Model Request: Simple AFs

[Springheel]

There already is a globe, done by Oddity. Don't know what happened with it though.

 

It's been in game for some time, though it doesn't spin. Frankly, I think having it spin is virtually pointless, and possible even a bad idea. It would be like bookshelves where every book is frobbable--it doesn't add anything to gameplay and can actually make the player aware of other limits to their ability to interact with the world that they wouldn't otherwise notice--it's like the "ugly friend" syndrom in reverse.

 

I'd like to make sure we don't get too carried away with animated objects. Neither a spinning globe nor a sign that reacts to arrows add anything to gameplay--it's just eye candy. And unlike other types of pure eye-candy (like light-beams or nice textures) they're going to have no impact at all if the player doesn't actively use them. Players aren't going to spin a globe or shoot a sign with an arrow for any reason other than "to see what happens". After the initial, "neat, it moves" that'll be it.

 

I'm not saying we shouldn't make any AF objects--I think a swinging bucket might be useful for some kind of mousetrap-style contraption. But if we're still seriously looking at a beta-release at the end of 2008 (less than a year and a half away), then we shouldn't get too carried away when there are lots of regular models that need to be done.

[Ishtvan]

I agree it's mostly eye candy and shouldn't be a high priority, but it can't hurt to have more interaction possibilities. Now that we have the procedure down, it should literally take 10 minutes to do an AF with a single simple constraint. If we have a sign model already, there's really no reason not to make an AF version as well. It takes far longer to model and texture stuff than it does to set up a simple AF for it.

[Baddcog]

I was just thinking items like a sextant, pliers (for blacksmiths), ect... would be good to have as AF's

 

Like Ishtvan said, simple to do the AI. The collision model is simple so that's no biggie.

 

Rigging these items is pretty easy.

 

But it would be better IMO to throw the pliers and see them flop around like they have a hinge. Instead of just rigid objects like T2. A major bonus to this engine is that we can do this stuf. At least for me, I was getting tired of T2 limits. Now it's more of an issue of what's best for any givn situation.

 

For the globe I agree, not needed. Although I don't think it would detract from the game any at all. But as itwon't be picked up/thrown ect the physics is a smaller issue.

 

I do think however all interactivity only HELPS the game. Sure maybe the player just frobs the globe and it spins, but is that much different than picking up T2's rigid sextant and throwing it? I guess my point is that certian things like the sextant really had little value at all. maybe good as a noise maker or prop. Sometimes as a decoy.

Funny thing though, after all my taffin, I still picked up those random things, frob things that don't do much, even though I know there is no real reason.

 

-------

books:

If we do a book AF, I'm torn on this, we would probably just need a new model. They look (in the editor) like the backs are just one plane, they don't actually have a binding modelled in.

The other reason I'm not sure is the pages. I know it would be crazy to af every page. To have the book only flop open to middle? I'm not sure that's good either. also when closed the rounded shape of pages would overlap.

 

I'll wait for input on that