DTS or DIF
by Ryan Armstrong · in Artist Corner · 10/19/2002 (10:42 pm) · 11 replies
Ok I have been playing a lot with mapping in Max instead of Worldcraft, and the results I get are 100 times better then in WorldCraft and Quark. YOu just have so much control over everything, and the scale is much better then in WorldCraft (Don't know much about Quark). Anyways, I have been reading up about the .dif and .dts file formats, mainly the shortcomings of .dif (i.e. no transparency, no animation, etc) and I was wondering, if you are going to design levels in Max, why not use .dts instead of .dif? Are there any benefits that .dif has over .dts other then that WC and Quark are both much easier to learn then Max is? Most of my team is moving over to Max for mapping now, and I was just curious as to if we should just export strait over to .dts for our maps, thus gaining transparency, animation abilities, etc, or does .dif have some sort of advantage that I am not aware of? Thoughts?
About the author
#2
10/19/2002 (10:54 pm)
FPS isn't much of a concern. We are targeting GeForce2 users and above. But the bound box thing might be. So you would have to create a bounding box for every wall and item that you don't want the player to walk through correct? That might eat up a lot of time. Is there any plug-in, or app that can create those automatically? ALso, how would you handle lighting?
#3
Zones are basically rooms that have no leaks to the outside or other zones/rooms. They tell the engine what to cull out and what to show. So, if your player walks into a dungeon with 100 rooms and no zones it will try to display all 100 (more or less)and attempt to check every room's lighting vs. the player's position. If each has its own zone then it would only show that room, plus whatever can be seen through a doorway (portal).
Portals are used to allow for doorways. As far as the engine is concerned a portal is a wall that can be seen through and walked through.
I'm not sure I'm 100% correct on the above, but I'm in the ballpark. ;-)
To scrap WC/Q, you would want to come up with some sort of BSP and zone system. Lights might be dynamic, though those are resource intensive.
You might consider trying to get emaps and transparencies to work with the dif format. I know there is a hack for the xparency issue, but that causes other issues with textured fog and emaps on .dts. I understand the dts and dif formats are similar, so it's beyond me as to why no real solution has been found.
QuArK is a capable 3D modeling program. It's not fancy, by any means, and no where nearly as nice as 3dsMax. That said, I'm getting to the point of making some pretty nice models with QuArK. If Torque supported npatches (or is it bezier patches?), too, then some nicer rounded models could be made.
So, there's some choices for you Ryan. Either extend the functionality of .dts, or that of .dif--whichever is better suited for you. :-)
BTW, I have a much better version of "WC2QuArK" now, that has everything needed--including a generic default texture. It's worked great for someone else who's tried it. Let me know if you'd like that.
Eric
10/20/2002 (3:12 am)
Aside from a compiled BSP, there are (like you suggested) lighting issues and also zones and portals. I realize there have been complaints as to the limitations of Torque's lights, but if done correctly they look pretty nice. Check out the Tribes2 ones, for example.Zones are basically rooms that have no leaks to the outside or other zones/rooms. They tell the engine what to cull out and what to show. So, if your player walks into a dungeon with 100 rooms and no zones it will try to display all 100 (more or less)and attempt to check every room's lighting vs. the player's position. If each has its own zone then it would only show that room, plus whatever can be seen through a doorway (portal).
Portals are used to allow for doorways. As far as the engine is concerned a portal is a wall that can be seen through and walked through.
I'm not sure I'm 100% correct on the above, but I'm in the ballpark. ;-)
To scrap WC/Q, you would want to come up with some sort of BSP and zone system. Lights might be dynamic, though those are resource intensive.
You might consider trying to get emaps and transparencies to work with the dif format. I know there is a hack for the xparency issue, but that causes other issues with textured fog and emaps on .dts. I understand the dts and dif formats are similar, so it's beyond me as to why no real solution has been found.
QuArK is a capable 3D modeling program. It's not fancy, by any means, and no where nearly as nice as 3dsMax. That said, I'm getting to the point of making some pretty nice models with QuArK. If Torque supported npatches (or is it bezier patches?), too, then some nicer rounded models could be made.
So, there's some choices for you Ryan. Either extend the functionality of .dts, or that of .dif--whichever is better suited for you. :-)
BTW, I have a much better version of "WC2QuArK" now, that has everything needed--including a generic default texture. It's worked great for someone else who's tried it. Let me know if you'd like that.
Eric
#4
Also, has anyone tried to write a max2dif converter? I know that could really help improve the quality of mapping with TGE. Max maps easily stand out when compared to WC or Quark maps, and would open up mapping to all the modelers out there.
What would be involved in this? Has anyone tried to do it? If not, I think I will have my team give it a go.
10/20/2002 (3:50 am)
Hmm, well mainly my only problem with .dif files is that they are static and as of now do not have real transparency, though glass itself would probably be done separately anyways since you would want it to be breakable. I guess the coders will have to figure out which format, dts or dif would be easier to modify. It seems that since dif is already built specifically for interiors, it would probably be best to enhance that format with animation, transparency, but does anyone else have any thoughts on this?Also, has anyone tried to write a max2dif converter? I know that could really help improve the quality of mapping with TGE. Max maps easily stand out when compared to WC or Quark maps, and would open up mapping to all the modelers out there.
What would be involved in this? Has anyone tried to do it? If not, I think I will have my team give it a go.
#5
10/20/2002 (5:45 am)
Im a little unsure because i havent actually used it, but theres a max2map exporter so couldnt you make it in Max then export it to *.map format then export it using the Map2dif exporter to get it in dif format?
#6
10/20/2002 (2:24 pm)
YEa you can do that, but bringing it through WC can screw up a model if it uses a scale smaller then it's 1x1. And if you are going to do things to scale, a lot of objects can be smaller then that. So we would need to write something that would go strait from Max to a .dif file.
#7
10/20/2002 (4:48 pm)
Speaking of transparency in .difs, I've managed to incorporate it and resolve the problems with the hack (the depth-sorting issues, mainly). Check out my latest plan for info. :)
#8
10/20/2002 (6:11 pm)
Oh hey there is some good news. Good work man. I'll check that out right now. :) Now if we could just get a max2dif plug-in that would be great. :)
#9
10/21/2002 (2:53 pm)
James, when do you anticipate a release of this code snippet?
#10
10/21/2002 (6:54 pm)
Well, beffy pointed out a flaw with it I hadn't noticed (it blocks light and doesn't let it shine through, like it should), so I'll need to fix that. I'm looking at either tomorrow or Wednesday evening to submit it as a resource (I'll post and link to it, too, so all the people who have been houding me for it can get it without waiting for it to be posted as a resource). :)
#11
10/21/2002 (7:12 pm)
lol sounds good man. Great work, that means one less thing my team has to do with the dif format. 
David Loomis
Other than that, if frame rates aren't a problem for you, and the graphic difference is worthwhile for the trouble of making proper bounding boxes... go for it.