Talk about anything

cybereality It would be easier to answer the question if the choice limited what I could actually do in the game

Erich_L It would be easier to answer the question if the choice limited what I could actually do in the game

Well I have a bunch of ideas. I'm just exploring the space. The original idea was an action FPS game, with parkour elements. This would be good for a single building or roof-top only like Mirror's Edge. But I also wanted to do some hacking elements, or maybe some sort of adventure game, more like Shadowrun, which would need a city or semi-open world. Where you could go on missions, hack computers, sell drugs, or whatever. I also was thinking of a physics based game, where you can pick up objects and interact with the world. This would be good for small spaces like single rooms. Maybe like a detective mystery where you investigate crime scenes. I'm not sure at this point. Just throwing out ideas.

what'd i miss?

TBH, not much. I finally got the VR project to open after removing all FBXs. Thanks to those who helped with that!

cybereality What you're describing here seems incredibly close to a deus ex-style immersive in an open world.

I just beat Tormented Souls, best game I've played in a long time. It's like the original Resident Evil but better. Sadly all the trailers I found have the wrong gamma or tone mapping, it looked much better on my PC. Not sure why that is, but the game looks amazing.

Thinking I might go with a fixed camera angle like this for my game. It really makes it feel more like a movie. Note, you can use tank controls, but the default is with the analog stick sort of like Ratchet and Clank or simple arcade platformers.

Oh my goodness, I know what I'm asking for might be a tall order but, I'm going to shoot my shot. Um...Does anyone know how to smoothly mix animations with ragdoll physics. I know that they're tutorials out their on how to do ragdoll physics in Godot but, there doesn't seem to be any on how to mostly move between ragdoll physics and animations. Let's say that I want to make game where enemies get thrown by explosions in a ragdoll but, can also get up back again if they survive? How do I go about doing that? Anyway, here is the tutorial for reference:

Pixophir I think they are asking about animation blending not about how to generate the ragdolls.

Aw, ok. Nevermind, then :-)

This topic about level design tools in Godot is always on my mind. Even though I don't plan on using any blockout method of level design in Godot, I've always wanted to know how it's done and I've found a tutorial that explains exactly just that:

The blockout style of level design seems to be the way a whole lot of "professional" gaming companies do their level design. Still, I'd like to one day make a game that has advance mod support and I doubt the whole blockout level design is mod support friendly( in comparison to the alternatives). Also, I think that they're still going to be a whole lot of limitations if someone wanted to make a more interactive level that 's well optimized when it comes to blockouts.
GSC might only be used for a prototyping tool but, it can do this:

Attempts to create highly destructable environments without the GSC node seems incredibly rigged, limited and might be painful to use on a large scale.

A non-CSG node solution to this problem that I've been thinking about, would involve the 3d gridmap. However, the 3d gridmaps don't have the same about of interactablity and functions as it's 2d counterpart. Now I know that it's not impossible to merge the 2d tilemap with the 3d gridmap and here is a video demonstrate of that:

However, I know how to do that and the person who made that video istn'g going to put out a tutorial.

Megalomaniak Could the solution involve some sort of precedural animation?

I would love to understand IK, though. You can use that to make characters actually have their feet at different heights of stairs and other cool things.

Audiobellum If you want, I guess. In which case IK definintely will become relevant.

As few courses as there are I wonder how I could learn some of this more advanced stuff.

Pixophir Not always. Most of games are, until you want to dabble in the wonderful/terribly confusing world of game physics. Not just vectors, how do you calculate how a character must plant its feet as it goes up a mountain? Or, how do you use only three animations to fully create a character that trips, falls over, jumps, and other things with inverse kinematics?

Something sort of like this character on the Asset Store in Unity, correct? I would seriously do a lot to figure something out like this.

I guess it gets used a lot, but I think robots are a pretty good answer to a graphics problem for an individual. It's perfectly all right to clone them. You can make them very unique style wise. The animations can look robotic. They go well with simplified scenery.

Audiobellum
That last video makes me think of the rather cool Crocotile 3D.
A 3D mesh editor in the style of a 2D tile editor.

Pixophir city's code base should have been more stable

They keep changing the time.

Pixophir Artemis I launch live stream starting aboouuut .... now

In Russia, few people believe that Americans have actually been to the moon. Technically educated people know they have, but it is impossible to convince the masses. The Russians can't admit that the Americans beat them so technically — it hurts them.

Launch is scrubbed for today.

fire7side I do believe that even perfectly rational people can end up believing things that are false. If "garbage ,in garbage out" is true for computers( that are supposedly smarter than us humans when it comes to somethings), then it's also true for humans as well. Things get even more hopeless, when disagreements stem from a difference in first principles. That said, it's rare for me to meet any perfectly rational people who are also wrong face to face; especially when it comes to the issues of conspiracy theories. At the same time, I'm uncomfortable with dismissing people who I disagree with as just being crazy, as even crazy people can get away with doing that( and they will if they've got more influence and power). Somethings it just feels that discourse is just broken. Heck, somethings it feels like it's more advantage to make the emotional argument than the logical one.

cybereality Yeah, that's what I meant. Your experience is at least credible to some degree because there aren't any third parties that would have to be in on it for it to be a hoax. I've had experiences that people don't believe because it's too incredible, but I know it happened. I didn't imagine it or hallucinate it. But, believing Sandy Hook was faked, or the moon landing was faked, that has to be immediately discounted. Like with the moon landing, it would actually be easier to do the real thing than to fake it at that public level by far. There are all those amateur astronomers with telescopes actually powerful enough to view it. You can see satellites in the night sky with the naked eye. The rockets took off at a public landing with thousands of viewers. All the news agencies would have to be in on it. And then there is just motive. All they would get out of it was that they were the first on the moon. No money or anything.

Well with the moon thing, you are right. It would have more costly and complicated to fake it than to do it for real. It's not like they had computer graphics back then (well maybe wireframe 3D, at best). I mean, look at the movie special effects from that time and tell me they could convincingly fake that. They couldn't. It would be possible, but still pretty hard today.

Audiobellum There are some conspiracy theories that really can't be discounted one way or the other, but others, it's definitely a lack of understanding the complexity of pulling something like that off. I laugh at a lot of fact checker articles because they don't get it right. They are still making assumptions that can't be proven and showing bias.

cybereality sorry, China, but Myth Busters actually proved that we did go to the moon. It was a cool episode, too. They tried to fake it, but gravity made them look very awkward. When they got onto a thing that simulated gravity on the moon, it definitely proved it as a fact.