3D floors gone too far?

smg m7 · Post by **smg m7** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 2:21

Say, this sonic fangame uses the old legacy engine, but they have a ton of really neat 3D floor, plus they have/had an excellent tutorial for 3D floors. Although I'm not sure if everything here is useful, but the fog, quicksand, water/waste, and light blocks could be helpful, not to mention the 3D conveyor belts and bouncy sectors. Also, the source code is readily available, so you can go right into it.

http://www.srb2.org

Post by **solarsnowfall** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 2:36

Thx, but I understand GZDoom's 3D floor functions just fine.

smg m7 · Post by **smg m7** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 2:39

No no, I didn't mean to say it like that... Heh, sorry. (Actually, it uses the dummy sector method anyway.)

Anyway, I was just showing a place to find a tutorial. It wasn't meant for any specific person. Graf might be interested in poking around the source sode too.

Post by **Graf Zahl** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 8:17

solarsnowfall wrote:While option 2's benefits are readily apparent to me, option 1 is still a bit foggy for me (the dumb mapper) and I don't expect you to teach me. My experience using things in ZDoom that use hi/low tag arguments is limited to cameras, (not fully understanding) wich is just enough to get by.

The difference would be that option 1 uses arg1/arg5 as lo/hi tag and option 2 uses arg1/arg2 as lo/hi tag but would require a new line special. That's all.

MartinHowe · Post by **MartinHowe** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 9:14

solarsnowfall wrote:A new teleport device? A warp core from some space ship? Does this kill your machine? If you liked the "volumetric" clouds, you may wanna check this out.

Cool and no lag, no crash. (Suppose I'd better report that to ATI as a bug

)

Post by **Graf Zahl** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 9:25

Three anti-ATI posts in a few minutes. You must hate them very much!

Post by **solarsnowfall** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 10:18

MartinHowe wrote:Cool and no lag, no crash. (Suppose I'd better report that to ATI as a bug )

I knew it ran fine on my machine, as virtually every game does, but not everybody has a 64 bit system with 256 MB of 256 bit memorry for video disposal. So before I go and try to spread these mapping techniques, I want to make sure they aren't detrimental to the average OpenGL user, that's all.

As an ATI user, there is little for me to complain about.

@Graf: Either option would be preferable to the 255 limit. I guess in responding to your original question, wich option would be better, I think when it boils down to it, it's all a matter of being able to refer to accurate documentation, as you've provided thus far. Granted, I'm proud of what I've been able to do with GZDoom, it wouldn't matter to me one bit if it became obsolete to something new, that worked better, and was just as well documented. I trust you will make the prudent decision. Sorry if that doesn't help your decision making process. Idealy, any changes you'd make would be seamless, but if it's not possible, it's not possible, and you've certainly done a fine job thus far.

Lexus Alyus · Post by **Lexus Alyus** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 10:43

I'd say go for option 2... 65455 3D floors is more than enough

.

Shit Solor... that's insane man, good work

.

Post by **solarsnowfall** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 11:04

Thanks! It took a bit of creativity on my part, but in the end, all praise be to Graf!

Post by **Graf Zahl** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 11:14

Lexus Alyus wrote:I'd say go for option 2... 65455 3D floors is more than enough .

Shit Solor... that's insane man, good work .

Both options would offer 65535 tags. You'd never be able to use as much because the sector limit is unreachable. You hit other limits far earlier.

Post by **Paul** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 12:13

Graf Zahl wrote: It isn't. The oldest code in the GL renderer is 4 years old and the 3D floor stuff 3 years at most.

Funny thing, I knew You'd say that, but You know what I did mean :B

Nuxius · Post by **Nuxius** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 12:22

O.K., so I get it now:

Option A:
160 = 3D floor
arg1=lo tag
arg2=type
arg3=flag
arg4=alpha
arg5=hi tag

Option B:
new# = 3D floor
arg1=lo tag
arg2=hi tag
arg3=type
arg4=flag
arg5=alpha

Right Graf?

MartinHowe · Post by **MartinHowe** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 12:24

Graf Zahl wrote:Three anti-ATI posts in a few minutes. You must hate them very much!

I wondered when you'd notice

I can forgive the card not doing something it doesn't have the hardware to do... but not it screwing up the fog that it IS supposed to be able to do, though - that just sucks

Post by **Graf Zahl** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 12:27

Nuxius wrote:O.K., so I get it now:

Option A:
160 = 3D floor
arg1=lo tag
arg2=type
arg3=flag
arg4=alpha
arg5=hi tag

Option B:
new# = 3D floor
arg1=lo tag
arg2=hi tag
arg3=type
arg4=flag
arg5=alpha

Right Graf?

Right. I don't like to introduce a new line type just because I didn't think too far ahead but the splitting of the tag doesn't look nice. But I think I'll do A. It's a minor inconvenience at most and normaly won't be needed anyway.

Phobus · Post by **Phobus** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 19:35

wildweasel wrote:
Killmur wrote:That is like asking if Valve can make it so people can by-pass Steam when running their games.
Yes, except in this case you won't get banned if you manage to find an alternate solution.

Well I found a way to do it, thouhg it was a bit dodgy and I can't play online....

@Graf: Really this whole Tags thing would be very useful for plain Zdoom too. Perhaps it could make a feature request over there? That way you'd get the code anyway, as you are basing this on Zdoom.

DRD Team

3D floors gone too far?

Re: 3D floors gone too far?

Re: 3D floors gone too far?