Duion

Being able to pick smaller numbers may not be a solution since the one color picker cannot go lower: 0.024 is #060606 and next step is 0.027 which is #070707 and inbetween there is none, that is already the smallest steps you can go. So you are only left with a handful of brightness steps where you can adjust night ambience.

I made a comparison screenshot of the same scene with same lighting settings in scatterSky, one in 3.8 and one in 3.9 with the new deferred rendering. The settings are: night color: 0.2 fog color: 0 moonlight color: 0.3 3.8: http://duion.com/files/temp/screenshot_005-00002.png 3.9: http://duion.com/files/temp/screenshot_TG_Fields_night008-00002.png As you can notice the new version is extremely more bright with the same settings. PS: You can also see that the black fog, does not darken anymore in 3.9. PPS: The first screenshot in 3.8 had HDR turned off, that is why the colors are more saturated, but for the brightness it does not alter much, since HDR actually darkens the scene and in 3.9 where it is on, it is still much brighter.

I noticed the ambient colors in 3.9 being overall much brighter. Before 3.9 it was like that 100% bright was 100% bright, 50% bright was 50% bright and 0% was 0% bright, now it feels more like the algorithm works different and 50% bright is more like 85% bright and 25% is like 70% bright etc. What I want to say is that if you want to work with dark scenes like night, you only have like the lower 10% of the brightness scale to work with, since everything else is too bright and the scale is too small to being able to adjust it well through the slider. Like if you want night brightness levels you now have to use values from 0.05 to 0.00 now. For example in one scene before I had for night ambient the value 0.2 and now I have to go down to like 0.025 to 0.035 to have a similar result, you cannot even enter such small numbers in the editor, you can enter only two digits after the comma, you can only hope to hit it with the mouse slider. Overall it looks like you have to go down to almost 10 times lower to achieve a similar result now. So it seems some algorithms have changed like the ambient scale as well as brightness and gamma, which now work differently, since you have brightness, contrast in addition to gamma and gamma only works in a small range now from 2 to 2.5 above and below it will not do anything. So any ideas what has been going on to the algorithms and rendering? I don't necessarily want it changed, but at least the color picker menu needs some change either to be able to pick the colors better and more accurate or bringing the algorithm up so you can use the proper range.

1 or 2 are the only sizes that work well, everything else gets into too big issues. If you want to save polygons you can increase the terrain LODing scale, it will remove polygons in the distance by reducing them into bigger polygons, that should be enough.

I was thinking about a new system to handle lightmaps, since the old system is complicated and has its issues. I opened an issue for it, but I also want to discuss it here, for some feedback. https://github.com/GarageGames/Torque3D/issues/1729 "The current system of lightmapping in T3D is not very practical to use, since you need to add the lightmap into each slot of each material that your shape uses, which creates several big problems: 1. You cannot reuse materials, since each material is only limited to one shape and I for example have materials that are reused over the game. So you would need to create a new material each time you reuse textures. 2. You cannot reuse shapes in different scenes, since the lightmap is fixed to the conditions they have been made for, so for each scene you would need to create a new shape with a new material to meet the new lighting conditions. 3. You have to setup each shape and each material by hand. The idea I have will fix all that. My idea is to automatically add a lightmap, if available by providing a specific texture for it. So you would need to create a lightmap UV in the second UV channel for all your objects, bake the lightmap in modeling program and then export it, in Torque3D you would just add the lightmap for the model by naming it a specific way to indicate it is the lightmap for that shape. Like with the terrain, where you have theTerrain.ter and theTerrain_basetex.dds then you would have myModel.dae and myModel_lightmap.dds and the engine would automatically apply it to the shape avoiding to having to use the material system. You could also setup multiple lightmaps for each scene light myModel_lightmap_scene1.dds, myModel_lightmap_scene2.dds etc. For control over it, you could have a checkbox for whether to use lightmap yes/no and which one to use and maybe an intensity slider and this would fix all the issues I named and make it overall more easy to use." So what do you think? Is this doable or did I overlook issues with that system? What is basically needed is redirect the models lightmap directly to use the specific file and not using the material system, so point to a file and automatically apply it in the lightmap slot in the second UV texture for the model, depending on each object instance.

You have a "allowPlayerStep" checkbox in the inspector in the editor on the right bar, activate it, it is off by default now I think.

Your game cannot be a mod for Torque3D, any game produced with a game engine is a standalone game. If you mod a game engine, you get another game engine, not a game.

I just deleted the symlink files and replaced them with the real file, called like the symlink, this allows me to shift the files through windows file system and not breaking them.

It is not your fault if the campaign fails, it fails for most of the people now. I even saw a project fail that got added to the staff picks of the crowdfunding site, because it was so good. You cannot really do much promotion yourself if you do not have many followers. Only chance is if you get a big youtuber, game magazine/news site/tech site feature your game. If you do not have all of that you could try paying for some advertising. But even if all fails, if you manage to get it released on Steam you will for sure sell a bunch of copies, the release will give you more exposure than you ever had.

Look at that thread, somebody recently worked on a solution, so you may want to test if it works: http://forums.torque3d.org/viewtopic.php?f=23&p=6173#p6173

Oh I forgot, you cannot change that in materials, I confused it with the footprint decals, sorry my mistake.

@flysouth In that case you are left with the possibility to deactivate decals on the material the object uses, this works all the time.

The bullet stops always when it hits something or when the maximum distance is reached. You can try integrating an armor piercing projectiles resource found here: http://www.garagegames.com/community/resources/view/21671 It is on my to-do list as well.

No, you also get stuck because of more edged terrain.

I once tried a terrain with 0.5 square size, looked a bit more detailed but you get stuck more often and it increased the polycount by a whole lot, so overall not a good idea, better work on better textures and blending instead smoothing the terrain mesh more.

You can deactivate decals per material and per object instance in the scene editor, set "decal type" to none.

90 Degrees equal 1.5707963 in case you need that value

I don't see what you want to use itch.io for, it seems to be mainly for mobile and 2D games and even if you want to distribute assets, you can do that now already, there is nothing keeping you back.

I have a similar problem and could not find a solution so far as well other than deactivating decals for objects that can be destroyed. Decals are just objects with a coordinate in the world I think, the same way you place props in the world, you place them and they are there, minus the object inspector features.

itch.io is for hipsters.

As I said before TSC is an initialism, not an extension used by microsoft. If you check the page for the extension: http://filext.com/file-extension/TSC you will see its used by TINA pro, circuit simulator software. Low risk for collision among torque users. If you check the page for .t3d however: http://filext.com/file-extension/T3D its used by Swift 3D, Topaz 3D, and Unreal Engine. High risk for collision. So you are right.

Hm you are right, all those extensions are already in use, so either use .t3d or just leave it as it is.

It is just one click to convert them. In blender there is a hotkey for it, or a checkbox on export, so this should not really be a problem. Personally I just ignored if I have ngons so far and it worked fine.

You can switch to wireframe mode inside the engine to see the triangles, otherwise I would have no idea how to test what the engine does with it, but I guess it triangulates them.

Yes, that may be true, since they will get triangulated and this may produce ugly results.