General > Discussion
Blowi'n Holes In Buildings ;D
Captain Bipto:
--- Quote from: BTAxis on May 16, 2008, 03:32:43 pm ---Not actually true, there is a limited amount of objects that will actually break if you shoot them. Only if the mapper explicitly marked them as such, though.
--- End quote ---
So can Area of Effect explosions go through some of the terrain like walls? (Not destroy the walls but hit the dude on the other side)
BTAxis:
I'm not sure. There *is* a flag for shooting through walls, I believe, but I'm not sure if it applies to explosions.
Panthera Leo:
--- Quote from: BTAxis on May 16, 2008, 03:32:43 pm ---Not actually true, there is a limited amount of objects that will actually break if you shoot them. Only if the mapper explicitly marked them as such, though.
--- End quote ---
Then I take it the problem is that either walls, cars, and such either can't dynamically be removed and/or replaced? Or is it that they're not modular, and destroying a wall would take out the entire building instead of just that section?
As for converting the maps to or from one standard to another, that's a job for a script if I ever saw one. The only human involvement would be the scripts development or touching up a map after.
BTAxis:
--- Quote from: Panthera Leo on May 17, 2008, 06:51:43 pm ---Then I take it the problem is that either walls, cars, and such either can't dynamically be removed and/or replaced? Or is it that they're not modular, and destroying a wall would take out the entire building instead of just that section?
--- End quote ---
When you mark a brush as breakable, it will disappear when shot. It's technically possible to build up a building out of little sections and mark them all as brekable, but there are several problems with that. First off, there's your shadows. Shadows are calculated when the map is compiled (and this is what makes map compilation take so long), so they are hard-baked into the map. When you destroy the piece of wall, you don't destroy the shadow it casts. Secondly, a wall you would nomally make out of one, maybe two brushes now needs to be made up out of many more smaller ones. This increases the brush count of the map and makes it load and render slower. Map optimization is a big part of making a map, so this is not trivial. Finally, making a map like that is a buttload of work, and nobody really wants to do it.
These are the principal reasons why we don't have destructible terrain, pretty much.
--- Quote ---As for converting the maps to or from one standard to another, that's a job for a script if I ever saw one. The only human involvement would be the scripts development or touching up a map after.
--- End quote ---
What? Who's talking about moving the maps to another standard?
Panthera Leo:
Who iss talking about different standard, just me I guess. I guess I was implying that the maps where to be made destructible, or move to another engine it would be a different 'standard'.
Shows what I know, I hadn't considered shadows all that complicated. I guess it would take a great deal of work to make the engine go from storing pre-renderer things, to having options to update for 'random' events (The top of the roof being blow off, or a entire building collapsing.)
In one hand I know it's harder then I think it is, and on the other I have this nagging idea that "No, that's what objects, pointers, and binary tree's are for..."
(Edit: having finished by CCNA&CCNP classes playing and organizing with variable information by tweaking bits inside a variable(IPs), and nesting classes is second nature to me. Though they teach neither in the class I recognized and picked up on what the routers are really doing.)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version