ANNOUNCEMENT - Important!

Purno · Post by **Purno** » 11 Mar 2007 14:50

Excuse me? Language barrier. I don't understand you.

Post by **uzurpator** » 11 Mar 2007 14:58

Purno wrote:Excuse me? Language barrier. I don't understand you.

Would you stand by your words and give some models - 40 or 50, form the dutch set?

Arathorn · Post by **Arathorn** » 11 Mar 2007 15:09

If someone could easily handle the conversion of those models to lower-poly ones, please do. At the moment I'm trying to figure out how to animate the planes I already made in Blender. I have two technical questions in regards of animation and the engine now:
1. I want to use two company colours for my models, one primary and one secondary colour. Can the engine automatically override default colours with colours you select for your company? For example I give an aircraft model textures with the colours x and y, is the engine capable of automatically swapping those colours by the colours a and b that the player has chosen?
2. When I make one animation (in Blender) per model, and that one animation would have all the animations necessary for that model, for example (I take planes here as an example because I'm working on those) frames 1-6 taxiing, 7-12 retracting gear etc, can the engine jump to the appropriate frame (and loop) in game?

Post by **uzurpator** » 11 Mar 2007 15:15

Arathorn wrote:1. I want to use two company colours for my models, one primary and one secondary colour. Can the engine automatically override default colours with colours you select for your company? For example I give an aircraft model textures with the colours x and y, is the engine capable of automatically swapping those colours by the colours a and b that the player has chosen?

Yes. The engine (ogre, dunno bout TROS) can do quite A LOT of post processing.

2. When I make one animation (in Blender) per model, and that one animation would have all the animations necessary for that model, for example (I take planes here as an example because I'm working on those) frames 1-6 taxiing, 7-12 retracting gear etc, can the engine jump to the appropriate frame (and loop) in game?[/quote]

Imvho - just divide the animated parts and we will do the animation in hardware.

Purno · Post by **Purno** » 11 Mar 2007 15:16

uzurpator wrote:
Purno wrote:Excuse me? Language barrier. I don't understand you.
Would you stand by your words and give some models - 40 or 50, form the dutch set?

you really need 40 or 50 right from the start? In that case, no I can't.

Post by **uzurpator** » 11 Mar 2007 15:30

Purno wrote:you really need 40 or 50 right from the start? In that case, no I can't.

Then why do you propose to throw away 50 models without providing a replacement?

Purno · Post by **Purno** » 11 Mar 2007 15:32

Because I thought someone here, perhaps Arathorn, might enjoy it to make models.

Post by **uzurpator** » 11 Mar 2007 15:35

Purno wrote:Because I thought someone here, perhaps Arathorn, might enjoy it to make models.

Who would stop him from making them, even if we had the aforementioned models?

Purno · Post by **Purno** » 11 Mar 2007 15:42

I can imagine I'd be more fun to make something new.

Anyways, this discussion is starting to get annoying and useless, lets stop it.

XeryusTC · Post by **XeryusTC** » 11 Mar 2007 17:01

Let's get models from other people first, and update them later with game optimized models.

And TRoS can't map certain colors to other colors (yet). I think it will be able to when the material engine gets in.
We can learn the engine to use skeletal animations (TRoS will support them, or already does, I don't really remember

), the same animation can be used on multiple models then (if they have the same skeleton). I don't think this would be a good thing for vehicles though so we can use keyframe animations, if there is a proper file format we can use different keyframe animations in the same file and read the correct ones out, I don't like to hardcode which frames belong to which animations though so. We could prevent that by using scripts which define where each animation starts or we could let animations start and stop at predefinied positions.

m3henry · Post by **m3henry** » 11 Mar 2007 20:10

uzurpator wrote:DISCUSSION ABOUT TRANSPORT EMPIRE ENDS NOW!

I agree, but development discussion should be allowed, as it is important because we have more than one person working on it, unlike TTDP I think.
as for models, a basic box-shape with basic colouring will do for testing, as we dont need highly complex models to see if it works.
and this is my 2 over one cents of thought, and thought only.

ISA · Post by **ISA** » 11 Mar 2007 21:26

m3henry wrote:unlike TTDP I think

Wrong!

Post by **uzurpator** » 12 Mar 2007 08:12

OK - I have made topics to submit content for variety of media needed for the game.

These topics need maintainers

I assume that Purno is responsible for the GUI and technical stuff and Arathorn for aircraft. Any takers for the rest of the stuff?

Arathorn · Post by **Arathorn** » 12 Mar 2007 08:36

I'll maintain the other 3d stuff too.

Post by **uzurpator** » 12 Mar 2007 11:32

Arathorn wrote:I'll maintain the other 3d stuff too.

Roger that.

Killer 11 · Post by **Killer 11** » 12 Mar 2007 13:03

So I guess people should contribute 3d models somewhere along the lines of detail in Warhammer 40k Dawn Of War? That kind of detail can be viewed from 1st person and it still doesn't kill performance if there's a lot of stuff everywhere.

Arathorn · Post by **Arathorn** » 12 Mar 2007 13:22

That's a good guess. I think that while you're modeling you can see for yourself whether you're getting too detailed or not.

Hyronymus · Post by **Hyronymus** » 12 Mar 2007 14:04

Let me add to this topic too and start with saying that I think starting with coding isn't bad at all. But I don't think the summary that uzurpator made of the game progress over the years is a fair one.

It indeed started in 2003 and currently we still have nothing workable. But the idea that it's all to blame to discussion is not completely fair. We did have an active coder once (rein) who then ran off and lately XeryusTC and Seniltai further developed their TRoS engine.

If I read the replies I get the feeling that the importance of having a discussion is overlooked. Without the discussions we wouldn't have a clear goal at all. I'm also worried that the Design Document will now be forgotten entirely. Nearly everyone actively involved in TE worked on the Design Document at some time in the past and uzurpator, you were one of the frequent commenters to it.

I suggest we do start coding but with some more "educated guesses" that we borrow from the latest version of the Design Document. I attached it to this post for good order. I also suggest that we use what we are offered, which means use the TRoS engine for our game. This is something we agreed upon last year and I find it too fundamental to rewind this decission.

DaleStan · Post by **DaleStan** » 23 Apr 2007 19:37

Obviously, your sarcasm detectors have overloaded. The box of replacements is over there --->

Of course, those are only the cheapo ones. Personally, I use one of those there <--- fancy double detectors. The second detector doesn't start twitching until the first overloads, but they're correspondingly more expensive, so I can't provide them for free.

OT: @Arathorn: Change the pipes in the ed2k link to "%7C"s, and phpBB will become happy again.

Arathorn · Post by **Arathorn** » 23 Apr 2007 19:53

I'm broke, but I will change the link, thank you.

Transport Tycoon Forums

ANNOUNCEMENT - Important!

Who is online