Simple tool for 3DS to DTS?

#1 You need to use a modelling program with a working dts exporter.

I.e 3dsmax, milkshape3d,maya,blender.. etc

Most of these should be capable of importing a .3ds

#2 @Chris: Take a look at the dtsSDK project in HEAD. It lets you construct an in-memory DTS object and write it out. The DTS object is very straight forward so reading in a 3DS file and creating the DTS one would be pretty straight forward (there are a couple of conversions or translations you need to do but it's neither rocket nor science).

#3 @Bill: What about the extra elements DTS files seem to include, like a bounding 'hull' and the like?

#4 The usual means of including that stuff is to follow a naming/model setup convention with your importer. So a collision mesh would be named starting with Col.

Or you can do a very simple tool and just not support any of that stuff.

#5 Combine shape3ds with dtsSDK and you are well on your way =)

#6 I understand the modellers generally need to add a bunch of extra materials and layers, etc...mine complain quite regularly about it, in fact. Has there been any work done on running through the vertices in say the 3ds file and autogenerating the collision mesh (perhaps just a fitting sphere or rectangular structure)? Getting shapes in is fine and all...but without at least a collision mesh it is only useful in odd situations.
The conversion from working in say 3dstudio max out to dts seems to be the largest "artificial" slowdown in our pipeline.

#7 You cannot rush good art nor good art assets.

The reason why there isn't a 'set up my scene and export it for me' button for the DTS exporter is due to the fact that you lose a lot of control over what is happening in your scene. A script or piece of code is as smart as we make it and it would be nearly impossible to write one that would be able to do a perfect DTS scene setup like an artist can.

I strongly disagree that its an 'artificial slowdown' or even a slowdown period. If you know what you are doing you can setup and pump out a DTS scene in no time flat. It just takes practice and patience, just like it takes to work with a 3D application.

If your artists are whining about how time consuming it is, tell them to suck it up and do it, it's their job. Setting up a model for export in Torque is no different than setting it up for export in any other equivilent high end commercial game engine, you have to do extra work that's required plain and simple. I am sorry if this last paragraph sounds like a rant, but I see so many people complaining about the incorrect preconception that its too slow or difficult to work with, because it isn't, it is in fact very easy to do if even an iota of same amount of effort that was put into learning your 3D application was put into learning the same tools for your game engine.

Logan

#8 Logan is right, a basic scene setup takes only a few seconds if you know what you are doing, but getting to that level of knowledge can be frustrating.

Basic Export:

• The "base" dummy exists
• The "start" dummy exists and is a child of the base dummy
• I have at least one detail marker dummy, its name is trailed by a number e.g. "detail 32"
• All my detail dummies are linked to the "base" dummy
• I have a version of my mesh for each detail number, its name is trailed by that number. e.g. "mesh32"
• My mesh is linked to the start node (unless it is a skinned mesh)
• If my mesh uses the skin modifier, it is not linked to anything in the scene
• If my mesh uses the skin modifier, the skeleton controlling it is linked to the "start" dummy
• I have a bounding box, it totally encloses my shape through all its animations
• My bounding box is named "bounds"
• My bounding box is not linked to anything.
• I don't have any numbers trailing object names aside from detail numbers

#9 It should be noted here that the topmost nodes in the shape (which tell the exporter this is the shape I want to export) do not need to be named shape and base. They can be called anything. The two nodes without meshes are what tells the exporter that this is the shape you want exported. This is covered in the documentation.

It should also be noted that if if you build a simple mesh, and it has a detail number, and you use the 'embed' shape button, the setup is done for you (with the exception of the bounding box)

characters are another matter altogether. they require a little bit of knowledge of animation and of how to work in 3d. This is due to the power of the animation system.

It should also be noted that most of the problems encountered are due not to an especially steep art pipeline, but that the engine makes make assumptions about (in particular, vehicles and characters) what a shape contains and what it does.

Some of the pain could be minimized by changing the engine to default to the objects bounding box for collision if the collsion shape either does not exist or is borked, and by making is so palyers and vehicles do not need to be pretty much fully completed in order to work.

I agree that steps can (and should) be taken to improve the art pipeline. My opinion is that there is not anything especially hard about it.

I think that some specific items should be put forth that people feel would make it easier for them to get art into the game. So, to make the art path better, what are people proposing change?