BLOG REMOVED

#21 Agreed, and with the Steering Committee being on hold..

www.garagegames.com/community/forums/viewthread/135693.

It might be that a bunch of us need to get together on some of this stuff in order to keep T3D moving forward.

Ron

#22 it might not be best to start it in this blog but hell who cares.

We all know you have been in the committe and that you left it as it took to much of your time -

i would suggest a less time consuming approach of things.
instead of going the steering C way of things, lets just
take a look at what we got here

more then 1 individual that is working on a fps game with T3D MIT
(that is just to make clear that discussions about how limiting the engine to a fps game are so wrong - are just wrong here)

Now the situation is that EyeCandy along with Gameplay Mechanics are the 2 keys that need to be worked on.

the worst thing is that we all actually still work alone on the Engine side of things.
How often did we all read something about the GMK and about countless resources that are almost all actually made for FPS Gameplay Mechanics.

So my suggestion would be the following
Lets take the latest T3D MIT Build
and enhance it and lets just make a FPS Edition of it,
remember this is not about showing the Engine, we are really past that.
Now its just time todo something together!

The following things
GMK
HitBoxes
Weapon Sway
Decals Depending on Material
Explosion and SFX Depending on Material
Structure and Armor Piercing Projectiles
Advanced Crosshair
Mount images on images

all those for example are things that i already got in my Engine built
(am sure most of you guys are actually porting the sam e Resources)
most of those are not functional yet as there are a couple of things that are not working or let me reprhase am really not a coding monkey.

However am still working on it and i would be willing to
work with others aslong as they follow the idea of a T3D FPS edition.

the other thing EyeCandy
we all agree that are ways to fake stuff but there is at the end a right way and a wrong way todo these things.

Together we might able to pull of some fancy shader stuff but alone, well Ron you at least know how long it takes to get to teh mountain.

Anyways thats my suggestion, who wants
jump on the boat and lets start a thread and outline what we all got and where to start.

#23 I have to agree with your thoughts. Perhaps, by making versions of the engine that are 'specific' to particular tasks, we can keep this thing alive. The hard part is getting more than you and myself working on these things. After all, I can pretty much ensure that even you and I (working on similar tasks) would not entirely agree on a particular approach. Still, this is one way I see to move the engine forward and I would be willing to agree to disagree at times.

Ron

#24 Ron and jolinar,
Hey I'm willing to help out.. I'm not a code monkey either but I have a
basic idea of c++, and basic modeling. I also have a little understanding of shader, plus some that I've purchased over the years that still work with T3D.
Let me know. Doing this would also help with the current project I'm doing.

#25 Hey guys,

@Ron am sure aswell that we would get head2head in some cases
but am for example almost always adding stuff as modules
this way if it doesnt work like expected or lets set it in another light
if someone in the group doesnt need that feature,

then its easy to just leave it out!

Now from what ic and know is that you Ron and Kory aswell are working on a FPS Game.

So my idea starts here - lets get together
line out the basic structure and what is needed
along with what evryone of us wishes for and/ or wants to have
and this way we can make sure that there is no missunderstanding.
Either way i will start a thread and who wants can jump on, it is not a must do thing - if someone prefers to work alone, so be it.

Anyways who wants/ wishes
here you go lets start
www.garagegames.com/community/forums/viewthread/135730

#26 Yep, I am in as well. Was actually going to post a blog about it.

Ron