Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Solutio Letum
Terpene Conglomerate
151
|
Posted - 2013.07.13 19:40:00 -
[31] - Quote
Cant people understand this is part of the current upgrades being made to the model. Its a physical problem meaning a graphical one also, they are remaking the models to V3 thats what is being done, until everything is V3 i guess they wont upgrade the whole physics engine on TQ.
Dont you guys remember the incursion mothership with the asteroid bouncing on it?? remember that video? Thats what V3 is supposed to be from all i can remember, they have been working on this side of the game for years now. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
15472
|
Posted - 2013.07.13 19:47:00 -
[32] - Quote
Solutio Letum wrote:Dont you guys remember the incursion mothership with the asteroid bouncing on it?? remember that video? Thats what V3 is supposed to be from all i can remember, they have been working on this side of the game for years now. No, that was just a demo of what DX11 and tesselation can do on the client side. The client does not handle physics calculations so that won't change how you'll actually collide with stuff (only how it gets animated for the viewer's pleasure).
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Multor Kaston
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
12
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 11:10:00 -
[33] - Quote
Milan Nantucket wrote:Multor Kaston wrote:Tron 3K - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reading_comprehensionYou win at sucking at that^. Being discussed is the collision detection itself, not how to work around it. At that, your suggestion isn't full-proof, as mission objects can be 30km in diameter yet it will say 0km distance from the object no matter where you're at. Whitehound - What do you mean? You win at not reading the your own link above. Full-Proof is non-existant meaning in order for someone to comprehend what your typing then learn how to spell. Maybe fool proof... or dumby proof or idiot proof. http://oxforddictionaries.com/words/spelling And what does "the your" mean, might I ask? Let alone your sentence structure... See what happens when you obsess over such things? You end up making yourself look ridiculous and fullish .
Tron 3K wrote:Multor Kaston wrote:Tron 3K - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reading_comprehensionYou win at sucking at that^. Being discussed is the collision detection itself, not how to work around it. At that, your suggestion isn't full-proof, as mission objects can be 30km in diameter yet it will say 0km distance from the object no matter where you're at. Whitehound - What do you mean? OP http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SarcasmYou suck at this^.. And you are this -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IdiotIts fun with these arrows and wikipedia.. When you learn to take sarcasm and someone being a smartass in stride and not respond you won't get another smartass remark.. I don't suck at understanding sarcasm, you just suck at conveying it. Do you notice other people as well have commented that staying within 4km is not a feasible solution? Of course I considered you may have been just trolling with that suggestion. I also considered you may not have been. Why are you trolling anyways? Nice life.
Idiot is a word I had thought had described you upon the first post you had made. I'm glad you've come and confirmed it. |
Multor Kaston
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
13
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 11:38:00 -
[34] - Quote
Ash Katara wrote:Another aspect of this is that while we are unable to fly through other ships or objects, we have absolutely no issues shooting threw them. This also seems add to me. If they ever re-visit collision detection, hit-boxed it would be nice to also disallow shooting through other objects or have those shots strike the obstructing object. I believe this has been discussed and the consensus was such a system would create too much lag and might not even function properly anyways. Don't quote me on that though. |
Arthur Aihaken
The.VOID
36
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 12:35:00 -
[35] - Quote
How about collision detection for weapons? It might actually be fun using some of these stationary objects as cover. |
Ace Uoweme
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
448
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 13:19:00 -
[36] - Quote
Solutio Letum wrote:Cant people understand this is part of the current upgrades being made to the model. Its a physical problem meaning a graphical one also, they are remaking the models to V3 thats what is being done, until everything is V3 i guess they wont upgrade the whole physics engine on TQ.
Dont you guys remember the incursion mothership with the asteroid bouncing on it?? remember that video? Thats what V3 is supposed to be from all i can remember, they have been working on this side of the game for years now.
Years?
Ever seen the collision model used in WoW? Players walk through each other. The reason for it is seen in Battlefield: the griefing it can cause if one player stops at a doorway or window.
Realism has a place in solo games. But in MMOs with problem children they don't work at all.
It's a sci-FI game. Not science fact. "In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." ~George Orwell
|
Multor Kaston
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
17
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 07:15:00 -
[37] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:How about collision detection for weapons? It might actually be fun using some of these stationary objects as cover. That would require them to redo the entire weapons system, would it not? As right now I'm quite sure the visuals are simply there for aesthetics; the missles/beams themselves not actually existing as physical entities within the world.
I do like the idea though, if they can get around lag issues. Ideally this would be implemented. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
320
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 07:54:00 -
[38] - Quote
Tessellation. & DX11. That is the video that was mentioned above. V3 is just prettiness with a bit of dynamic lighting effects & makes it easier to re-skin the same shape ( think on this last one). Tessellation is what had the direct skin mapping for collisions. |
Debora Tsung
The Investment Bankers Guild
186
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 07:59:00 -
[39] - Quote
Jonny Monroe wrote:Loosely related: NPC pathfinding.
I go into a mission and there's a bunch of NPC ship groups, one of which is 180km away behind a static object. After klilling all other groups, I now have to drift 90km over to them to kill them then 90km back to the acceleration gate. If that static object wasn't there, they would have come to me while I was fighting the other groups. As it is, the entire group spends the 20minutes+ bumping their spaceships into an object in space. I can only imagine the pirate captains of these ship raging at unfair universe for putting an object there and giving them no tools to go around it. They look pretty damned stupid either way, just hitting their heads against a wall because they can't figure out to go around.
If you don't want to put at least basic pathfinding on your NPCs, you could at least do them a favour and not put objects in their way.
Immersion = killed.
As far as I could see so far (the few times I actually bothere to check) those ships were actually stuck inside that large collidable object. For whatever reason some missions seem to spawn NPC ships so close to some objects (like the Amarr Station ruins present in some missions) that they actually glitch inside them unable to ever leave it again. Hooray for mission design. -.- There's nothing a million chinese guys can't do cheaper. |
Multor Kaston
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
18
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 08:04:00 -
[40] - Quote
Debora Tsung wrote: For whatever reason some missions seem to spawn NPC ships so close to some objects (like the Amarr Station ruins present in some missions) that they actually glitch inside them unable to ever leave it again. Hooray for mission design. -.-
Lol, I actually had something similar happen in my first couple weeks of playing. I ended up inside a station like that somehow but in low-sec. Sat there thinking I found a glitched out safe spot. Well, someone locked onto me and showed me otherwise .
|
|
Burl en Daire
The Ecstatic Cult of Dionysus Trifectas Syndicate
8
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 08:05:00 -
[41] - Quote
I was stuck on a data can the other day for five minutes at 6000m. I couldn't even use my data module. I have also had so run ins with roids that we further than 4k. I never had any of these problems before the latest expansion. |
Debora Tsung
The Investment Bankers Guild
186
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 08:20:00 -
[42] - Quote
Multor Kaston wrote:Lol, I actually had something similar happen in my first couple weeks of playing. I was trying to warp out in low-sec but had that "bump the station" endlessly problem. It eventually pushed me THROUGH the station somehow, so I disengaged warp thinking I found a glitched out safe spot I could troll from. Well, within a few minutes someone locked onto me and showed me otherwise .
Yeah, the first time I saw that hollowed out asteroid in a mission I thought "AWESOME" and pilotest my Merlin right into it, star wars feeling and all... o_O
Was fun until I tried to turn around and get out of it. It took me only 15 Minutes at a speed only slightly faster than the average pedestrian... There's nothing a million chinese guys can't do cheaper. |
Inxentas Ultramar
Ultramar Independent Contracting Home Front Coalition
588
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 08:41:00 -
[43] - Quote
The answer is math. Because it needs to be done serverside algorithms must be simple and fast to compute.
Take two spheres. One is the object, the other is you. Calculate the distance between the centers and subtract the radius if both. Is that number lower then 0? The objects collide and the collision is handled. Problem? The 3D models obviously aren't all sphere shaped. |
Debora Tsung
The Investment Bankers Guild
187
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 08:49:00 -
[44] - Quote
Inxentas Ultramar wrote:The answer is math. Because it needs to be done serverside algorithms must be simple and fast to compute.
Take two spheres. One is the object, the other is you. Calculate the distance between the centers and subtract the radius if both. Is that number lower then 0? The objects collide and the collision is handled. Problem? The 3D models obviously aren't all sphere shaped.
But, spheroid ships would be cool, too. :)
I always wanted my private little mini death star. There's nothing a million chinese guys can't do cheaper. |
Vorll Minaaran
Centre Of Attention Middle of Nowhere
11
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 13:46:00 -
[45] - Quote
Devblog about Destiny (EVE's physics simulation engine) from 2009. You can see how 'easy' to bugfix/improve it: http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/facing-destiny/ |
Alicia Aishai
Universal Freelance CONSORTIUM UNIVERSALIS
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 04:24:00 -
[46] - Quote
OP makes a good point. I was almost stuck several times, including one so badly that I was starting to wonder whether I should just self-destruct... In the end I got out after 10 minutes but that wasn't a very good 10 minutes given that it was in null and fully exposed to gank.
I understand the point people are making that this is not a priority item for devs and CCP has better things to do, which may as well be true.
However, there are easy things which could be done: - Give us an option to see the collision boxes on the screen in "wire view" so at least we understand what's happening. Rather than bumping on invisible objects or going through visible objects, both of which are very frequent... - Improve path finding (this can be done on client side, no server resources used) so that people don't get stuck 10 minutes trying to go around a (small) asteroid. Right now, the path finding is just horrendous. - Have some sort of failsafe to avoid players being stuck in places where wrap is impossible and getting out is a nightmare (or impossible) Edit: by failsafe, I mean a /unstuck command or similar; to avoid exploit it could be disabled in combat
Those 3 things do not require a lot of developer resources to be delivered. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Tribal Band
574
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 19:27:00 -
[47] - Quote
It's because their collision maps are old as **** and badly in need of updating.
It annoys the hell out of me when asteroids are much bigger than they appear (which makes it easy to get stuck in an asteroid belt that looks fairly easy to move through), and in missions and other deadspace pockets you have to memorize where the invisible collision areas are, just so you don't get stuck, and because they are completely arbitrary and bear almost no resemblance at all to the actual structure of the site. Same goes for stations. Acceleration gate collision maps are entirely too big. You warp to them at zero and land at anywhere from 1500m to -3500m (from the collision map edge). You have to be lucky to not have to fly away from it for a while just to be able to use it. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |