Arrow Model Orientation

[Domarius]

Going back to arrow orientation for a bit - I don't know how much has changed in the code or with the models since I did the arrow script, but back then, the arrows, when placed as ammo sitting around the level, always pointed upward by default and sat halfway through the floor.

 

This would get really really annoying for mappers since they would have to rotate each arrow individually each time they place them in the level.

 

What I propose is for them to be re-modelled with a new orientation so that when they are dropped into a D3 map, they are lying flat on the ground by default and the mapper only needs to rotate it along the vertical axis to point it in whatever direction nessecary.

 

The arrow script can be re-adjusted to orient the arrow to whatever.

[Dram]

err...that's already been changed Dom afaik. now the arrow tip is at the origin.

 

its not really a problem for the mapper to rotate the arrow anyways - a 2 second job, 5 if you're slow, and then you can clone it till you're heart's content

[New Horizon]

err...that's already been changed Dom afaik. now the arrow tip is at the origin.

 

its not really a problem for the mapper to rotate the arrow anyways - a 2 second job, 5 if you're slow, and then you can clone it till you're heart's content

 

Agreed. Doesn't bother me at all. An AI, chair or anything else on the other hand would be annoying.

[Ishtvan]

They might be lying upright in a quiver or a barrel too, mappers don't necessarily have to place arrows down with the long part parallel to the ground. I don't really care though, not being a mapper, would just have to change some code parameters if they were rotated.

[Domarius]

Most of the time they are lying down, don't you think?

 

I suppose you can clone it. But that means you have to keep scrolling back to other parts of your level to clone some more arrows. Instead of using the handy rightclick menu which should be quicker.

[sparhawk]

It doesn't really matter in which direction they are facing, unless you can proove that that there is a prefered orientation. After all, if a mapper distributes them over the map, he will rotate them in random directions anyway, so it doesn't matter much, wether they are rotated wrong or not, because I would expect that they are facing the wrong direction in 90% of the cases, no matter which initial rotation you choose.

[Domarius]

I expected as much from you.

 

Your argument would also work for a chair - sure it can conceivably be oriented in any direction depending on what happend to it, but MOST of the time it's going to be in its upright position, isn't it?

 

It's just a logical time saver.

[Gildoran]

He's saying that you're not going to just have all arrows in your level pointed to the east. Since you're going to have to rotate them random directions (northwest, almost south, etc) anyway, you might as well have the arrow be vertical.

[Springheel]

Dom's point is valid, though. If there were a chair that currently got imported upside down, we'd fix it, regardless of the fact that mappers may not want all their chairs facing east. Unless it's complicated to do (I have no idea) it makes sense to have arrows that start off laying flat, just like it makes sense for chairs to be standing up.

[sparhawk]

Your argument would also work for a chair - sure it can conceivably be oriented in any direction depending on what happend to it, but MOST of the time it's going to be in its upright position, isn't it?

 

A chair has a natural orientation. Which means, that a chair should ba facing such that you can sit in it, but the actual direction where it faces to doesn't matter as well. So the chair should be correct in the up/down direction, there is no preference for orienting it i.e. north or west.

 

Well, maybe it makes sense to do the same for arrows, but they are much more free in which direction they should look, becuase they don't have a natural direction IMO.

[Ishtvan]

Well, just decide on something soon before I forget which settings would have to be changed in the code to accomodate new arrow axis. The code cares which way is the long direction obviously, for stuff like seeing how far the arrow sinks into the wall.

[Domarius]

Lying flat on the ground is the most common orientation for it.

 

All that needs to be done is for the most recent "arrow modeller" person to rotate it and export it.

 

Or change the def file settings... if that's possible. Can't remember.

[SneaksieDave]

I'll never understand why everything has to become a bickerfest, a pissing contest, a war of wills. Really helps the creative process.

 

I think it's safe to assume gravity here. Would it stand on the tip? Lay it down already.

[Domarius]

I know - I didn't expect a debate. It's so simple - drop an arrow on the ground. Does it balance on the tip or lay flat?

 

When I dropped arrows in my level I didn't care which way they were facing - but I had to rotate them anyway because standing up like that is just unnatural.

 

Get a modeller to put it on his/her todo list, or record the link to the thread somewhere, I don't care. But sit here thinking of counter-arguments for this? Honestly guys. It makes me lose faith in the human race.

[Dram]

omfg..

 

Hell I don't care and I'm a mapper. Can we stop arguing already? If it's ultra-easy to put it laying down then who cares, but if it takes like 30minutes on Ish's part to have to change code for it to lay flat then it's not worth the effort as it does shit all in advantage.

 

Let Ish choose, since he's doing all the code for them. IMO anyway...

[Ishtvan]

Huh? I don't care if it's layed down or upright, I just said please decide on something soon so that I can change it and not worry about forgetting what has to be changed. Also, you'll have to do it on two models now, broadhead and broadhead_collision, just please leave the origin at the very tip.

 

Oh, that reminds me, we'll have to change the fire arrow light location also.

[Darkness_Falls]

I think someone should just make them so they lie flat. Problem solved. As a mapper, it seems like I'd get annoyed by having to constantly re-orient them from vert to horiz. To solve, is it just a matter of rotating the object 90-degrees in Lightwave? Seems like that would only be like 2 seconds of work.

[sparhawk]

2 seconds work in Lightwave, and of course we must adjust the code as well to accommodate it. It already works, so I don't see a strong argument why we should change it now, since the objects have to be rotated anyway.

[SneaksieDave]

The Optimal Way

Post #1:

"Hey guys, it would be more convenient if the arrow laid down flat, for mappers, you know? So it's in a natural state to use from the start."

 

Post #2:

"Good point, okay. There, it's changed and CVS'd."

 

The TDM Way

Posts #1 to n:

...

[Domarius]

Okay all that remains is for a modeller to re-orient it and Ishtvan to change a few numbers in the script.

 

No point debating weither or not to do it, just which modeller is going to get around to doing it.

 

I think someone should just make them so they lie flat. Problem solved. As a mapper, it seems like I'd get annoyed by having to constantly re-orient them from vert to horiz. To solve, is it just a matter of rotating the object 90-degrees in Lightwave? Seems like that would only be like 2 seconds of work.

I can verify that it annoyed me when I was making my map.

[Darkness_Falls]

I can verify that it annoyed me when I was making my map.

And I can verify it would annoy me if I was knowledgeable enough to make a map

 

Not sure if I did this right, but here are broadhead arrow models lying flat:

broadhead_flat.lwo

broadhead_collision_flat.lwo

 

I just rotated them so they were flat. I didn't pay attention to the X/Y/Z orientation grid; does that matter?

 

EDIT: If the same needs to be done for the other arrows (e.g., fire, gas, noisemaker, etc.), I can't do that. I can't seem to find their LWO objects in my /doom3/darkmod directory. Maybe they all share the same model?

[Springheel]

We don't have any other arrow models in game yet.