Elvas Tower: ORTS new shape format??? - Elvas Tower

Jump to content

  • 25 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

ORTS new shape format??? Rate Topic: *---- 1 Votes

#1 User is offline   SP 0-6-0 

  • Foreman Of Engines
  • Group: Status: Contributing Member
  • Posts: 977
  • Joined: 12-November 05
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Another planet.
  • Simulator:MSTS/ORTS
  • Country:

Posted 12 October 2015 - 12:33 PM

Afternoon, I am interested in knowing just what the objective is regarding finding a replacement shapefile format? Will the new format be specific to ORTS or will a established format be chosen? Will ORTS continue using the ace file textures or will we be using new texture formats as well?

What are some of the available open source 3d shape file formats and associated texture file formats?

Robert

#2 User is offline   disc 

  • Foreman Of Engines
  • Group: Private - Open Rails Developer
  • Posts: 818
  • Joined: 07-October 12
  • Gender:Male
  • Simulator:OpenRails
  • Country:

Posted 12 October 2015 - 01:21 PM

As i wrote, DDS is supported now for textures. In experimental setting, the usage of DDS if available can be enabled. No more is needed, that's the "native" gpu format. I've been using DDS signal glows since a year, also the OR only rolling stocks come with dds textures. Only the new 3D format is missing.

#3 User is offline   Genma Saotome 

  • Owner and Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: ET Owner
  • Posts: 14,781
  • Joined: 11-January 04
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United States
  • Simulator:Open Rails
  • Country:

Posted 12 October 2015 - 01:52 PM

View PostSP 0-6-0, on 12 October 2015 - 12:33 PM, said:

Afternoon, I am interested in knowing just what the objective is regarding finding a replacement shapefile format?


AFAIK there isn't one. A major issue is centered on the question of what does a change mean for users of the commonly used CAD programs? For example, if there was a decision to pick the foo format and foo can only be produced by 3dMax, how many current content designers are going to shell out $3,500 for a license... so they can begin to learn and use a completely new tool?

Substitute Blender, or Rhino and you have the same problem only less expensive.

IMO the ideal solution would have been to acquire the rights to modify TSM and extend the functionality of the .s file; Maybe it would have needed a new extension but that's not a big deal. Followup by adding the same new features to the Sketchup exporter and work w/ Amabilis to do the same for 3dcrafter. The OR team actually started to talk to the owner of TSM about it but then dropped the ball when that person left the team.

In the meanwhile someone else got control of TSM and given who it is my opinion is there is much less than a zero percentage chance that change will be useful to the OR team.

#4 User is offline   disc 

  • Foreman Of Engines
  • Group: Private - Open Rails Developer
  • Posts: 818
  • Joined: 07-October 12
  • Gender:Male
  • Simulator:OpenRails
  • Country:

Posted 12 October 2015 - 02:35 PM

There are plenty of useable free opensource 3d formats, are supported by every cad programs. No need for TSM, and no need of .s.

There is Collada, but somebody said it's too heavy for an ingame format and it would be overkill to use it directly in game, however a lot of games directly use it so maybe it's not so heavy.
GPZ implemented gltf support, but he is inactive since months.

But collada also can be used as an intermediate format, and a new format can be created for OR, with a collada -> or format converter.

Here is a c# collada library so the importer/reader don't need to be written

Or here is the Open Game Engine Exchange format. It's a "light" textual format, plugins for 3D max, maya, and blender.

#5 User is offline   SP 0-6-0 

  • Foreman Of Engines
  • Group: Status: Contributing Member
  • Posts: 977
  • Joined: 12-November 05
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Another planet.
  • Simulator:MSTS/ORTS
  • Country:

Posted 12 October 2015 - 02:50 PM

I was looking at some formats earlier and noted X3D, B3D, .CSV formats.

I still tinker both in TSM and Gmax and would like to be able to at least still use Gmax for ORTS. Yes, Gmax is old and way out of date. But, Gmax is free and everybit as powerful as the $3500 dollar programs that have too many features we really don't need in a modeling program for train simulation.

ORTS will probably need conversion programs like MSTS came with that can take say .3ds and convert it to the native ORTS format what ever it ends up being. The same being said for the osd texture format. This way there should be less issues with modeling software people want to use for ORTS.

I will take a look at other 3d train simulators from the open source communities and take note of the 3d shape file formats being used.

More to come later.

Robert

#6 User is offline   Genma Saotome 

  • Owner and Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: ET Owner
  • Posts: 14,781
  • Joined: 11-January 04
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United States
  • Simulator:Open Rails
  • Country:

Posted 12 October 2015 - 04:03 PM

Quote

I will take a look at other 3d train simulators from the open source communities and take note of the 3d shape file formats being used.

More to come later.


Don't rush. Unless there is someone to do the actual work of implementing something in the OR code the question remains quite hypothetical... and given the nature of contributed labor whoever does choose to work on this matter is very likely to prefer to follow their own opinion of what format is best.

#7 User is offline   SP 0-6-0 

  • Foreman Of Engines
  • Group: Status: Contributing Member
  • Posts: 977
  • Joined: 12-November 05
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Another planet.
  • Simulator:MSTS/ORTS
  • Country:

Posted 12 October 2015 - 09:58 PM

Wavefront .obj file https://en.wikipedia...front_.obj_file

ORTS has the unique opertunity to not only break away from the .S file format. But also to work with the open source community to take a little known format and help grow it into a mature format that could potentially be the work horse file format for ORTS to use for many years to come.

My list thus far,

X3d https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X3D

.Obj https://en.wikipedia...front_.obj_file

B3D http://www.blitzbasi...3ddocs/docs.php

Robert

#8 User is offline   captain_bazza 

  • Chairman, Board of Directors
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: ET Admin
  • Posts: 13,920
  • Joined: 21-February 06
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Way, way, way, South
  • Simulator:MSTS & OR
  • Country:

Posted 13 October 2015 - 01:40 AM

Doubled edged sword; I guess, the necessity to learn a whole new method of producing models, with, or without, a graphic front-end, will drive away some most of the older gen of asset contributors. A new format might attract new modelers to the genre, who will start off with the new format, but a lot of historical modeling knowledge will be lost.

However, I don't see any changes in that direct (new model format) coming in the immediate, or mid-term, future of OR.

It would be somewhat ironic that some modelers might revert back to producing only for OR.

Just my opinion.

Cheers Bazza.

#9 User is offline   captain_bazza 

  • Chairman, Board of Directors
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: ET Admin
  • Posts: 13,920
  • Joined: 21-February 06
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Way, way, way, South
  • Simulator:MSTS & OR
  • Country:

Posted 13 October 2015 - 01:44 AM

PS My research has shown that there is really no universal modeling format that will suit TS, because it appears most of the formats out there come - and go. For one reason or another they reach a dead-end in their development and the project dies. At least the old 3ds mesh format has stayed the course.

CB.

#10 User is offline   disc 

  • Foreman Of Engines
  • Group: Private - Open Rails Developer
  • Posts: 818
  • Joined: 07-October 12
  • Gender:Male
  • Simulator:OpenRails
  • Country:

Posted 13 October 2015 - 01:51 AM

View Postcaptain_bazza, on 13 October 2015 - 01:40 AM, said:

Doubled edged sword; I guess, the necessity to learn a whole new method of producing models, with, or without, a graphic front-end, will drive away some most of the older gen of asset contributors. A new format might attract new modelers to the genre, who will start off with the new format, but a lot of historical modeling knowledge will be lost.



Modeling not depends on format. All formats are polygonal/triangular. Nothing will change, just there would be possibilities to use new material, and maybe new naming conventions for the parts, and avoid the pain of using .s format.
I can add my TS20xx models to OR after renaming the parts and replace the TS20xx materials to MSTS ones, but i don't want to wrestle with the .s format, also the MSTS materials are not enough.

.s format is currently repelling the new content developers/coming from TS20xx or trainz, as it's an ancient format with bugged, old, limited, and payware tools. That is one reason why the most of the MSTS models doesn't look so good.

View Postcaptain_bazza, on 13 October 2015 - 01:44 AM, said:

PS My research has shown that there is really no universal modeling format that will suit TS, because it appears most of the formats out there come - and go.


Which formats are these?

  • 25 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users