High-res textures would require a small change to the map config file. That can be done without hurting backwards compatibility.
The map format specifics are documented along the various cubescript commands which are used to change the map attributes. However, it might be helpful, if there was an additional document, which made it clear, exactly what set of attributes is stored within the map file.
The (cubescript) documentation is not really up-to-date. Hopefully, that'll change before a release ;)
As for the shadow entities: I included the code to clean up light entities of old map formats - which allows those to be repurposed in format 10. Which means, shadows can be added later.
I had a look at the particle emitter and we do need this feature in the next version for sure! :)
I actually did ask for this when I was working on ac_keller, but eihrul and/or drian didn't want to add this feature for reasons I can no more recall. I'll happily help out on that feature!
When I was fooling around with the current presets I realised that there is working alpha blending with the bullet sprite. At some weird setting I had that particular .png endlessly lined up horizontally and vertically with some colour covering and it would still show models and that sprite behind it. As far as I know Toca and Lucas have been experimenting with alpha blending, but it didn't work as intended. To be honest, I never understood why it wouldn't work, alpha blending has been in openGL/DX like ever since. It would be hell of an upgrade if we finally could at least have properly working transparency with mapmodels.
That rotate-able and diagonal clips are just awesome. I can't check myself atm, so, can we rotate entities (mapmodels/clips) along all 3 axis now? *fingerscrossed*
Actually, AC has had particle emitters for a long time and no one ever used them. Currently, they are part of the model features: you can attach an emitter to a model tag. Still, we don't have any useful emitter types for the desired AC design. Most of the emitter types are just variations of the sparklies from edit mode.
I remember experiments with window models, 5 or 6 years ago, I think, from eihrul and toca. IIRC, it was too expensive or just didn't work as desired. FYI, if it were to be implemented, it would not require changes to the map format.
Clip rotation only works in 45-degree steps and tilted clips have the same "stairs"-feeling as slopes in map geometry (both intentionally). Mapmodels can rotate on all three axes freely. On two axes with 0.1° resolution, the third (pitch) with 1° steps.
I was wondering, if I should remove the artificial "stairs"-feeling from the more gentle sloped clips (say, below 25% rise). Slopes without stairs feel very weird to walk on (I have an experimental branch somewhere, which smoothes out /all/ slopes: works excellent, but feels very unnatural, so I never included it). Since the stairs on clips are only artificially added, they could be easily removed from flat angles. That would be something, that would to have to be tested :)
22 May 15, 05:03PM
(This post was last modified: 22 May 15, 05:04PM by Mr.Floppy.)
That transparency is something I'd like to see on the TODO list, maybe Lucas can help out with his experiences there?
I guess having no 'stepping' on those sloped clips will make it feel like floating, which will be rather weird indeed.
How about that, you will step up/down only when you have done one full cube-hight (or reaching solid ground of course). So you will not have that cube-by-cube stuttering on rather gentle slopes. Read when you have a 1/4 rise you will only step up any 4th cube horizontally. Sure, the models visual borders will not correspond perfectly then, but tbh they don't do anyway. This might be a good compromise between 'floating' to 'stuttering', when every horizontal cube width was taken into account. Almost flat slopes will not have an step up/down effect at all then. Well, effectively like what you suggested with the 25% cap I suppose... :P