null texture?

Loey

with all the fancy 3d walls and props, navigating the walls and ceilings as a skulk looks like it will be pretty hard. will there be a something equivalent of a null texture that allows mappers to create a flat invisible face that skulks can stick to so they dont get stuck on architecture?

Serotriptomine

I would want to assume so. Or all of these cave maps you see being made will have skulks being stuck every half inch they move.

Pipi

This would be too complicated for mappers.

I'm sure they have thought of this already. Skulks' wall walking will surely adapt to a certain elevation of the terrain.

pSyk0mAn

What you mean is the clip-texture and I'm sure something like this will be added, because there will always be a need to direct/block player movement.

But I agree with Pipi that most part of the map and the usual complex shapes should be handled by movement code or some kind of autogenerated collision hull, because that would save a lot of work.

Dalin Seivewright

All of the models, complex or not, will most likely have their own collision hulls. This means that the rocky surfaces you might see aren't the actual surfaces that the Skulks would be climbing on and there is an invisible simplified collision model that you do not see but is used for calculating collision.

An example: <a href="http://www.odedge.com/assets/images/autogen/a_optimize_collision_hull_02.jpg" target="_blank">http://www.odedge.com/assets/images/autoge...ion_hull_02.jpg</a>

If you were to walk on that set of stairs in the game, it would appear that you were doing so but in fact, you would be walking on the invisible ramp (the red brush). Anyways, the collision hulls would probably already exist so not much level designer interaction would be needed. This is all just speculation though but I think its pretty much what all the major engines are doing right now.

Loey

<!--quoteo(post=1746195:date=Jan 8 2010, 11:15 AM:name=Pipi)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pipi @ Jan 8 2010, 11:15 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1746195"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This would be too complicated for mappers.

I'm sure they have thought of this already. Skulks' wall walking will surely adapt to a certain elevation of the terrain.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
complicated for mappers? all they need to do is create a face and apply the texture

<!--quoteo(post=1746219:date=Jan 8 2010, 02:35 PM:name=pSyk0mAn)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (pSyk0mAn @ Jan 8 2010, 02:35 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1746219"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->What you mean is the clip-texture and I'm sure something like this will be added, because there will always be a need to direct/block player movement.

But I agree with Pipi that most part of the map and the usual complex shapes should be handled by movement code or some kind of autogenerated collision hull, because that would save a lot of work.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
if i recall correctly skulks didnt stick to the clip texture so null was used instead

<!--quoteo(post=1746228:date=Jan 8 2010, 06:29 PM:name=Dalin Seivewright)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dalin Seivewright @ Jan 8 2010, 06:29 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1746228"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->All of the models, complex or not, will most likely have their own collision hulls. This means that the rocky surfaces you might see aren't the actual surfaces that the Skulks would be climbing on and there is an invisible simplified collision model that you do not see but is used for calculating collision.

An example: <a href="http://www.odedge.com/assets/images/autogen/a_optimize_collision_hull_02.jpg" target="_blank">http://www.odedge.com/assets/images/autoge...ion_hull_02.jpg</a>

If you were to walk on that set of stairs in the game, it would appear that you were doing so but in fact, you would be walking on the invisible ramp (the red brush). Anyways, the collision hulls would probably already exist so not much level designer interaction would be needed. This is all just speculation though but I think its pretty much what all the major engines are doing right now.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
thats all fine with models, but those hulls wouldn't exist for spark made geometry

Pipi

<!--quoteo(post=1746228:date=Jan 8 2010, 02:29 AM:name=Dalin Seivewright)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dalin Seivewright @ Jan 8 2010, 02:29 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1746228"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->... and there is an invisible simplified collision model that you do not see but is used for calculating collision.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I think that nowadays, they calculate proper collision directly from the model so they adapt the terrain under (and around) them.


<!--quoteo(post=1746263:date=Jan 8 2010, 06:53 AM:name=Loey)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Loey @ Jan 8 2010, 06:53 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1746263"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->complicated for mappers? all they need to do is create a face and apply the texture<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Yes, but do that a hundred times now.

Loey

so in other words its just time consuming not complicated? it wouldnt have to be for every surface, just ones that are tricky to manevour during the test run. did you map for ns1 pipi?

Corporal_Fortier

<!--quoteo(post=1746325:date=Jan 8 2010, 01:58 PM:name=Loey)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Loey @ Jan 8 2010, 01:58 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1746325"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->so in other words its just time consuming not complicated? it wouldnt have to be for every surface, just ones that are tricky to manevour during the test run. did you map for ns1 pipi?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think he means it would complicate things a lot if mappers have to create such surfaces for every prop they place in their map, whereas if this "easily navigable surface" is already included within the model, then there is no need to draw the said surface for every rock prop you place, for example. If you are drawing complex geometry though, then yes of course this will be useful, but I gather you are only speaking of props since you mentioned "fancy 3d walls and props"in the OP.

Loey

actually i was referring more to geometry because ive been making my "fancy 3d walls" with spark not props

Pipi

No , I haven`t map for NS1.

What I meant is that now they calculate terrain nivelation is calculated through the player`s model. They pick up info of the terrain`s mesh and they player`s position adapt to it.

It wouldn`t be only time consuming. I`ve been building rooms and corridors that becomes already hard to fly through because there is so many things. Sure, you could place them in a layer, but layers doesn`t work for geometry.

Kester

It was the noclip texture iirc. It's actually pretty useful as a lot of the time without it you can get a player annoyingly caught on a piece of geometry, such as a strut down the side of a corridor. A noclip texture can guide the player around it without them noticing.

As for the putting them in layers, I'm sure by release there will be support for geometry in layers, so that shouldn't be a problem.