[DahBlount]

After some thought, I now believe that integrating assimp into FSO is not the best solution to add more functionality to models in FSO.
Assimp thread can be read here: http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=87282.0

As it turns out, PCS2 already uses OpenCOLLADA to import .DAE files. OpenCOLLADA is a great format that is natively supported for export in Blender and features both a Maya and MAX exporter for those willing to install it by hand.

The primary purpose of this project is to extend animation capability. Any secondary objectives can be requested by community members.

It may, in fact, be much easier (perhaps even cleaner) to:

• Do animation support in POF
• Do animation support in PCS2
• Do animation support in FSO

(In that order)

What thoughts does everyone else have on this subject?

[zookeeper]

The needs for animation in an engine like this are very limited, so I don't see any reason why animations would need to be able to be somehow embedded in model data rather than being driven by tables only as they are now.

[DahBlount]

Some animations are too complex to be done via tabling, in which case, having baked animations would be great. Additionally, translations are not supported by the engine.

[zookeeper]

Some animations are too complex to be done via tabling, in which case, having baked animations would be great.

Yes, that's the idea I was disagreeing with.

What kind of animations do you think would be too complex?

[Spoon]

Some animations are too complex to be done via tabling, in which case, having baked animations would be great.

Yes, that's the idea I was disagreeing with.

What kind of animations do you think would be too complex?

Mechs

[DahBlount]

Some animations are too complex to be done via tabling, in which case, having baked animations would be great.

Yes, that's the idea I was disagreeing with.

What kind of animations do you think would be too complex?

Mechs

In addition to skeleton based animations, things that required trees of objects to be rotated in a very complex manner. If you're willing to wait, I can whip something up in Blender tonight to show the sort of animations that would require baking.

[z64555]

whoa whoa whoa, I thought you were talking about just adding the bone data to the POF, not the entire animation? If you did that, then you'd be pretty limited in the number of different animation sequences you could do.

[DahBlount]

Can't work on the bone data without animation data. Animation data can be read and used via rotations and translations done on an object and its subobjects. However, skeletons require that there be animation data consisting of bone positions and orientations that are linked using either subobjects or weighted vertices.

[z64555]

eh, Want to try phrasing that again? You sounded like me there for a minute.

I can see having something like an idle animation baked into the .pof, but there isn't any reason not to support tabled animations or a separate animation file.

[DahBlount]

eh, Want to try phrasing that again? You sounded like me there for a minute.

I can see having something like an idle animation baked into the .pof, but there isn't any reason not to support tabled animations or a separate animation file.

I never said anything about removing tabled animations. Also, idle animations aren't exactly what I was thinking of. Think of things like an On_Weapon/Turret_Armed animation where you get things like barrels extending with expanding or rotating parts.

[Bobboau]

bones could be implemented in POFs now, simply have the skeleton as a set of subobjects with no geometry and some sort of property flag in the skeleton base. would have the advantage that all animation code would be unified (i.e. things like turret animations would work out of the box). there are a couple of ways you could organize it, skeleton as child of skin, skin as child of skeleton, both being siblings to a common null base. point being you wouldn't need to make any changes to the POF file format or PCS2 (other than possibly file conversion), you would just need to add support in engine and maybe in the converter.

[The Dagger]

I'd like to have docking points, primary banks and secondary banks animated by been able to parent them to a moving subobject if possible. I know Oddgrim tried to put an animated docking port on the Isis but couldn't.

[DahBlount]

Work has officially begun on this.

[Goober5000]

Work has officially begun on this.

If so, then I highly recommend redesigning the FSO animation system while you're at it.  It is an absolute and utter mess, to put it politely, and I struggled mightily to debug it while helping Vasudan Admiral with a model a few years ago.  It needs to be completely ripped out and replaced.

[headdie]

Awesome news

[DahBlount]

Work has officially begun on this.

If so, then I highly recommend redesigning the FSO animation system while you're at it.  It is an absolute and utter mess, to put it politely, and I struggled mightily to debug it while helping Vasudan Admiral with a model a few years ago.  It needs to be completely ripped out and replaced.

Alright then.