Where would mappers rather see these models?

[Springheel]

Not sure where to put these, so I thought I would ask the people most likely to use them.

 

Most module sets have an empty window designed to allow the player to climb through. The model usually has an empty hole in the wall, with a separate frame model and window model designed to fit inside (see image). The mapper combines them as desired and turns the window model into a door entity.

 

My question is, where would mappers prefer to find the separate frame/window models?

[Goldwell]

I think to help save the mapper jumping around between folders it's best to keep the windows for the associated module set in their folder. It seems more logical that way, just create model and the windows are right there in with the set.

[Epifire]

I think to help save the mapper jumping around between folders it's best to keep the windows for the associated module set in their folder. It seems more logical that way, just create model and the windows are right there in with the set.

 

My thoughts exactly. In that same vein of thinking, I'm a big fan of using the same naming convention for parts designed as a set. I'm usually that guy who just arrow keys around in a set to find something, so it's really handy when all the intended assets are all in a bunch.

[Destined]

I agree. Just yesterday, I found a model of the timber exterior set (i.e. the timber01_baywindow02), that I haven't used yet, because it was not in the architecture/modules/exteriors/ext_timber01 folder, but the architecture/windows folder. It makes sense in both folders, but while working with the exterior modules, it simply did not occur to me to look in the windows folder.

I have asked this once before, but cannot remember the answer: Is it possible to get a model to appear in two different folders? I.e. is it possible to define more than one "editor_displayFolder" entries? If this was the case, you could put the windows in the modules as well as the windows folder, so mappers could find them regardless of which folder they look into.

[Obsttorte]

I have to disagree with my previous posters. We already have windows and windowframes in the window folder. I would not derive from this standard as it is only confusing. Jumping around between two folders isn't a big thing imho as later on you copy most of the stuff anyways. In addition, mappers may not neccessary use the windows in combination with the wall modules or vice versa. So no real need to have them in the same folder.

 

Having a copy in each folder seems like a waste to me.

[Bikerdude]

Is there a way to have the Windows in the physical windows folder, but appear in the matching module set in DR?

[Destined]

If I understand you correctly, this should be the difference between "editor_displayFolder" and "model". The former defines the folder in DR, in which the model appears, while the latter defines the location on the hard drive.

[Springheel]

If I understand you correctly, this should be the difference between "editor_displayFolder" and "model". The former defines the folder in DR, in which the model appears, while the latter defines the location on the hard drive.

 

That only works with entities, not models.

 

The only way to make models appear in both folders is to have two copies.

[Bikerdude]

The only way to make models appear in both folders is to have two copies.

Fair enough then, On one hand I agree with Obs, but on the other I have gotten used to all the new modules and associated parts being in the same respective folder - from a workflow point of view its much faster.

[Destined]

The only way to make models appear in both folders is to have two copies.

Hm, multiple copies would bloat the size of TDM unnecessarily, so I would object to that. I did not know that the editor_displayFolder is only used for entities, so multiple entries can apparently not be achieved with only little work and without said bloating. Obsttorte has a fair point, I think it may fit best in the windows folder, so it can also be found by mappers not using the modules. Would you consider to move other windows that are not part of a module themselves (like the bay-windows) into that folder as well? After all, these might also be of interest to mappers not using the modules.

[Springheel]

Would you consider to move other windows that are not part of a module themselves (like the bay-windows) into that folder as well? After all, these might also be of interest to mappers not using the modules.

 

 

Once they're released they can't be moved, because then maps using them will have an error.

 

I've gone back and forth about this in the past, which is why I haven't been consistent. There are valid points for both (or all three) choices. I'll go with whatever the majority of mappers prefer going forward.

[Destined]

Ah, right, maps use the given path. Things I tend to forget...

[Obsttorte]

You could theoretically create entity definitions for the windows etc...

 

This way you could have one folder for the models, but two entity defs which place them in both folders in the "create entity" menu. If you want to use the lod versions you have to use the entities anyways and the defs are only textfiles that don't weight that much.

[NeonsStyle]

Why not put them in a modules/windows and modules/doors folders? With both filled and empty variants. I hate having to change folders, its much nicer

if they are where I expect them to be.

[Springheel]

You could theoretically create entity definitions for the windows etc...

 

This way you could have one folder for the models, but two entity defs which place them in both folders in the "create entity" menu. If you want to use the lod versions you have to use the entities anyways and the defs are only textfiles that don't weight that much.

 

Either way I still have to pick a folder to put the model in. And I have a feeling mappers would be unlikely to look under the entity tree when looking for models--less likely than checking a different model folder.