim: Integration of the ground war with the air war adds a
lot of depth to the newer simulations. What approach have
you taken in this area?
Scot: In X-Fighters, the ground war is definitely there,
but it's always treated as a context for the Air War,
rather than something you interact with in any intimate
way. The types of mission you fly and the construction of
those missions is dependent both on the state of the ground
war and on the air doctrine in effect on both sides of the
conflict at the time. For example, if your side's air
doctrine is focused on tactical bombing and the other side
is big on air superiority and you're currently supporting
the defense of Germany, you're going to draw a lot of close
support missions in the Rhineland opposed by sweeps and
intercepts.
Csim: Can you tell us about the command structure for a
squadron leader? Will we be able to use the radio when that
technology is developed during the course of the war? How
much control will the squadron leader have over his flight?
Scot: One of the things that sets X-Fighters apart is the
degree to which you interact with your squadron mates. You
issue commands to pilots with simple key-based commands,
but what you'll hear is your voice issuing a verbal order
to the pilot(s) in question.
The granularity of your command over the squadron is at the
section level. This is a bit of a fiction since the Germans
used a 3 plane kette, but we decided that for game play
purposes it made sense to standardize.
Csim: How will a pilot become a squadron leader? Once
achieved, will we also have the ability to structure or
plan our flights?
Scot: In the original spec for X-Fighters, we'd planned to
let you grow into the role of squadron commander, but we
eventually realized that by doing so we deprived you of one
of the most interesting parts of the game until you were
halfway through the war. So now you start the game in
command of the squadron and have responsibility for
everthing from training pilots to supplying aircraft to
recommending theater wide changes in air doctrine.
Csim: Will we see a wind model in the sim?
Scot: Yep. Wind and turbulence are both modeled. We still
haven't decided whether we'll include vortex effects from
heavies, though I suspect they'll be there.
Csim: How will new technologies impact X Fighters? Will we
see surround sound, force feedback, support for vr
headsets?
Scot: Some of this is still up in the air. The big issue
here is schedule hit vs impact on the player community. If
I had infinite resources at my disposal, we'd support every
I/O device known to man, but I don't. We'll probably
support the major force feedback sticks. Headsets and
surround sound? We'll see.
Csim: What can we expect for later add on scenarios?
Scot: This really depends on a lot of things I can't
predict right now, but I hope to see at least an eastern
front add on. One of the things we discovered in the course
of our research for X-Fighters is the fact that the
Russians were very much at the forefront of aviation in the
late 30's. If a few decisions had gone differently we might
well have seen Soviet domination of the air very early on.
I'd love to explore that.
Csim: Janes and iMagic have begun shipping their sims with
spiral bound manuals, a BIG improvement in my mind. Will we
see this trend with Sierra also?
Scot: Don't know yet. It's something I really want to do,
but there's some really cool stuff I want to include in the
manual that I'd even sacrifice a spiral binding to keep.
Guess we'll see...
Csim: What do you feel is the coolest feature of X
Fighters?
Scot: For me, it's unquestionably the notion of, "I build a
plane. You build a plane. We get up to 10,000 ft and find
out who the big dog is." Looks like a lot of people here at
Dynamix agree, they keep stopping me in the hallway and
asking me when they can start blasting each other on the
local net.
Csim: If you had all the time and talent in the world, what
would you do when Aces: XF is complete?
Scot: Already working on it. I hate being mysterious, but
all I can really say at this point is that it's very cool,
uses our 3D technology in some pretty ambitious ways,
explores an area of serious simulation that's been largely
ignored and offers lots of opportunities for deep play and
personal engagement. This one's gonna take a while though,
so don't expect to see it right on the heels of X-Fighters.
Csim: Sounds cool.. geez, I hate mysteries! So how soon can
we expect to see Aces:XF?
Scot: For mostly strategic reasons, we recently moved the
ship date out to the first quarter of next year.
Csim: Aaarrgh! Ah well.. thanks Scot, and best of luck!!
Scot: You're more than welcome. And feel free to pass on
this e-mail address to your readers. The team would love to
hear what they have to say.