Pixel Perfect

I agree with that and can see that in action, but what I think Dicon is referring to and certainly what I'm seeing is that if you apply a texture with a vertical line to a face and then rotate the model 90 degrees on the z axis the line remains vertical rather than moving with the face and becoming horizontal, whether the texture is locked or not. In other words the texture is not being rotated with the face its mapped to. The help file does state the following:

Well I'm hoping someone will post a solution to this or point out where we are going wrong as 3DWS has not been supported for a while now as Leadwerks is a one man company and he moved onto the Leadwerks Engine project which has pretty much occupied his time ever since. To be honest if I have anything more complex than a really simple texture mapping to do I do it in a proper UV mapping tool like Ultimate Unwrap 3D Pro which is why I have probably never noticed this before. It's not expensive and is very powerful although there are plenty of other good UV mapping apps or modelling apps with UV mapping capability around too. The original LithUnwrap is freeware and is still a capable UV mapper once you get used to it, so if your pushed for cash that's always an option. 3DWS is nice for generating CSG models though and putting your levels together.

hmmmm ... I can't get it to lock the texture either when rotating. Either it's a bug or we are both missing something!

I'd open them in Blender or some other 3D Modelling app and rescale them before importing into 3DWS. With regard to the textures, just a silly question but you are using texture formats that DB Pro supports as if the level file references the texture files and they are in the folder they should be loaded. The .stf format textures provided with 3DWS are a unique format to 3DWS and virtually no other application in the World supports them.

I'm sure there was a command for this in the original release of the engine ... but it got taken out. [EDIT] Yep, I was right... from Leadwerks Engine version 2.0 //***************************************************************************** //**** **** //**** Mesh Layer Commands **** //**** **** //***************************************************************************** typedef TEntity (_stdcall *TCreateMeshLayer) (TEntity terrain, TEntity mesh, int resolution, flt size, int subdivision); typedef void (_stdcall *TConstrainMeshLayer) (TEntity meshlayer, flt minheight, flt maxheight, flt minslope, flt maxslope, int alignToNormal); Maybe Josh could just expose something like that again.

Great to see how well this is progressing and thanks for the tip on the filtered picking, I'll bare that in mind.

The lightmap certainly is embedded in the .3dw file and I suspect is probably stored as vertex color information in the DirectX format file although I've never used this format with 3DWS due to its limited support for terrain layers (just a single layer). The lightmap is exported as a seperate file with b3d export but I don't think its in a straight forward overlay type format so you might struggle with using that. Do you not see the lightmapping when importing the .X file into DX Studio?

You need to iterate through the child entity objects belonging to the LoadScene entity looking for the entity whose class key is named Terrain. example: // In ... for each child of level loop // Get the terrain entity childClass = GetEntityKey(newChild, "class",""); if(childClass == "Terrain") { terrain = newChild; }

Sounds great but like MG .. I need to see a vid of it in action to get me all fired up and wanting it

Yeah, if you can pull that off Rick you'll have a lot of very grateful people I'm sure.

Good point ... I can't say I've ever noticed a problem with the normals in 3DWS but surely if your subsequently applying a normal map for the bump mapping the surface normals would be ignored anyway? I guess the best way to determin this would be to open the level in something like UU3D Pro and display the normals.

I remember PushedX working with this in the past and I liked the look of the results.

Great system .. great demo Rick! Your vision of thingoids is really starting to take shape. You are rapidly becoming 'The People's Programmer' as far as a lot of Leadwerks users will be concerned. Can't wait to see where this goes next

doh ... you've started another round off again Lumooja will be posting about not having taken into account the effects of tachions spiralling backwards from the future

From my understanding so long as you can create an OpenGL viewport in your application then Leadwerks will render to this using a custom buffer. TylerH has done this before in C# and posted code in the past so you might want to do some searching of probably the old forum I'm using the same technique of parenting the Leadwerks window that wh1sp3r suggested but it's not ideal.

I couldn't agree more. Dark matter is just more sticking plaster desperately trying to hold together an outdated model of the Universe that no longer matches the observable behaviour. Science and mathematics being reflections of the less than perfect human mind always produce less than perfect models ... but we have a fun time trying to convince our selves we can explain everything. However, we might as well spend our time on the planet doing something and there is nothing we love to do more than re-create everything that our sensory perceptions lead to to believe exist ... be it in the form of a mathematical description of the Universe or a digital representation of the world in the form of a computer game

Great groundwork Aggror ... looking forward to seeing this develop!

Great look Ryao!

Are you applying baked lighting from 3DWS via the dbo object. As far as I'm aware 3DWS doesn't support bump mapping so the light map will will be applied to the surfaces as if they are flat surfaces. If this is then subsequently being overlaid on top of the dynamic lighting of bump mapped surfaces I'm not sure what the end result would be. I suspect it has little to do with 3DWS but more to do with what your subsequently doing in the engine your using (DBPro or DarkGDK I'm guessing if your using dbo format). Yeah ... DBPro ... just noticed your screen header!

I think I need to sign up to that learning curve too Mike

Watching the forums over any period of time, be it general requests or feature requests, makes me smile as I see the same old things coming back time and time again: Request for Leadwerks splash screen At least Josh's response to that one made me smile but also made me decide not to bother with a Leadwerks splash screen!

I agree with you Mike in as much as I too have little to no requirement for LUA as I'm quite happy to code everything in C++ but I think Josh needed to have his Editor appear more dynamic and that was the driving force behind the introduction of the scripting language to show people the power of scripted objects. For the artists and the less experienced programmers it does give them something more realistic and fun to play with as well as being a valid game development language for those with less ambitious projects. For me in many respects the 2.3 editor was a step backwards as it's forced me to have to use LUA with the removal of the generic properties editor and as I now hear the removal of ini file support in the not too distant future! This somewhat contradicts the assurance Josh gave prior to release that people not wanting to use LUA wouldn't need to. However, I might well end up being glad of LUAs inclusion though even if it's only for some high level scripting of AI. With regard to the water, I agree the water looked nicer in old versions of the engine but I see no real reason why those shaders couldn't be made to work in 2.31 with a little persuasion. You might need to invest in a crash course in shader fundamentals and or elicit the help of someone who is shader savvy; but I'm sure it could be accomplished fairly easily. I think Josh is aiming at a FFT solution eventually but appreciate that with Josh's lack of road maps and timescales you might not want to wait that long. It's not a problem for me and probably many others. If you can handle going back to some of the bugs that existed in the older versions then I guess that's a viable option for you. Good luck.

That's a great AI implemention MG ...well done mate .. very impressive! Sometimes the simple solutions can be the most effective.

Excellent!!! I wasn't at all convinced when I had a brief look at it that it was doable. I'll be interested to see the results once you have something to demo

Interesting work ... the light is certainly looking very natural in that final shot.