Dif or .dts?
by John Spivey · in Game Design and Creative Issues · 10/30/2006 (1:04 pm) · 4 replies
I know that for interiors the best method to render them in engine is to make a .dif. But I just looked at the FPS Environment demo pack and all of those models are .dts. Why not model those in .dif? I thought that you wanted to use .dif for most structural items. The demo stuff has no .dif's that i saw in them. I know if you want animated buildings then you want to go with .dts. The windmill for example. It is one entire model. Why not make the base structure in .dif and just make the blades .dts. A simple datablock will make them spin so why make the entire thing animated? They look amazing but I am wondering why there were no .dif models in there and it was all .dts?
#2
I have been thinking of making large amounts of "interior" elements but actually using DTS instead of DIF.
What exactly is automagic mesh collision? Does this allow the actual visible DTS mesh to have a collision?
Any info would be great :)
11/09/2006 (1:24 am)
Hi there,I have been thinking of making large amounts of "interior" elements but actually using DTS instead of DIF.
What exactly is automagic mesh collision? Does this allow the actual visible DTS mesh to have a collision?
Any info would be great :)
#3
Automagic mesh collision . . .
= not putting in the effort to optimize your meshes for network play
= dramatically increasing calculations for in-game collisions
= dramatically loooowering game speeds
= not a feature that's built into TGE or TSE for DTS shapes
= a feature that might get built into Torque X when it's released
Until recently, this has just been wishful thinking for lazy modelers. Collision boxes and spheres have been around forever and everybody hates them. However, the new Torque X engine info has hinted that true polygonal collision detection may be possible and maybe even with Not Horrible (tm) performance.
11/09/2006 (4:16 am)
Just guessing, but here goes.Automagic mesh collision . . .
= not putting in the effort to optimize your meshes for network play
= dramatically increasing calculations for in-game collisions
= dramatically loooowering game speeds
= not a feature that's built into TGE or TSE for DTS shapes
= a feature that might get built into Torque X when it's released
Until recently, this has just been wishful thinking for lazy modelers. Collision boxes and spheres have been around forever and everybody hates them. However, the new Torque X engine info has hinted that true polygonal collision detection may be possible and maybe even with Not Horrible (tm) performance.
#4
To clarify a bit on "automagic" mesh collision, it is where the mesh itself becomes the "collision mesh" as well. This means that you have accurate triangle collision rather than a bounded area collision. Depending on the gametype, many times you would never be able to tell the difference between mesh collision and bounded collisions. The problem is if you have something like a bed with a headboard and a footboard.
If you use a single cube collision mesh, you would place the collision box above the highest point (probably the headboard) and below the bed and have it cover the entire area of the bed. The better solution, would be to create three collision boxes. One for the headboard, one for the footboard, and one for the bed proper. This way you can jump on the bed but not walk through the head/footboard. Plus, you wouldn't seem to float above the bed if you jumped "on it" with the single collision box. Of course, most games have traditionally solved the problem by not letting you jump up on the bed anyway, which (unless there was a gameplay reason) is a negligible giving.
You will still have some zoning issues with DTS interiors as they are not culled in the same way as DIF objects are. You will basically have one big area that is rendered all the time, so the more geometry you add, the more problems you have. You can, however, create a simple DIF object for the walls and doorways and zone it appropriately. It would be hello to reconstruct in the World Editor, but it could be done. That's actually pretty close to what I've been doing for a while.
11/09/2006 (7:43 am)
If you are making a FPS then you might want more "accurate" mesh collsions, but if you are making an adventure game, a platformer, or a RPG then boxes and spheres are actually standard and extremely simple to manage. Platformers are about the only one of the above which make you think about your collisions in terms of importance (other than RPG's with ladders). This is because you can often jump and grab ledges, climb up, etc. But that simply means you have to be aware of where you want your player to be able to grab and pull them up and manage collisions more accurately there. The vast majority of scenery in RPG's and Adventure games does not benefit from accurate collisions.To clarify a bit on "automagic" mesh collision, it is where the mesh itself becomes the "collision mesh" as well. This means that you have accurate triangle collision rather than a bounded area collision. Depending on the gametype, many times you would never be able to tell the difference between mesh collision and bounded collisions. The problem is if you have something like a bed with a headboard and a footboard.
If you use a single cube collision mesh, you would place the collision box above the highest point (probably the headboard) and below the bed and have it cover the entire area of the bed. The better solution, would be to create three collision boxes. One for the headboard, one for the footboard, and one for the bed proper. This way you can jump on the bed but not walk through the head/footboard. Plus, you wouldn't seem to float above the bed if you jumped "on it" with the single collision box. Of course, most games have traditionally solved the problem by not letting you jump up on the bed anyway, which (unless there was a gameplay reason) is a negligible giving.
You will still have some zoning issues with DTS interiors as they are not culled in the same way as DIF objects are. You will basically have one big area that is rendered all the time, so the more geometry you add, the more problems you have. You can, however, create a simple DIF object for the walls and doorways and zone it appropriately. It would be hello to reconstruct in the World Editor, but it could be done. That's actually pretty close to what I've been doing for a while.
Associate David Montgomery-Blake
David MontgomeryBlake