Alexander Smith Wrote:ggadwa Wrote:Alexander Smith Wrote:Brian, is there any way to add some better functionality to the portal system? I have a pretty large mesh map that I made, and it's a pain in the neck to try and cut it into a lot of pieces for the portal system. I'd very much like it if I could simply place the portals in areas where they would entirely cover some polygons, and the engine would automatically assign any polygons inside portal X to portal X, and any polygons inside portal Y to portal Y. See what I mean?
I'll add some to editor to deal with that. They will have to be separated in editor because engine wouldn't know how to properly deal with a polygon that crossed portals.
[>] Brian
Thanks. All my polygons are perfectly setup so they would NOT cross in to other portals, so it's something that would work great for me.
Also, when libary objects are imported into the Editor, are they imported on a uniform scale? Because I don't want my map getting stretched in any way, and it would be nice just to have a uniform scale option, instead of any kind of XYZ size only.
They should be, that's something I worked out with Bink a while back to get his stuff importing properly. I'm close on this new rendering, since I'm breaking everything as is, I might as well look at some portal stuff as that's the other confusing part of dim3. I can't really get rid of them but if people do maps in a certain way, I might be able to substitute. Not sure, it's something I'm looking into.
[>] Brian
Brian, another weird bug.
Make an object with contact set to FALSE (script, don't know if it works with scenery), and put the player spawn spot 5-10 feet above it. When the player falls he will land ONTOP of the object, not falling through it. If you move of of it you cannot get back on, and you can walk through it as usual.
[EDIT]Oh, and make sure you fix duplicating in the editor.
[EDIT2]obj.model.animation.fade isn't in the docs
Progress has been very very very sloooowww. I've got way to many open things right now so I keep catching bugs in the collision rewrite when I'm trying to do the rendering rewrite
Though, I have to say, the mesh rewrite went off fairly well, nothing bad broke and it happened relatively quickly. Hopefully I can get back to a once a week beta schedule (after this one) to just fix the volumes of bugs I haven't gotten to.
My thought process is -- I'm breaking everything -- so I might as well FIX everything while I'm at it.
[>] Brian
No rush please. Take your time, I don't think any of us is in a big hurry, and I would really like to have as many new fixes and features in this next release as possible.
ccccc Wrote:Brian, if you make a script object in the editor and put the word "scenery" ANYWHERE in the type, the object never loads. Weird... It doesn't really matter, but some people won't be able to figure out why half their objects aren't showing up. xD
[EDIT]Hey Brian, could you up the limit on objects in the editor? I'm making a forest map and need more trees. :|
You should change something in the course script. It handles attaching the scripts to the spots, and now, it only does that for bots and objects. Edit it like this:
Code:
function mapConstruct(course)
{
var i,cnt,name,type;
// setup camera
camera.setting.type=DIM3_CAMERA_TYPE_FPP;
// query spots to attach objects
cnt=map.spot.count;
for (i=0;i!=cnt;i++) {
name=map.spot.getName(i);
type=map.spot.getType(i);
if ((type=='Object') || (type=='Bot')) {
map.spot.attachObject(i,name,type,map.spot.getScript(i),map.spot.getParameter(i));
}
}
}
becomes
Code:
function mapConstruct(course)
{
var i,cnt,name,type;
// setup camera
camera.setting.type=DIM3_CAMERA_TYPE_FPP;
// query spots to attach objects
cnt=map.spot.count;
for (i=0;i!=cnt;i++) {
name=map.spot.getName(i);
type=map.spot.getType(i);
if ((type=='Object') || (type=='Bot') || (type=='Scenery')) {
map.spot.attachObject(i,name,type,map.spot.getScript(i),map.spot.getParameter(i));
}
}
}
See the difference?
Thank you, I forgot about that part. xD
OK, here's my current path:
1) Next beta will have the new rendering code and hopefully a lot of fixes (not all, obviously), some new scripting stuff, and fixes to the interface scaling problems (this is a big one, the interface does not scale properly in a number of places.)
2) After that, I want to do a test to see how well I can get along without the portals. It might not work -- but right now the portals add a layer of complication when importing large maps. Portals add a lot to the speed, but I can also get some of that out by properly treating the meshes as separate units, but that would mean that you'd have to be careful how you compose maps. Again, not sure, it's something I want to try.
3) After that (if it works), I want to work on some optimizations.
4) After that, just bug fixes and code clean-up, and fix the remaining problems.
If this all goes off, we should all have a very modern engine that should be very open and very easy to work with.
[>] Brian
You could almost call this v3.0, lol. :P
I'm looking forward to this.
Brian: I think you should keep portals but have another 2 modes, one for dragging portals by themselves, one for dragging portals with the pieces in them. This way you could import the map, then drop portals onto it. Dunno what you would do about pieces that are in 2 portals at once, could you just leave them and treat them as if they were in both?
New version out, this'll be a test of the new rendering code. Move to the new thread I started as this one is getting long in the tooth
[>] Brian