Hard Light Productions Forums
Modding, Mission Design, and Coding => FS2 Open Coding - The Source Code Project (SCP) => Topic started by: Kai on February 14, 2005, 02:23:32 pm
-
Thanks to the SCP Freespace 2 now has the enviromnental mapping. So what about bump mapping ? Is it possible?
For those who don't know what I am talking about:
http://freespace.virgin.net/hugo.elias/graphics/x_polybm.htm
-
We're getting there, bob has IIRC alraedy created a system in wich bumpmapping could be implemented, or somthing to that effect.
-
Bump mapping is waiting for an overhaul of the texture system. At the moment FS2 has to make repeated passes in order to put in all the features we already have. Adding bump mapping or normal mapping would require yet another pass which would slow the game down even more.
The overhaul is going on at the moment though so don't that it's just an excuse :)
-
^is there going to be a new integrated texture/shader format with this overhaul or somthing? anywhere where i can get the specifics on it?
-
actualy the texture system isn't the bottle neck for bump mapping, I do intend to implement a shader system that would allow bump mapping sooner than later, but this wouldn't be the first progect of mine to fail.
-
When bump mapping is implemented, I'm going to cry. I promise. ;)
-
Me too, Setekh. Me too.
-
As long as you can tell the difference I will too. But if it's implemented like it is in Renegade , I'll smack you....;)
-
Renegade has bump mapping? ;)
-
One question: can anyone tell me the difference between Bump mapping and Environmental bump mapping ? Is it the same feature?
-
environmental bump mapping is a different version of bump mapping. it simulates bumps by shifting the reflection map over by a certain amount in specified areas.
-
ehm..thnx so what looks better? and do all the newest graphics cards support both these functions?
-
G4MX doesn't pixel shaders, which if IIRC, is a factor.
-
oh yes the pixel shaders and the whole DX9 stuff...will those things be implemented?
-
Err... doesn't DX8 do Pixel- and Vertex shader, too?
I've an "old" GeForce 3 which already have those features...
And AFAIK DX8 should already support this...
Well... Okay... DX8 Supports the GF3 version of shaders (version 1.1?) and for higher shader versions we really would need DX9...
Wait... OGL can do that, too ;)
-
Problem with Direct X 9 is that you would have to have a video card that supports it. ;)
-
and who does not have such a card today;)
-
me, for one :P
-
*Raises hand
Add me to the list.
-
oh my...:)
-
I already wrote, that I only own a GeForce 3...
But for now I can play almost all games!
-
I intend on makeing a shader system that can handle full/partal/or no shader suport, that is once I get done with my current projects, unfortunately people are slow to test things like the animation system and weapon models
-
Does your shader system support ps/vs 3.0 then?
-
it would if/when I got started on it.
-
Woohoo, this is great, go for it Bob.
Banzai! Banzai! Banzai!
I want so suggest a system that allows using post filter fragment programs via choice in FRED like the skyboxes can be choosen.
This would be great for some mods.
-
Originally posted by Bobboau
once I get done with my current projects, unfortunately people are slow to test things like the animation system and weapon models
-
yes funny how once tha gets mentioned everyone goes silent
and goob wonders why I never finish one thing before starting another
-
will these be the RGP normal maps, or grayscale heightmaps?
-
Yeah. Anything that requires the slightest bit of work on their part is convieniently overlooked. :doubt:
If I knew how to use the system, maybe I'd try a few simple things, but until then, I'll stick to my usual modelling ways.
-
... look at my posting in the weapons thread...
-
yes, and as your reward I will post speculation on what I may one day do.
how's this sound you are able the write a post procesing filter and specify variables that effect it that you can script via sExps.
the way I'm thinking about writeing the primary shader system is haveing a table that specifies three ways to render a model, a fixed function system, a system that has a vertex shader but still requiers a fixed function raster step (wich you specify in a fashion similar to the full fixed function material) and a full vertex/pixel shader system. there will be code to decide wich one of these gets used (wich can be overiden via comand line).
the way shaders are going to be writen would be to use a API independent HLSL, I am currently leaning twards Cg. I'm thinking it would be a good idea to have it broken down into sections to you have a section of a shader dealing with transformation, a section dealing with an individual light (of a specific type, we have three types) and texture coordanant generation and anything else that needs to get done after lighting is done.
there will be a number of predefined variables such as the transformation matrix, the light list, camera position, primary/secondary/teritery textures ect, as well as pre defined vertex data position, normal, uv, ect, you will be limited by what data types have been predefined (and somewere in the shader entree you will need to define what you are going to need) but it should be a simple task to add new variables and data types.
-
Sounds VERY good to me.
-
wow..get it done asap Bobboau
-
test, code, now!
I want to do this, but I can't untill my current stuff is done, test my current stuff! ...damit!
-
ehm..and what is your current stuff? the multiple ship docking?
-
Originally posted by Kai
ehm..and what is your current stuff? the multiple ship docking?
The animation system ...check the "Recent SCP Builds" subforum.
-
checked...and found nothing. you mean the animated textures on (mainly) shivan ships?
-
No, the animated subobject code.
The weapons model code, and a few others...
This one:
http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,30458.0.html
And quite possibly this one
http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,29515.0.html
-
sorry but the external weapons is imho a dumb idea..
-
Originally posted by Kai
sorry but the external weapons is imho a dumb idea..
Get off the high horse.
Said code would make tons of things possible. Add pods, parts ect. ect. to the ship - anything you want to add to the ship without creating a separate model.
...and with tertiary systems, and modular ships that isn't something you really want to do.
The animation code also makes it possible to have animating subobjects - moving hangar doors, turrets with protective cover, ect. ect.
-
Originally posted by Kai
sorry but the external weapons is imho a dumb idea..
sorry but that gets done first, if I just leave it hanging you'll end up with bugs out the ass, at the least you could run the build and make sure I didn't break anything else.
-
okey ill try it..but still i think its a worthless feature
-
Originally posted by Kai
but still i think its a worthless feature
Good for you.:) You wanna tell us why?
I can see many implications of this...I mean, it looks less than perfect now of course, but the first models in the fs2 engine were probably untextured cubes...
-
^well fs1 engine atleast, and probably more like untextured arrow shaped objects.
Anyways, is there anything other than extranl weapon code and animation code that bob needs testing for now?
-
i just do not know *WHY* put so much effort to making missiles visible from external view...if it does serve yet another purpose tell me please
-
It's visual candy... in theory there's no point in having shine maps but almost everyone agrees they look darn cool. Same thing here I believe.
-
yes the shine maps ARE COOL. this is not imho:) i think the best thing in the work now is making the hi-poly versions of ship models - THATS PRETTY DAMN COOl - and i think the GREAT hi-poly Herc is Bobboau's work isnt it? now thats a SUPERB work
-
people have been asking for this for years, with WCM's techroom thing I had the idea that if every weapon had a model too then art could be dynamicly generated too, so I decided to take on the project, it's a relitively simple change, and the weapon model code is basicly complete, all it needs is lots of testing, what I realy need to get done with now is the animation code, I'm thinking I should just focus on getting the core of it done, then explain how you use it to the other coders so they can implement all the calls to it.
both of these need moders to create content and then people to play the game with that content.
-
Originally posted by Kai
okey ill try it..but still i think its a worthless feature
The Starfox mod will use this feature. It's not worthless at all.
You will drool and accept this feature as a good one...
-
you know the weapon stuf seems to be working without flaw, no one can say I didn't try to get it thuroughly tested, the animation code can't be made any better untill I get a lot more models suporting it to test on, I'll make a thread for coders on how to implement new animations.
-
The BSG's launch bays is more than ready to have the animation code extend and retract them! Is none rotational movement in the bag?
-
AFIK it was from day 1 of Bobb's implementation.