Would a 3D widget in T2D be practical?
by Demolishun · in Torque 2D Beginner · 06/23/2014 (9:50 am) · 7 replies
Every time I hear about T2D I am impressed. It also is very attractive due to the platforms T2D supports. So I keep wondering if adding a 3D widget would be worth while. Something that supports all the current platforms (as much as is practical) and gives you a nice 3D environment designed from the ground up around OpenGL. I would not want to touch the rest of T2D, but just allow the widget to be just another tool in T2D.
Would a 3D widget in T2D be practical?
Would a 3D widget in T2D be practical?
About the author
I love programming, I love programming things that go click, whirr, boom. For organized T3D Links visit: http://demolishun.com/?page_id=67
#2
06/23/2014 (4:17 pm)
If done right. I'm all for 3D object rendering in T2D, even more so than a merge of the two engines. The legacy TGB used to have DTS objects, which was a good feature. I think having 3D object rendering in T2D MIT would be a huge gain, so long as it was user-friendly. The DTS system of old days is unwieldy. Given that T3D has COLLADA, I'd pick that over DTS any day. So you have my vote.
#3
06/23/2014 (4:45 pm)
I thought DTS objects were a streamlined data format? Collada would be slow to load every time. I like how T3D loads it once and converts for you. Is that what you are thinking?
#4
06/23/2014 (5:05 pm)
It is indeed. 
#5
Honest question(s) though: what benefits are gained from having T2D render 3D models natively vs. using a modelling program's ability to export a 3D animated model to a sprite sheet? Ease of use, better memory overhead, some other reason? Can you batch 3D models like sprites to reduce draw calls? Also, I would think Blender and company have much better renderers than what T2D provides out of the box with OpenGL 1.x - so does adding 3D support also drive the need for an updated rendering pipeline?
06/23/2014 (10:33 pm)
If someone is serious about implementing DTS in T2D, this would be a good starting point: github.com/jamesu/libDTShape. It's also worth noting that T3D is moving towards using Assimp for model importing instead of just Collada.Honest question(s) though: what benefits are gained from having T2D render 3D models natively vs. using a modelling program's ability to export a 3D animated model to a sprite sheet? Ease of use, better memory overhead, some other reason? Can you batch 3D models like sprites to reduce draw calls? Also, I would think Blender and company have much better renderers than what T2D provides out of the box with OpenGL 1.x - so does adding 3D support also drive the need for an updated rendering pipeline?
#6
It is that or find another engine for what I want to do. I found one candidate that will do what I want I think. However, I like Torque and was wondering if T2D could be made to do what I want. It just supports so many platforms out of the box.
I am thinking low poly, low res textures, and a ton of cubic terrain. The memory consumption will be due to huge amounts of data. That will probably limit the number of platforms. I dunno, I am asking what the pros think.
06/23/2014 (11:24 pm)
I am not looking for a 3D sprite solution. I am thinking general purpose 3D widget to handle a 3D scenegraph. I have no idea what that entails.It is that or find another engine for what I want to do. I found one candidate that will do what I want I think. However, I like Torque and was wondering if T2D could be made to do what I want. It just supports so many platforms out of the box.
I am thinking low poly, low res textures, and a ton of cubic terrain. The memory consumption will be due to huge amounts of data. That will probably limit the number of platforms. I dunno, I am asking what the pros think.
#7
06/24/2014 (4:21 am)
I'm for 3d models. That way I can mount weapons to characters :) 
Torque Owner Lukas Joergensen
WinterLeaf Entertainment
(Edit: Btw you'd be surprised of how many games are essentially 2D games with a few 3D models here and there)