Jump to content

TorqueFan

Members
  • Posts

    130
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by TorqueFan

  1. @Azaezel

    I finally found the issue. Bear in mind this is using T3D v3.10.1. Actually the pack/unpack methods already included the rotation.


    Since I had deduced that the older version worked, I went through the motions of plugging in the updates one at a time to find the culprit. It ended up being this:


    In aiPlayer.cpp:

    void AIPlayer::updateMove(const Move* move)
    {
       if (!getControllingClient() && isGhost())
          return;
     
       Parent::updateMove(move);
    }
    

     

    Removed that method from the source and issue is gone. It appears all this really does is make a check for controlling client and ghost, then calls the original Player class' updateMove(). In my case the camera is the control object, so this here breaks the move or some such shenanigans for me I guess. Anyhow, issue resolved, and I didn't have to revert after all. Glad you posted something about it, since I woulda just carried on using the older version had I not took another peek :lol: At least now we've got it cornered.

  2. @Azaezel

    So nice of you to post this up on Christmas. I had suspected something getting lost over the wire, but I took it for granted the Player class was already passing along a rotation value. Chances are if that didn't exist already, the older versions I've reverted to didn't pass it along either.


    As of yet I hadn't been able to replicate the issue using the older versions of AIPlayer/Player, but I will definitely give this a shot using the current versions as well. If I had to pick between the two, I'd prefer the newer version of AIPlayer because all updates have been useful. Still can't believe I hadn't thought to check if Player was passing a rotation variable across the wire, as essential as rotation is to my specific implementation. Perhaps it wasn't as necessary prior to the AIPlayer datablock and additional poses being added.


    In any case, with this bug stomped out we've reached alpha with our current project so still plenty of time for updates/improvements(internally we term 'alpha' as bug-free, concept fully functional, working on visual polish and added features).


    I'll post back here when I get around to plugging this into the newer AIPlayer class and running it through the gauntlet. For science!

  3. I fixed this, but it wasn't pretty...


    I ended up having to completely replace the AIPlayer class with an older version from around 2015/2016. There have been several pose, navigation, and AFX-animation additions since that time. Something broke the rotation warping, unfortunately, so I was forced to revert.

  4. Something I probably would not have noticed if I hadn't been linking here from my site...but the entirety of the wiki and the main google search result home page are using an http:// protocol as opposed to https://


    I literally had to type https://torque3d.org in the browser to get to a secure homepage, as any searches list http://torque3d.org at the top.


    This is HUGE. The downloads page is hosted as well under http://


    While surely there is no foul play here, a huge deterrent to even navigating the community site may need looking into.


    Just briefly taking a peek I saw this issue which(I believe) is causing Torque's forum to show as not secure although it is using a secure https:// protocol:


    SEC7137: [Mixed-Content] The origin 'https://forums.torque3d.org' was loaded in a secure context and loaded an optionally blockable insecure image resource at 'http://ghc-games.com/public/nichijou_deerplex.jpg'.


    Maybe work is being performed under the hood, but thought I'd give a heads up to those in the driver's seat ;)

  5. Be teased no longer! First installment of the series! Starts off a bit slower, and there is a part about renaming the animations I'm still typing up. Will ramp up much more quickly once we get into Part II and beyond. I had a good bit of fun getting this all together :D


    Still a bit of formatting stuff I'll be working on, but I'm beat. Got worked like a mule! Picking up where I left off tomorrow, updating some pics and so on.


    https://www.upstateindie.com/tutorials/2019/12/17/T3DPlayerAnim_I.html

  6. Yes, you are right @Jason Campbell


    I apologize this spiraled out of control the way it did. Duion was right to pursue the goal of a new Soldier model, as that is exactly what I proposed originally. Sometime in between this posting and that original idea, however, I had internally shifted my focus towards something far more meaningful(in my eyes) for newcomers. That wasn't anyone's fault but my own, although I have to admit the type of behavior displayed here just shouldn't occur, and that's on my end as well.


    I'm constructing a tutorial, down to where to click in the Editor with pictures, around my ideas and I'd encourage Duion to continue to pursue his goals of getting a new Soldier model out there for the Community. If this is all 'connected' in some way is irrelevant. Just it needs to be something!

  7. Your ignorance is beyond imagination, I stated in the initial post that this is NOT about modeling a new character from scratch and I repeated that before and after multiple times.

     

    At this point I'm being called ignorant and asking for moderation help. I hadn't been able to locate any means of contacting them as of yet, but I feel like this is casting a shadow on our Community.


    I've said I wouldn't post here again but I've attempted to have an intelligible discussion with those who understand the usefulness of tutorial content and it's impossible on this forum. So, yea, I won't post here again.


    edited to add quote.

  8. Hey thanks for that @Bloodknight.


    I was beginning to wonder if all of my efforts might be lost here. That's what I'm trying to say, regardless of the source this stuff needs to be put out there in an easy to follow format. Just that understanding of 'how' this works is what's under scrutiny in my eyes. It shouldn't be a scattered all about process trying to piece together example source/script etc. just for some kid to pick up the engine and have some fun. That child might meet his full potential one day and develop the next super AAA Torque game. It's not for us to decide. It's for us to give them that ability and wish them well.


    Things will inevitably change, with 4.0 on the horizon, and I've already eluded to that in the tutorial Part I. I plan to start with 3.10.1 and then as 4.0 hits back that up with the relevant changes so old school and new school can sing in harmony.

  9. I will release this tutorial on my website for those eager to learn. Where they go from there is entirely up to them. I wanted to put it here, and perhaps create a wiki on it, but if it's unwanted I won't do that.


    I'm not going to actively try to suppress a huge wealth of resources and information from those people out there who can use it. My goal is to teach people Torque, not the animation and character creation process. That's an entirely different process, and I offered to build up a platform for users to follow that would lead up to that point. Along the lines of:


    Now you have an understanding of how this process works you are now prepared to follow Duion's tutorial about modelling a new character from scratch.


    You won't allow me to set that groundwork for you, thus I'll just do what I know is right for those people who are thirsting for knowledge. I am offering relevant and useful information for new users to engage with and enjoy while they learn the ropes. This shouldn't be such a heated discussion if we all want people to learn.


    Who cares what can or can't be distributed for a tutorial series man? I've already wasted enough of the day with you about this. I hope anyone who is interested will enjoy the new tutorial when I finish it.

  10. Here I've been building a tutorial for people to use as a learning tool. The fact that this entire idea originated in another thread where I was attempting to help a newcomer to begin with has been lost here. Originally I proposed that a new Soldier be created, and I'm still on board with that 100%. However, as I'm designing these tutorials I'm realizing that a clear and concise and easy to follow introduction is a must.


    The issue here is that it's largely being overlooked that mixamo is intended to be used as a learning process for people to enjoy. For entry level users and up to learn and see right away results so that they can build excitement around using the engine. Not to mention when they are done if they choose they can keep that character for their game if they want to and it can be legally redistributed in that way.


    I just feel like I'm trying to offer an extremely positive thing here, that will ultimately help a lot of people learn in an easy way, and it's being shot down before it gets off the ground because of differences in opinion. I mean, when it's all said and done this thread wouldn't even exist had I not taken the initiative and started being proactive and suggesting all of this in the first place. If the help isn't wanted, why do I spend the weekend trying to help?

  11. Following a tutorial that will leave you with an fully animated model that you can use in your project is NOT useless. For those actually interested in this, I'm still working on it, and not letting Duion discourage this resource for our Community.


    Goodbye Dude

  12. Also LOL that thread you linked only indicates that repackaging it for resale is not legal. You can actually still use the stuff for your own projects, even commercially.


    Here is a quote from the OFFICIAL mixamo FAQ: https://helpx.adobe.com/creative-cloud/faq/mixamo-faq.html


    You can use both characters and animations royalty free for personal, commercial, and non-profit projects including:

    Incorporating characters into illustrations and graphic art

    3D printing characters

    Creating films

    Creating video games


    Stop spreading misinformation. I hope you succeed with a new default Soldier using MakeHuman and I'm not attempting to discourage you from doing that. PLEASE do that. Just don't go around like you are learned in things you aren't and try to discredit others who are.

  13. You just don't read other people's posts at all. No one is attempting to redistribute any models or animations. Dude get a clue. I'll just let you continue to talk to yourself here and make a new model.


    Peace, and I wish you much success on that front.

  14. Also don't spread misinformation. Mixamo really is free, unless you want to use Fuse, which in our case we won't.


    Additionally, yes this IS 100% full well about learning and a tutorial.


    I find it hillarious how I took the initiative to begin a new tutorial series geared towards helping newcomers, posted on the boards I was being proactive on this front, and you ran off to try and 'head me off' and put up a post about it prior to me releasing the tutorial. Now that has evolved to you pasting up a link of some old model you created and calling that a tutorial. That is underhanded to say the least. I've tried to be civil with you and invite you to join me on this path so that we can share your ideas and mine with the Community but you have made it clear that won't be possible. The evidence is in this thread. Your reputation precedes you, Duion, so I'm just gonna let that be that.


    I'll release my tutorial, if not but for the simple fact that you are attempting to discourage it.

  15. I believe you might be misinterpreting my intentions with using mixamo here. The mixamo workflow I wanted to introduce was for exactly what I am doing, making a tutorial and introducing folks to Torque in a fun and engaging way. I've repeated myself on this point many times above and really don't think you've grasped it yet. The mixamo process is an INTRODUCTION. Not meant to be kept or cherished or integrated into the engine. Used exactly as it was designed to be used, as a learning tool. I went over all of this above, how this learning process could ultimately lead up to creating your own model, which then yes you wouldn't want to include mixamo at all for.


    If you can have fun doing something, chances are much more likely you are going to stick with it. But if you can't get to the point that you are able to model/animate/script a character just jumping headfirst into that process can be a huge deterrent.


    I also wanted to add, once again, that I am not trying to say let's use one over the other. Read carefully my wall of text above. I want both!

  16. Mixamo is free, with optional paid services. Additionally all of that is used as an introductory process to Torque animation, which is exactly what mixamo was designed for: learning.


    Again, I find you speaking to me as if I am unaware of the material involved with the topic of discussion. It's unfortunate that you really do make it so very hard to work with you. You throw around terms like 'useless' and always introduce things to folks as if they had never heard of it before and you are shedding light on something that was hidden.


    I'm not attempting to throw a new user headfirst into a character modeling and Torque hook-in process. The mixamo step is for everyone to get moving right away(again as a beginner) and get to the point that they can do those things. THIS is the underlying issue with the existing documentation that is scattered about, there is no mediator between the experienced user and the new one.

  17. Alright! Now we're onto something. As I eluded to in the other thread where this discussion started, I'm already knee deep in a tutorial about all of this stuff so I will be putting that out there real soon. More on that in a minute. For now, I'd like to thank you for taking an interest in this topic and going so far as to provide an outline of ideas. I can already see that you will be a valuable ally in the struggle to document all of this for our beautiful new peoples!


    Now I do have a small difference in opinion about the method by which we should present this information. I really feel that we need to present the information in a smaller, bite-sized fashion(which is exactly what I'm typing up now) so that it is easier to digest. I do think you are all over this, Duion, and what you are suggesting here all fits hand in glove with what I'm proposing. While we may have a difference in opinion and workflows(and honestly you have some great ideas around workflow), the point here is that the relevant information is reaching newcomers in an easy to read fashion. Let's not allow small things like this create a barrier between us, because when it's all said and done we both want the same thing for this Community: an easy way to approach the existing Player object system in Torque.


    Now I know when I proposed this idea https://forums.torque3d.org/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=1737&start=10#p12631 I suggested a new Default Soldier model. Honestly I still DO think we need this, but now that I've gotten deeper into the documentation creation process I have realized that not only do we need that replacement Soldier but we also need a kickass series of tutorials that build up to the level of expertise that you have to offer. This means that while I'm here pegging away at this series you can be preparing all of what you are suggesting at the same time and allow me to lay a little bit of groundwork for you that leads into that new Default Soldier.


    It's not really a proposition at this point, since I'm already hard at work this weekend on this new tutorial series(Part I), but I do want to emphasize here that readability is key. Rather than taking all of these advanced things into consideration when first starting out with Torque, I feel like the information should be super fun for the newcomer to start out. Advancing through the tutorials, the information gets more and more complex, until ultimately the new user is ready to tackle this here what you are talking about. See there how we can work together and make this something bigger than we would have each by ourselves? I am confident that this will fit together very well, leading the newcomer through a series and then ultimately engaging them full on with the Blender and new Soldier process. This way the user is having fun and seeing right away how easy it can be to get animated Players moving in Torque and THEN when they are full well and ready they will be prepared to tackle the more advanced things you are talking about. Make sense?


    Please let me reiterate that I want to work together with you on this. I also believe that you have a wealth of knowledge just bleeding to be shared so please let's try and see eye to eye on this. When it's all over with, we'll have all of my ideas AND all of yours in a readable format for our Community!


    1- I'm starting out with mixamo. I'm going to show people how to straight up use the entire library there as an introduction to the Player animation system. What we'll end up with here is a system for newcomers to follow that is super easy and fast and fun to get rolling with.


    2- As the user's level of experience improves(because we are actively teaching, as it were), we will slowly introduce topics such as movement triggers, weapon states, nodes, and so on.


    3 - Eventually, once the user has been prepared by this process, they will be able to digest all of the stuff you have above. Which I agree with all 100%.


    Anyways, as stated, this tutorial is already in motion. I'm going back to it now ;)

  18. That's wonderful news, noemen! I feel very strongly about this topic of helping newcomers because I have clawed my way up through the lack of information around some of this stuff myself. Not that it's not all out there, but there is such a different viewpoint from those who have been working with the engine for a number of years and those who are just stumbling in trying to get it all working.


    My goal is to help present this information in a new light. That's a bold statement, but somebody's gonna have to sit down and perform these mundane tasks in order to prevent this sort of frustration from occurring for others in the future. I'm going to be proactive on this front and do that.


    It is widely unknown to the community here, but I have been working for a long while towards this end. I have a lot of really exciting things I want to share for everyone here, but I really was planning to drop it all when 4.0 full hit. This way I'm not introducing things that will become irrelevant with its release. I feel 4.0 is at a good place, and it is Christmas time after all, so I'm going to take a more prominent stance trying to share some materials I've been silently constructing in the background. Anyways, have fun man, it's only gonna get better!

  19. Keep trying what Duion is suggesting, noemen. It's definitely not going to be bad for you to get a grip on that process. Be sure you're having fun with it! In the meantime I am behind the scenes trying to get a completely new workflow idea and tutorial ready, one that won't require any sort of initial creation just a way to use what's out there and hook it into Torque.

  20. Well this is just a combination of language barrier and difficult to understand state machine system.


    He is probably working with or looking at the default soldier, but this is not a good thing to start with, it is too high quality visually and regarding animations etc. This leads to people not understanding the basics. In a normal shooter you are always holding a weapon, so there is no animation for not holding a weapon.


    I'm still suggesting to remove the default soldier and force people to build their character from the ground up, since then people would start with what noemen wanted, a character not holding or aiming a weapon, then they would have to add a weapon and add an aim animation and they would already be almost there what he wants as final result.

     

    I think that you're onto something here, Duion. I don't agree that we should force people to build a new character from the ground up, because some sort of example should be included for newcomers. Also, depending on someone's level of experience it is highly likely they might be able to follow the code but not the animation process or vice versa. What I DO think that we should do is replace that default soldier with something more approachable. Let's just squash that so it's not an issue any longer.


    I am going to take the initiative here and provide a replacement soldier and tutorial for all of this. I am going to encourage any community member to help out if they have input. This is in no way an attempt to hijack your thread @noemen , but what I think we'll end up with here is an alternative to the existing messy introduction to player objects currently in Torque.


    Forum Etiquette

    Speaking of threads, this thread is in the wrong subforum here on the boards to begin with and when I piece together this information(hopefully all this weekend) I am going to start a new thread in the appropriate subforum and link to it here. For future questions, noemen, please be aware that forum etiquette(behavior) goes a long way to helping your issues be seen and dealt with in the correct manner. For example, this issue I've noticed you've posted up in a few different places here on the boards trying to get it looked at. In the future I'd encourage you to put up your thread(in the correct section of the boards) and use just that thread for help. Eventually someone should be able to help.


    With that, I'm off to get ahold of the relevant links and information so that I can start up that 'New Community Soldier' idea here for us all to share.

  21. @Happenstance Yep, you are right


    I think we have this solved. My colleague was able to discover my shortcoming around this issue. What happened here was when I implemented the resource by @GuyA posted above, I hadn't implemented the adjusted warping code from the other resource by Ivan. I tried each resource separately, while Guy explicitly had said that Ivan's code would be necessary for his resource to work. I was wondering why I had used that resource numerous times in the past and it worked. This is why I could still get the turn rate working but the warp was still broken.


    When I revisited this all earlier this morning, rather than create a new AIPlayer datablock as in the resource I added the maxTurnRate stuff to the player.h and player.cpp code as suggested in the comments of Guy's resource. Basically adding only the relevant warp change to AIPlayer in getAIMove(). So far, this all equates to a fix here for me. I hadn't been able to replicate the issue since.


    To Note

    Stock Torque presently does suffer from this closet case. Without modification of the warp code and that limit on turn rate, these issues can still crop up. I noticed that some of the existing code does include similar changes to what Ivan had originally proposed. However, if it isn't used in conjunction with Guy's maxTurnRate limiting warping can be broken in certain cases.

×
×
  • Create New...