Any chance of getting Ca3D to support/handle MOHAA meshes...

Get help with installing and running the Cafu Engine here. This forum is also for general questions and discussion of all aspects regarding the Cafu Engine.
Post Reply
Balr14
Posts: 4
Joined: 2004-10-16, 07:25
Location: wisconsin
Contact:

Any chance of getting Ca3D to support/handle MOHAA meshes...

Post by Balr14 » 2005-03-15, 08:02

and scale?

I tried the demo a while back and I was disappointed in the performance. So, I've been basically looking for other engines ever since. I have a small game I'm trying to develop and KillerKind asked me to come back here. So, here I am. I like what I see, but I'm still concerned it won't handle my maps. I'm primarily a mapper and texture artist and old person, without a lot of technical skills in other areas, so go easy on me. If my maps will work with this engine, I think we may have something.
User avatar
Carsten
Site Admin
Posts: 2160
Joined: 2004-08-19, 13:46
Location: Germany
Contact:

Post by Carsten » 2005-03-16, 11:19

Hello Balr14,

first, please, let me know what MOHAA meshes are. Definitions? Examples? Then I may be able to help you.
and scale?
Sorry, incomplete sentence. Please clarify. I have no crystall ball here.
I tried the demo a while back and I was disappointed in the performance.
Have you read the FAQs
http://www.ca3d-engine.de/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=7
http://www.ca3d-engine.de/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=9
:?:
If my maps will work with this engine, I think we may have something.
I'd be happy to help you, but you must provide far more details for me to being able to do so.
Best regards,
Carsten
brendank310
Posts: 1
Joined: 2005-03-25, 05:04

Post by brendank310 » 2005-03-25, 05:13

mohaa meshes would be the bezier(patch) meshes that are created and saved in the mohaa .map format. scale of players in the mohaa engine is 128wu high, contrasting from the normal 72wu player height.

my own questions on the ca3d-engine in concern to balr's game are:
-what is the performance in comparison to poly usage(with the r_style with no dynamic lighting and shadows)[ex: COD allows around 200k polies on screen with decent performance]
-is the precalculated lighting still being developed and how does it compare to the quality of say updated q3 light calculations?
-would starting a project on the ca3d-engine require the redoing of work later on when the matsys is released, along with any other planned features?

I appreciate any answers you can provide.

-brendank310
User avatar
Thrawn
Posts: 302
Joined: 2004-08-30, 10:38
Location: NRW, Germany
Contact:

Post by Thrawn » 2005-03-25, 13:27

Hi brendank,

you should wait for the next release. Then, you can develop maps, static models, textures (along with their shaders) and particle effects. The weapon system will be changed soon, so you shouldnt start adding the weapons there after (same for animated models). Other changes won't really affect the content.

@ Polys: Wasn't fully tested yet, thats something I could do when the next release is out.

That's what I think to know :wink:
User avatar
Carsten
Site Admin
Posts: 2160
Joined: 2004-08-19, 13:46
Location: Germany
Contact:

Post by Carsten » 2005-03-31, 16:04

brendank310 wrote:mohaa meshes would be the bezier(patch) meshes that are created and saved in the mohaa .map format. scale of players in the mohaa engine is 128wu high, contrasting from the normal 72wu player height.
Okay, then. These are only matters of simple conversion. That means that Ca3DE cannot deal with mohaa stuff directly, but you can normally handle these kinds of problems with e.g. Perl scripts easily.
-what is the performance in comparison to poly usage(with the r_style with no dynamic lighting and shadows)[ex: COD allows around 200k polies on screen with decent performance]
I'm sorry, but that question cannot be answered in numbers: there are too many dependent factors. (E.g. drawing a million polygons that cover one pixel each is entirely different from drawing fewer polygons that each cover the entire screen.)
-is the precalculated lighting still being developed and how does it compare to the quality of say updated q3 light calculations?
The Ca3DE radiosity lighting is broadly considered to be of very good quality, easily comparable with Q3 lighting.
-would starting a project on the ca3d-engine require the redoing of work later on when the matsys is released, along with any other planned features?
Introducing revolutionary new technology has a tendency to destroy backward compatibility. However, whenever such things happen within the Ca3D-Engine, they can either be fixed by simple Perl script magic (either do it yourself or ask me), or I keep the releases backward compatible long enough, or I provide converters right away.
All this applies to the MatSys, too. If you ever feel there is an upgrade problem that you cannot solve on your own, just contact me - I'll never leave anybody alone with upgrade problems!
Best regards,
Carsten
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests