November 30, 2005 at 1:54 am #3983
I’ve been thinking quite a bit lately about doing some more modelling for the game, and that brings me to a little problem: I’m unsatisfied with the export I wrote for Blender. I either need to do more work to that, or I need to figure out another solution.
The “other solution” I’ve been thinking about is this: Coding Scorched to import from another format that already has a good export script in Blender. I’m pretty familiar with the code used to import the MS3D models into Scorched (I have used many portions of it in my own programs*), and I can see that it may be easier to write some code to import from another file format than to perfect my Blender-MS3d export.
My question is this: Anyone have any thoughts on a popular format that might be useful for Scorched?
Any input appreciated – I wanna get modelling again, but not until I’m satisfied with a solution. 😉
* I also made the code I stole from S3d use PNG images – remind me to add what I did to Scorched – wouldn’t take long.November 30, 2005 at 4:46 am #24655
I’ve had my say… I wrote the first draft of the milkshape code.
You think it’s bad now??? Try doing models with ASE models 😉
Not that I’m shooting you down… it’s just that I figured it was the best solution at the time. Blender wasn’t an option when we started to add the new format (and if it was, it was very soon after coming out of closed source)
Also the milkshape format added options we didn’t have before:
We also haven’t implemented some of the features in the milkshape format (mainly animation) so if you want to look at a new model format make sure it can handle all the features of the old one, as well as what you want in the new one.
(And if you say .X file format I may have to hurt you 😈 … the format is fairly easy to understand, but just try and write a program that will open it properly— even the MSDN documentation on it is wrong)December 1, 2005 at 9:46 pm #24656
I don’t think that the MS3d format is bad, it’s my export script that’s bad. 😉
Maybe I’ll stick to that format, but I think I’ll rebuild my export script from the ground up. The way it is structured has made it difficult to change. Perhaps I can get it right this time. 😉
Thanks for the input Cam!
cbxDecember 7, 2005 at 8:56 pm #24657
all this talk on wich is best for 3d has me wondering..
have you guys ever heard of a 3D Object Converter?
this way you can use whatever 3d software you are used to
& work well in and you can simply convert *most* if not all
formats into whatever you wish.
heres a link as an example
although im not to happy about the lil add setup.exe
file they drop in your windows directory when you install it.
other then that its a good program
its not free .. but theres always ways to make it so
ARRRrrDecember 17, 2005 at 2:26 am #24658
its not free .. but theres always ways to make it so[
It’s not free, so I won’t use it. 😉
I have used only free software (really, legally free, that is) at home for several years now. 🙂
cbxSeptember 7, 2006 at 10:38 pm #24659
I’ve just been revisiting this idea – I’ve been looking over my export script to add armatures for animation, plus fix a few other little quirks, but it’s written in Python, and, since I don’t know Python, really, it’s a bit brutal. 😉
Again, the thought came into my head that “it would be easier to write the import for another format in C++ in Scorched” – I took a look around, and the Ogre .mesh format stands out.
- Is supported by Milkshape and Blender
- Was developed for Ogre, which is open source, so there’s plenty of info available
- Supports armatures/animations
- Supports LOD (not sure how this works – haven’t looked into it – might be easy to use, might be freakin hard… dunno)
In short, it supports everything that MS3d does, and a bit more, and I think I could get Scorched to load a .mesh file WAY faster than updating my blender .txt export (it pretty much needs a ground-up re-write to add the ability to export bones)
Also, added bonus: Using the binary .mesh format, it should speed up model loading a bit.
cbxSeptember 8, 2006 at 3:24 am #24660
If you’re confident in it, go for it. Sounds good to me.September 8, 2006 at 2:16 pm #24661
Sounds good, if the model format is well defined I could give it a go if you dont want to.September 8, 2006 at 10:09 pm #24662
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.