02-12-13, 09:07 | #401 | |
Member
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,494
|
Quote:
Last edited by -Roli-; 02-12-13 at 09:08. |
|
02-12-13, 10:01 | #402 |
Member
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 343
|
Omg, yes that is a great idea to implement that. I think this is priority to finish the whole Lara's movement. Am i right?
Last edited by Ado Croft; 02-12-13 at 10:03. |
02-12-13, 10:56 | #403 |
Member
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,286
|
Yes. I'd love this feature. Even if local multiplayer is too much to code for you guys, to be able to record a speedrun of the level for other players to race against would be a great feature for the LE.
|
02-12-13, 19:09 | #404 |
Member
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,810
|
Multiplayer is a great idea indeed, especially because (as TeslaRus told me) code is built in a way you can play ANY character in game (i. e. gameplay is not linked to "unique" Lara, as it was in classic TRs - theoretically you can link wolf, bear, baddie, torso boss etc. as a player character). This way, not only cooperative mode is possible, but also some kind of "deathmatch", or so - only thing we need is special multiplayer levels, but that could be a challenging task for level builders!
|
02-12-13, 19:32 | #405 | |
Member
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,494
|
Quote:
|
|
02-12-13, 19:46 | #406 | |
Member
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,320
|
Quote:
believe me, i know what i'm talking about. Last edited by A_De; 02-12-13 at 19:52. |
|
02-12-13, 19:59 | #407 |
Golden
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 16,751
|
I've had a crazy idea (not related to multiplayer) that would be a lot of work and would not really be practical except as a stupid joke. I think I'll try it anyway and then present you with the results once I'm done. For that, I first have to reactivate the Mac build, though (the thing will work on Windows as well, but I am not going to develop on Windows unless I get paid for it). So you can look forward to that in the coming week.
Edit to add: By the way, in my opinion, the biggest priority is not multiplayer or single player, it's refactoring and commenting the code. It's amazing what you guys did, but it's also incredibly annoying to work with it, because I simply have no idea what's going on, and trying to figure out what is going on takes up way too much time. If you want, I can help with that and try to improve some sections of the code that you're currently not working on; just point me in the right direction. Last edited by Cochrane; 02-12-13 at 20:54. |
03-12-13, 01:13 | #408 |
Member
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,286
|
Another thing I'd like to ask, are you building your own roomedit for this? or shall we still be using the old winroomedit/NGLE? Because there are a few things you can't do with the old roomeditor that would make great improvements to levels and if you could find a way to add it to the original LE it would be great.
Smaller Squares - Even if it's just half the size of the old square (4 squares = 1 old LE square) levels suddenly look a whole lot more realistic. Doorways fit Lara better, jumping puzzles are more intricate...that sort of thing. Overhauled Diagonals - Currently we can raise corners of tiles to make a diagonal ledge, I'd much prefer a button somewhere in the roomedit that splits a tile diagonally, and allows you to select each triangle individually. This would let us make diagonal walls and platforms easily rather than relying on objects. It also lets us texture better, as we could textures triangles with different textures rather than making a transition texture. Larger map area - We are creating more open world environments and the old map size just doesn't cut it, it's too small. There is currently a very glitchy workaround in the NGLE but it can cause the roomedit to crash. The feature would just make the map area limitless (or very very far), with the builder being allowed to scroll around the map in the 2D view. Then we can make massive open world games. Last edited by Boobandie; 03-12-13 at 01:15. |
03-12-13, 03:31 | #409 | |
Member
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 3,462
|
I don't think there'll be any roomedit at all, really, from what I've read. It's simply a new and better engine to play TR1-5 levels as well as some customs and there's no plans (?) right now to add some sort of TRNG or TREP compatibility. So if people will use it to release levels with, then they will have to build levels the usual way and not encrypt them.
About the smaller squares and diagonals, apparently the room mesh data is used to calculate more precise collision on an ad hoc basis compared to the old method. It's the first bullet point in the opening posts. What I mean by this is, I guess you'll be able to have in the end much better collision when using meta2tr. Quote:
Last edited by Niveus; 03-12-13 at 03:46. |
|
03-12-13, 23:36 | #410 |
Member
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,810
|
@A_De: of course, multiplayer is useless until we have stable single player with all data formats and functions, and that's a priority. But if someone wants to write it, we can't prevent him from doing it!
@Cochrane: Yeah, TeslaRus' style of writing code is a bit cryptic, as I also tend to lost in it sometimes. Also, there are remains of russian comments that need to be translated (and it is slowly being done). I'm trying to describe things that I understand and/or write myself, but I believe that there is another tendency from my side - over-commenting the code (you can check it in audio or gui module). But anyway, over-comment is better than under-comment! @Niveus / Boobandie: We clearly need some mid-point between floor data and mesh collision approaches, as OpenTomb still lacks proper support for opaque-yet-passable textures and solid translucent textures. Maybe we need to leave "old TR compatibility mode" for classic levels, which will operate floor data for room collision, and create something else for meta2tr-ed levels. We still need to decide this. |
Thread Tools | |
|
|