3D Version?

Chat about anything not covered in these forums, but keep it civil!

Post » Sun Oct 12, 2008 2:44 pm

I have to disagree. I think that there is a lot that can be done with relatively simple additions to construct. It won't be crysis, but with some basic controls I think some really awesome stuff could be made.

My list for what would be needed:

3D model object
play animations (no need for inverse kinematics, ragdolls or any of that complex stuff)
3d collisions
3d lighting (again, basic stuff)
camera controls (set xyz, etc)
set sprite's Z position
perspective rendering (<--As far as I know, construct renders things with an isometric (no perspective) camera.)

If we were able to set that to a normal perspective-based camera (perhaps on a per-layer basis?) and had the abilities listed above, we could make all sorts of awesome 3d games.

A couple 3d behaviors might be nice too, like 3d bullet. I'm not a 3d programmer, so forgive me if I underestimate the task of what I've listed, but as far as I know those would be relatively simple as far as 3d goes.
Moderator
B
88
S
32
G
33
Posts: 3,005
Reputation: 27,432

Post » Mon Oct 13, 2008 12:45 am

[quote="Arima":2xiof53d]
perspective rendering (<--As far as I know, construct renders things with an isometric (no perspective) camera.)[/quote:2xiof53d]

Actually the 3D box object does render in perspective. If it were orthographic (I believe that's the word you're looking for), you wouldn't see the sides of the box angling away towards a vanishing point, there wouldn't be any foreshortening, and no depth cues except Z layering.

And yes, I think you've underestimated the tasks you've listed. The ability to load and render models with animation itself is a pretty tall order, let alone 3D collisions and whatnot. Hell, the 3D box doesn't even do 3D collisions. dfyb has a more realistic approach to the situation, and making 2.5D games like how he's suggesting is a much more realistic goal.

And even if you only had the ability to load an animated mesh, you could still fake real 3D with events anyway. Take a look at David's Wolfenstein demo... already it's on it's way to becoming a real FPS. I'm sure some clever person (Glamthaus ;)) will pop in there any second and show everyone how to make it mouse-look up and down, and after that how to move in the Y world axis. Arcticus has a pretty clever system for vertical movement with his orthographic game already, with some tweaking it could be adopted to render the world appropriately.
Moderator
B
5
S
2
G
6
Posts: 4,348
Reputation: 10,971

Post » Mon Oct 13, 2008 3:59 am

My 3d program uses 'isometric' for a perspectiveless camera, I should've looked it up. I didn't convey what I meant properly by that, I know boxes are rendered with perspective, I meant for the entire camera because it seems like the camera's fixed at orthographic, and so can't move around freely in a 3d world with perspective (I shouldn't have mentioned that since I don't entirely understand how the camera(s?) work). Is there another camera for the 3d box? I guess my head isn't wrapped around the concept of moving the camera around in 3D when it's rendering both orthographic and regular perspective at the same time. Forget that point.

Again, I still have to disagree though, via the point you made - construct already has a lot of power to make 3d games as it is now (if you don't mind using boxes). I think even an 3D RTS or a 3d mario-type game could be done with only adding animated meshes and lighting (and being able to click on a 3d object, forgot that one).

Making a 3d box jump or run around is easy already. For the RTS, you can use a sprite with RTS movement elsewhere on the layout to control the x and z position of the box (mapped to the x and y positions), as well as the yaw, and solid sprites as obstacles, so while it seems like the box is navigating around obstacles in 3D, it's really a normal sprite doing it offscreen with 2d pathfinding. It's a little clumsy, but it works.

Animated meshes I don't know anything about, so I won't comment on.

I should have said basic 3d box collisions. I know exact 3d collisions are hard, but simple ones can be done now via events (I know how to check if a point in 3d space is in a box, but if not two boxes are overlapping). They can be faked to some extent by checking in 2d for two dimensions (like I mentioned above for the RTS) and use events for the third. It wouldn't be the most exact method in the world, but it would work for basic games.

Sprites are already setting their X and Y - I remember someone saying it would be possible to make a 3d sprite object, if it required too much modification of the normal sprite.

Honestly, I think you overestimate the difficulty. I don't mean to suggest that I know better than the developers, or how long it should take but from what I know about 3D, they don't seem like either insurmountable tasks or unreasonable requests.

Clarification: I think they're right that they should concentrate on the 2D part first. This is post 1.0 stuff.

Sorry about the wall of text.
Moderator
B
88
S
32
G
33
Posts: 3,005
Reputation: 27,432

Post » Mon Oct 13, 2008 9:09 am

Just figured I would add my 2c on this topic.

3D Sprites. If this is anywhere near as easy to code as a plug-in as it is to fake within Construct (See: http://www.fileshack.us/get_file.php?id ... lation.cap), then it should be a walk in the park to create. This will be the first plug-in I will be attempting to make (Just waiting on VS2008 so I can begin).

The other stuff will hopefully flow on from there, but we'll see how difficult it gets :). (Though I must admit I'm feeling fairly confident at this point. Lets hope I stay that way.)
B
2
S
2
G
5
Posts: 108
Reputation: 1,866

Previous

Return to Open Topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests