Jump to content



Recommended Posts

  • Replies 166
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

First images the terrain color looks wrong, all my levels are very well adjusted so the vegetation blends nicely into the terrain, now everything looks messed up again.

Second image with the skybox it looks like the reflections on the paintball barriers are wrong, I used the skybox for reflective cubemap on them and they looked nice, but now the settings seem to be all wrong again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So , here , only for the red/blue skin , the transparency (or alphaBlendOp or whatever) has been activated and a little adjustment of the roughness and metalness sliders , also the sun brightness has been increased .


maybe the pixelSpecular or specular settings in the old materials has a different effect in the new engine . IDK , just saying .anyway .. hows it looking ? 🙂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/27/2023 at 4:05 AM, fLUnKnhaXYU said:

maybe the pixelSpecular or specular settings in the old materials has a different effect in the new engine . IDK , just saying .anyway .. hows it looking ? 🙂

of note: pixelSpeculars a dead entry. that was a flag for whether or not specular values operated on, well, a per-pixel basis. which is does across the board by default now. likewise specular maps aren't a thing. ORM maps which replaced em are pretty much taking those slider bars and baking em into a per-pixel sheet of the form
red = occlusion (those fake shadow lines we used to throw in diffuse textures)
green = roughness (so how blurred reflections get) 
blue = metalness (roughly how much plastic or mirror like it looks)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 3 weeks later...

This is not to be considered a whine and complain type of post . I enjoy T3D binary action and would that this only be considered as part of the fun of it .

So , perhaps youve seen the previously posted pic of my new character thumbing along a road . It is the result of having edited this model to accommodate the 70 bone limit . 14 of 16 bones were removed from the coat tail and the resulting animation was quite not good IMO .

the armature is as follows

root .............. 1

head/spine  . 5

arms/shoulders . 8

legs/feet ... 8

hand/fingers . 32

mounts . 1 (mount0 Right hand)

face/eyes . 10 

coat tail 16

total bones = 81 (maybe)

* no eyelids , no tounge , no other mounts . this should be 10 more totaling 91 .

needless to say it affords a lot of face and hand animation .

please dont crunch these numbers they may be not very close at all to actual

this little pic shows with the 16 bones in the coat tail . which could be much cooler and funner IMO .


HAVE A NICE DAY and holiday week .


Link to comment
Share on other sites

well , Kent Butler , I shall have to look into that mounting animated object to the player thing . switching garments does sound compelling . So far I havent successfully exported a baked cloth physics animated thing either (I think thats what its called) .  👍

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 I guess mounted animated objects (armatures is the only way I know of) is my only choice in this dilemma since I do not wish to trade off face and hand animation (Id actually prefer 1 armature hidden meshes and such tricks). Im glad my win7 mech can afford me this option . Anyone on the cutting edge and importing modern cloth animations into T3D ? would be really cool to check out but it seems that not many roads lead to T3D .

Duion , Im thinking flowing coat tail .


Edited by fLUnKnhaXYU
added info
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, if you just want to up the bone count for your application, you can just change

Though I really advise seeing where you can trim your bone count down first. Remember, that's all bones times all verts in a given mesh. Adds up.

Edit: I would point out one likely place for saving would be the fingers. remember there's a third person and first mesh you can feed a player

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thanks for that Azaezel and it brings some stuff to mind . Hands , one of the more finely detailed of the meshes in this model , probably just behind the face and head while also the highest number of bones involved . Secondly , actually each bone only affects a relatively small portion of the hand meshes , which in fact are rarely animated at all . Exactly the same goes for the face  leaving basically , mostly , translation to the entire model with of course a bit of rotation to things like arm/leg waist/neck joints (since as I see it , its mainly walk run movement animations unless there some dancing available . thus leaving most bones being skipped except in relation to those animated , usually , only a few bones , I presume . While , I am wanting to add 10 - 20 bones to exactly that same movement state animations + involving a couple thousand additional vertexes to the job of animating the walk or run movement in addition to some flowy coat tail during root animation . akin to nice hair or an octopus , I guess . Also I dont fancy the idea of scripting (or adding functionality to the source) to accommodate fool proof syncing of the separate objects especially considering what could be long durations of the needed animation of course meaning the movement of the coat tail mesh around the legs of the character . I feel that I have trimmed the armature carefully to perform what Im hoping to do here , unless I add a cape and hair etc etc etc . and Im kinda enjoying 4.xx and cant hardly see myself going back to 3.9 just for the number of bones available . So thank you and good luck .

 Also  , I see a pound sign followed by a "L" 67 . Ive never seen that before and Ill bet it means line 67 . NEATO

sorry if this is all stupid .You are the boss and I trust your decision but just imagine my surprise when 3.10 binary fun time turned into an unexpected road runner coyote season grand finale !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So , would anyone know if it'd be worthwhile to pursue the use of shape keys when creating a shape base model or any other class model  , actually ?? they look great in Blender  but I haven't achieved exporting the DAE with a working shape key animation . So , what Im asking is , can I do this in 4.xx ?? TY . a shape key with just a couple of bone drivers would be great .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...