Not logged inOpenClonk Forum
Forum Home Help Search Watchlist Register Login
Up Topic General / Feedback and Ideas / Full 3D Eenvironment
Post
- - By Anonymous [de] Date 2011-10-29 20:16
Hey guys,
I just tried your Openclonk Project, and it felt really good. But there is one thing that makes me wonder:
The background in the game is made with 2D textures while there are 3D objects placed in front of them. This combination is very strange and i felt like the fully prerendered 2D Clonk looks even better. Why doesn't the game deal with a full 3D environment? I think of something like this:


So that might work like a ant farm, but the cameara is fixed to the front. If you can't move the camera (like in the picture-mode of super smash bros.) you don't have to care whats behind


Also it would be nice if everything else is displayed as 3D Objects. So the grass doesn't have to be a cross of two texture (like in gwX), it could look like this:


Don't get me wrong, i love this project, but with integrating a full 3D Enviroment, i would be pretty badass
Reply
Parent - - By Ringwaul [ca] Date 2011-10-29 20:57
Hello! Nice to see more people interested in OpenClonk. :)

>The background in the game is made with 2D textures while there are 3D objects placed in front of them. This combination is very strange and i felt like the fully prerendered 2D Clonk looks even better.


This is likely due to resolution differences between the 3D objects and the landscape. Have you tried the high-resolution landscape shader? It makes the 3D objects and 2D landscape blend together much nicer.

>Why doesn't the game deal with a full 3D environment?


The technical implementation of such a feature would incredibly difficult to implement and wouldn't give us much in return. There was talk of giving the landscape 'depth', so we could have perspective effects for the camera. However, the amount of engine overhaul/rewriting required to make such a change simply did not seem worth the effort for a little visual eye-candy.
Reply
Parent - By ST-DDT [de] Date 2011-10-29 21:29 Edited 2011-10-29 21:32
I don't know how you implemted the current graphics but i read you use layers or somethin similar.
You could simlpy add another one containing the same graphics like the first landscape layer but a litte bit smallerand maybe a litte bit more white (distance fog) to  create an effect of 3Dnality.
If it had been possible to push the current landscape graphics to an image i would have simply designed an paralax object to simulate depth.
(nice idea, maybe ill code that for my selfmade maps in CR, won't take too long, but denies dynamic maps, EDIT: it doesn't if i create an ingame copy by it reading the mat-pixels, not every singel but one per 6edge pattern, but i dont' know if that will lead to lags)
Reply
Parent - - By PeterW [gb] Date 2011-10-29 21:49 Edited 2011-10-29 21:58
Everything is done with 2D textures in any case. There are just various methods for simulating a 3D look. So you are saying you don't like the approach taken for the landscape? What exactly would you like to see? Parallax? Shadows? I can't really picture what you mean by "full 3d environment" - provided you aren't talking about actually making the game 3D.
Reply
Parent - - By Anonymous [de] Date 2011-10-29 23:02
I meant visual eye-candy Ringwaul mentioned. I wasn't aware of the effort that is necessary to realize it ;) I'm not into programming, but is it possible to implement some scripts from the gwX Voxel-Engine to achive this effect?
Reply
Parent - - By PeterW [gb] Date 2011-10-29 23:14
"Visual eye-candy" still doesn't really tell me much :)

Could you maybe post a screenshot and show exactly what you'd want to look differently? Then I can tell you my opinion whether technical changes such as moving to another graphics data representation would actually help with that goal. As far as I'm concerned, your "ant hill" image is exactly what is already rendered.
Reply
Parent - - By Newton [de] Date 2011-10-30 18:22
Wasn't there a game 10 years (or so) ago where you would manage a dwarfish(?) mine in 2.5D? I think this would be a good example.
Reply
Parent - - By PeterW [gb] Date 2011-10-30 20:08
I suppose you don't mean Dwarf Fortress?
Reply
Parent - - By Newton [de] Date 2011-10-30 20:13
yes
Reply
Parent - - By PeterW [gb] Date 2011-10-30 21:01
As in "you don't" or "you do"? Because I really don't see what visual eye-candy we might possibly derive from an ASCII game.
Reply
Parent - - By Newton [de] Date 2011-10-30 22:30
As in: "yes, I don't mean Dwarf fortress". Isn't that obvious?
Reply
Parent - - By Mafi [de] Date 2011-10-30 22:37
English lacks the German "doch" as in:
"Ja (das nicht)" vs "Doch (das)"
That's why I hate negative questions.
Reply
Parent - By PeterW [gb] Date 2011-11-09 00:57
To make up for that, you can easily say "I do". In my mind, that and "no" are the two valid answers to a negative question. But hey, I'm no native either :)
Reply
Parent - - By PeterW [gb] Date 2011-10-31 08:16
Well, could you describe what you mean better than? I have no idea what you mean.
Reply
Parent - By Zapper [de] Date 2011-10-30 21:25
Dwarf Fortress is not from 10 years ago - the last devblog entry dates 10/28/2011 :<

also, sure you mean DwarfFortress? (Screenshot: http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/screens/dwf6.png )
Reply
Parent - - By Matthias [de] Date 2011-10-30 22:33
Wiggles
Reply
Parent - By Newton [de] Date 2011-10-30 22:42
Exactly
Reply
Parent - - By PeterW [gb] Date 2011-10-31 14:37 Edited 2011-10-31 14:44
Like the views shown in this review?

To me it sounds like the main difference there is parallax - as well as floors / ceilings that appear through the changing perspective. Do we want that?
Reply
Parent - - By Clonkonaut [ie] Date 2011-10-31 17:04
Well, with appearing floors / ceilings you get at least the impression of deepness.
Reply
Parent - - By PeterW [gb] Date 2011-10-31 17:15 Edited 2011-10-31 17:19
It's one of the ways you can create that impression. Note that, say, in the anthill example we didn't even see floors and ceilings. Also note that this kind of thing necessarily is pretty much invisible in the middle of the screen (where you are looking straight into it) - arguably the portion of the screen that's most interesting at any given moment.

I can try to hack up a prototype to see what this would look like with pixel shaders. Idea would be to draw the background layer with parallax and maybe transform textures so they look more like a floor as seen from the side. Plus appropriate lighting. Wouldn't work for extreme values, but might give an idea whether we're actually interested in this.
Reply
Parent - - By Clonkonaut [ie] Date 2011-11-01 15:53

> Also note that this kind of thing necessarily is pretty much invisible in the middle of the screen (where you are looking straight into it)


The camera should of course have a certain angle. So looking from above normally maybe tilt below if the clonk moves up.
Reply
Parent - By PeterW [gb] Date 2011-11-01 17:41
I'm not so sure about the whole thing. After all, this kind of thing hides information from you, strictly speaking - even though it's "only" the background material at certain places.
Reply
Parent - - By PeterW [gb] Date 2011-11-09 00:50
Hm, have been thinking a bit more about this - strictly speaking, we already have ceilings: We make the edges round-ish in order to make them visible. So to improve the 3D-ishness of the whole thing, we would actually "only" need to distort the texture depending on the normal and the perspective. The good thing is that there's already a standard algorithm for that: parallax mapping.
Reply
Parent - By PeterW [gb] Date 2011-11-14 13:56 Edited 2011-11-14 14:01
Hm, this is really hard to notice... At least if I do it correctly for the current rounded edges. The eye simply can't see that the rounding is 50% steeper at one point over the other. I think we'd have to switch to "harder" edges in order for this to actually have any visible effect. Hm, let's keep it in mind anyway.
Reply
Parent - - By Luchs [de] Date 2011-11-01 15:23
Also, Trine.
Reply
Parent - By Clonkonaut [ie] Date 2011-11-01 15:50
Or Trine (1), which isn't that advanced in comparison to 2 ;) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_edpi_31Rf4
But yes, a very nice example!
Reply
Parent - By PeterW [gb] Date 2011-11-01 15:54
Yes - but that's definitely a full 3D environment which just so happens to only inhabit 2D mechanics.
Reply
Parent - - By B_E [de] Date 2011-11-07 19:51

>like in the picture-mode of super smash bros.


That's actually precisely what I thought a few weeks ago, but I filed it under "probably not important enough for developement" (Ringwaul: "incredibly difficult to implement and wouldn't give us much in return"), since even when it would be implemented it would merely stay a gimmick.

Also, hi from me, nice seeing fresh ideas!
Reply
Parent - By Ringwaul [ca] Date 2011-11-08 00:36
Hm, well I was referring to actual polygonal 3D. A gimmick to emulate perspective would definitely be simpler.
Reply
Parent - - By Sven2 [de] Date 2011-11-14 14:51
This reminds me: Are we even using perspective projection for object models at the moment? I.e., if one Clonk stands on the left side of the viewport and another at the right side, then do you see more of the right side of the left Clonk and more of the left side of the right Clonk? Or is it all parallel projection?

I imagine having perspective projection on objects would already give us loads of opportunities to make the game more 3Dish. For instance, if larger rock-objects are added into the ground, you would get a feeling of depth as you scroll through the landscape.
Reply
Parent - By PeterW [gb] Date 2011-11-14 15:52
I don't think so. This might even make more sense for landscape objects, as we could give them a "Z" parameter - so for example grass in front of the landscape moves perspectively relative to grass in the back. Could be a better way to achieve parallax effects.
Reply
Up Topic General / Feedback and Ideas / Full 3D Eenvironment
Post

Powered by mwForum 2.29.7 © 1999-2015 Markus Wichitill