4 ms·
Question: you're using the super-fine voxels for the aesthetic, (and it does look amazing), but only coarse grained voxels for gameplay? I can see the trade-off
by hyp0 12y ago
Question: you're using the super-fine voxels for the aesthetic, (and it does look amazing), but only coarse grained voxels for gameplay? I can see the trade-off makes sense, for the reasons you mention (path-finding, monsters can get through).
It's just that a fine-grained modifiable world would be super-amazing. It seems to me that your rendering tech could do that just as well... if the edits only occurred on-screen, they are manageable (and all the rest can be rendered off-screen to bit-maps and cached, as you do now).
Of course, what I'd really love is a living world, which also changes off-screen. e.g. erosion. But I think that may be asking too much of present-day hardware...?
marketing advice: copy notch. Do little updates as often as you can, for every small thing you do. It gives you energy, engages long-term followers and - most important - is advertising, so more people know about it.
- gavanwoolery 12y agoGood question - you can add in fine grained details as well. The macroscopic chunks are used to make quick calculations. Then on top of that, it sees whether or not the chunk contains microscopic changes, and if necessary recalculate a path or collision or whatever. Erosion: doable, but not something I'm going to tackle right now. I originally built errosion in from the start to try and create realistic maps, but it turned out to be way simpler and faster to just pull in real world heightmaps and mix them together in patches, even if not realistic. Marketing advice: taken. :) I'll be updating more frequently now, especially with the KS campaign going, which is pretty much a full time job right now.