RF2 Question

[scott]

now im just a begginer and havnt been working with these programs for long but have already got the hang of building 3d models in milkshape.

my question is will we be able to import models and get them to look almost the same as they do in there native program with no messing about with stuff within the entity, now i know its grate having the flexability to changethe settings but for begginers like me i find it a bit confusing at times

and my second question is will we be able to easily import models as geometry, or is it still going to be bsp?

and my third question is will you be able to do per vertex modeling within RF2?

and my final question is the help documents, will these just be technical information or practical aswel as i find RF's document to technical with a few entities.

granted that you want to make RF2 before the documentation, i was just wondering what your future planes were.

[AndyCR]

That depends. If you mean will lights, particle effects, etc carry over, no. If you mean animations, textures, etc, yes.

Models will be pretty much indistinguishable from level geometry. RF2 dosen't care, since it would be HARDER to impose limits like those in RF1 these days using irrlicht.

Yes, vertex editing will be doable, though youll have to convert the model to level geometry (should be a simple button click) first, because otherwise it would just reload the mesh every time you edited it from the .X or .ms3d or whatever file and overwrite your changes, so it has to be stored as level geometry - ie in the level; file - even though rf2 dosen't make much of a distinction other than what file contains the mesh. Hope that made sense. In other words, RF2 cant WRITE model files, so it has to store modified mesh data in the level file instead of in the mesh file. other than that it should be identical.

I have very few ideas about the docs yet, what i do know is that i will likely be the one stuck with writing them since i know rf2 best. I'm considering embedding the docs inside one of the rf2 programs, or making a custom reader program, so the docs can actually show you what to do, or click one thing and it loads a sample map. Just an idea, cant even begin to garantee it will make it in.

[paradoxnj]

I see a couple of issues with RF2:

Mesh Formats
Irrlicht uses Quake 3 BSP files or other pre-canned mesh formats for meshes and levels. There is a limitation with the Quake 3 tools as you cannot release any content that is made with them as part of your own game (unless it's a made using the Quake 3 engine). Not everyone owns (legally) 3DS Max, Maya or Lightwave. Milkshape has a poly limit, and DelEd is not beginner friendly (which is what RF is geared for).

This goes for actors as well. MD2, MD3 are Quake formats therefore cannot be released as part of your own game.

What is the art pipeline going to be for RF2?

RF Team's Work
In addition, aren't QuestofDreams and wxb1 working on a hardware T&L version of Genesis 3D complete with DX9 driver? Why wouldn't you just wait for that? It would be easier instead of doing a total conversion. If they should get creative and make a material system that rivals OGRE or Doom3 then visuals should not be a problem.

Entity Manager
No engine does entities like Genesis does. That being dynamically defined. Even Quake 3 has pre-defined entities. How do you plan on making the Entity Manager compatible with a new engine? How will a level designer store this information in the world file?

I'm not attacking you, i'm just asking some questions about your design.

[AndyCR]

Yes, that's why in every post that asks what the model formats for RF2 are i take out the Id formats. I will not be including support for them.

The art pipeline is anything you own that can export any file format that RF2 understands. The -preferred- art pipeline is Blender3D to .X or Milkshape3D to .ms3d, or your average thousandplus dollar art package to whatever of the numerous formats it exports that RF2 supports.


The same reason I did not choose Jet3D, love the concept though I do: It's still Genesis3D. It's still the same dropped engine that people just keep waking from the dead with new features, and it wastes the RF developer's time and makes them have to do double duty; both develop an engine AND a game creation suite. If I chose to simply join the RF1 dev team, where would RF1 be in 5 years? Up a creek without a paddle, constrained to a dead engine that we have to fight to add new features to, being laughed at because we still use ancient technologies like BSP - and dreaming of an RF2.

With Irrlicht, we get a rock-solid, stable, next-generation engine that has clean, precise syntax and support for most of the latest technologies, and above all, developers around the world who are programming RF2's engine for us as we speak, and will likely continue to do so far into the future, so we don't have to! And even if Irrlicht dies, we're still in a much better position than we are now with Genesis3D, because we have next-generation features and a jump on the engine development!


I will be rewriting the entity manager, just like I'm rewriting every feature that Genesis3D had but Irrlicht does not.

The level designers (i assume you refer to the users, not the programs) will store the information the same way they always have - RF2 is like that, it works almost just like RF on the outside, obviously with more features and greater stability, but on the inside you can see the improvement. There are less occurances of //HACK and //BUG than there are of 'using namespace'.


In addition, RF2 is already quite progressed. I was quite surprised when I realized that RF2 is already composed of 35 source files - most of which are 100% complete.


No problem, I enjoy questions because they force me to think, and sometimes to consider issues I didn't know existed. If you have any more I'll be happy to answer them!

[paradoxnj]

Begin Shameless Jet3D Plug
Just side note...I lead the development team for Jet3D. We've been in constant development for over 2 years now. We now have a stable D3D9 driver and we are getting good framerates (65FPS with 5000 polys in view) with it. We are now in the middle of implementing our material system (which is fully configurable and very powerful) and shaders which will be applied to polys via our editor.

Not trying to change your mind, just letting you know the status of Jet3D.
End shameless Jet3D plug

Irrlicht is a great engine, it's just missing content creation tools. It's a scenegraph based engine that is missing a scene editor.

I'm glad to hear that you are so far along with it. I can't wait to see some rendered screenshots of scenes. If you need some assistance with network, sound or shader coding...feel free to drop me a line. I'm also a game music composer and sound fx designer (my primary function in game development).

[AndyCR]

Yeah, that's why I mentioned having nothing against Jet3D except for it's "father". Nice to meet you!

I agree completely; level creation is where Irrlicht is terrible. Niko (the main Irrlicht developer) is working on a level editor, but RF2 will not use it (though it may very well borrow source from it). RF2 will use a rewritten RFEditPro, using wxWidgets and Irrlicht (for wysiwyg level rendering in the viewports). I think I have mentioned before that I view the RF2 tools as just as much of a project as RF2 itself. I -hope- that others will do most of the tools, though I have a feeling I will end up doing the majority of RF2EditPro itself.

I will probably take you up on that, thanks!. The menu code is almost to the point where it needs sound to be implemented.


RF2 is one of those projects where you are working on it, and then suddenly step back and go "Was I insane? How am I supposed to do this?!", then happily go back to working on it and forget all about it. It's weird like that. One minute I'm optimistic as could be about RF2's future, then the next minute I'm struggling with the 'worst bug I've ever faced' and RF2 seems doomed, then I solve it and RF2 is happily back on it's way.

But being realistic, if I don't have help this will take me 6 years. This will end up either being a team effort or another project that died of old age before it was even born. It's really up to programmers to sign on to help me in this. I already have all the facilities for team development - full CVS, etc. I just need people.

[Coty]

There is one free level builder/engine out there that looks very promising. It is called Getic . You probably already know about it, but I just thought if you didn't, you may want to check it out. It supports lightmaps.

I like Irrlicht better than OGRE because OGRE is very picky about it's custom mesh/material/skeleton format.

I also may be interested in helping you out with RF2 based on the Irrlicht engine. I can't program, but I can do models and maps when you get that far.

My choice would be Blender for Level editing and Fragmotion for models.

Do check out Getic though, if you haven't already. The level editor is not too bad. Lightmap support is a big plus. and much of the code has already been done for you, including multiplayer.

I also think Blender makes a great level editor, but it didn't have any lightmap support when I checked it out.

[AndyCR]

Thanks! I'll see if it can be used!

Thanks for your offer, RF2 will definitly need good models and maps soon.

[n321]

Just as long as you plan on making a .map to rf2 bsp compiler...ill be happy...I MUST use Radiant! all i need is rf2 to be able to compile a quake 3 .map (or doom 3) into rf2's bsp format!

[AndyCR]

It's a definite possibility.