.obj -> .sur converter

StarTrader wrote:
If you decide not to, then I am sorry, and thank you for trying, but I won’t use it very much (if at all), because I can already do this with existing MS tools and 3DSMax tools, and it is a pain now. Your utility will not make anything easier if you make it in the way you say.

Indeed…

Either it’s pure irony or ignorance

Schmackbolzen: OK, thanks. I have no idea of the benefits or comparison of Pascal, I used it very briefly many years ago so I am aware of its existence, but I was not aware it is still current.

To the negativ-sprechers:

“Voiced your interest”? When, pray?

Not on this thread when I asked.

My first comment: It re-iterates a VERY obvious point - that half-working tools are not useful. Schmack would indeed be wasting his time if he produced another half-working tool. So why should he waste his time? Even bad old “I” would not want him to do that.

“My Specs”: Although I wrote the post, it was Bejaymac who explored the sur to the minutest detail over a very long time, and laid out in several long-since-lost posts what that structure requires to function properly. It’s not my spec and not Bejaymacs either, it is DA and MS’s. He unravelled it and tried very hard and very patiently over a long time to explain it to all of us. I listened to him and eventually I put them into a list because that is what surs need to have to function properly.

As for .obj format as an input? You too will eventually agree that although this makes the utility more flexible, so that you can use it with 3DSMax and other programs, when you need to generate 200+ conversions in sequence, you too will be just a teeny-weeny little bit less happy about it and wish it would work from a .cmp or from within the chosen graphics program as an exporter.

What is the criteria for a sur?
“Surly”, this is obvious? Any vanilla sur.

So “surly”, a sur creating tool should make an identical sur to the vanilla one for the same vanilla ship, from whatever input is chosen?

We know that a sur containing less than this will not work fully.

e.g.: concave shapes = non-detection and/or crashes.

e.g.: no HpIDs = crashes.

e.g.: no Hardpoint geometry = no hits on mounted weapons, as a couple of people reported a while ago.

We already have several SUR creation utilities which are LESS than productive because they don’t produce completely working, reliable surs.

So - No, I don’t want another less than complete tool. And behind your masks of criticism, nor do you. I was being clear and honest.

Yes I know I am badgering Schmack for a timeline, because I have been waiting for this tool for a very long time. Several others took on this task and then gave up without finishing it. But of course you have already forgotten?

Me? This is my third time around. So I would like to know how long is this piece of string.

Secretly, so do you, but you prefer to ride on the backs of others such as me, while biting our necks. That is despicable.

Show me how completing this utility to the extent of producing identical surs to vanilla will not benefit all of you?

So my cajoling will also not benefit you, right?

But right now it’s just ST-bashing time to some of you.

This is OK for a while, I don’t care too much most of the time, I am reasonably thick skinned.

But don’t go too far, children.

w0dk4 wrote:

StarTrader wrote:
If you decide not to, then I am sorry, and thank you for trying, but I won’t use it very much (if at all), because I can already do this with existing MS tools and 3DSMax tools, and it is a pain now. Your utility will not make anything easier if you make it in the way you say.

Indeed…

Either it’s pure irony or ignorance

Only time will tell.

Relax ST, I’m taking the piss and you knows it you old Croc! Carry on!

W0dk4:

I so like people who intentionally misquote to prove a null-point! (But I couldn’t eat a whole one).

May I enlighten everyone and put in the entire context of your intentional misquotation:

For me the ONLY criteria is that the generated sur file for any standard vanilla FL ship, say for example the Stiletto (bw_fighter), MUST be exactly the same as the original vanilla sur file, with all the same components. And it has to work, of course.

If you decide not to, then I am sorry, and thank you for trying, but I won’t use it very much (if at all), because I can already do this with existing MS tools and 3DSMax tools, and it is a pain now. Your utility will not make anything easier if you make it in the way you say.

I don’t recall whether you have added command-line support, Schmack, but that would alleviate any speed concerns as a simple batch script would make the conversion a one-step process no matter the number of files required

StarTrader wrote:
Blah blah blah

ST, your perceived entitlement to these resources is getting ridiculous. I’d hardly call what you do “cajoling”; it’s borderline harassment.

This tool works very well and, in its current form, a staple of the FW:ToW mod. Yes it doesn’t do “everything” but with some concessions, it does more than anyone else has done previously.

Just be patient and stop being a prick. Schmack will get to it when he can.

And please stop with the “children” garbage. It’s getting rather tedious. It’s also ironic, as it’s you who is acting like one.

Sushi you surprise me. I thought you were more mature.

Entitlement? Utter Rubbish, where do you see that claim from me?

My previous question was over a month ago and there was no news since.

As only one other person expressed any interest I assumed that only he and I were interested and that therefore Schmack would probably not be interested in developing a new version for only 2 people.

I wouldn’t be, that is for sure.

You may have observed that I have kept a very low profile in the rest of the forum for some time too.

So I think I was not out of order in asking for news on this remaining subject which is of interest to me.

Fine, so you have used the existing utility for your own mod.

Good for you.

So since you think you don’t need an improved version then the current one is fine for you. Right?

So you’re out of this discussion since your needs are satisfied, right?

Well I did all of mine manually, over the past 4 years, and twice and even three and four times over. A good satisfying result for me, but a heck of a lot of long nights, cursing and failures before I managed to get a good set, and not for all ships. My tough luck. I’m not complaining, I took it upon myself to write a complete mod alone and I did it and released it. I am happy that I managed it, not bragging. But i was convinced that my surs were still causing my random intermittent crashes.

And then suddenly, LS comes up with his Sur Builder. Wow! Ecstacy! So I waited and encouraged him by doing an awful lot of testing and producing conclusive test results - alone again, and in vain. Sad that it too was dropped, could it be because of lack of expression of interest from others, methinks?

And then after more months, Schmack very kindly agreed to produce a better tool, and has done so as a first version. This is great.

And Schmack has included the missing HpID table so surs no longer cause those random intermittent crashes.

Yes, Schmack’s tool is now producing good 1-part surs. But it doesn’t yet do multipart and does not place Hp hit detection shapes into the sur.

This is causing no hit detection on mounted weapons, right? Despite the weapons having their own sur files.

No problem? OK, for you.

And Schmack has informed us that there are other unkown areas too. This is not surprising or else others would have also found the method. In my opinion too, he and his advisers have done extremely well in unravelling the darned thing to this degree.

All this is fine, I didn’t get any bad reaction from Schmack, only from you and a couple of others.

Odd that.

Don’t like my sarcasm in this and my earlier posts?

It’s because of my disappointment that nobody else actually stated that they are interested in Schmack developing the tool, and then suddenly you all are, but jump on me for pursuing it - for you too!

I suggest you give up antagonising me, and let Schmack reply in his own way, and we can then all see what he is prepared to do, and when he thinks he can manage it.

How is this harassing him? I’ve not pressurised him, I have just asked him and I am asking only to know for myself.

You and others will also benefit from any development that Schmack makes, so you should be pleased that someone has expressed an interest to keep this going if Schmack is willing and able to do so.

If he isn’t able to do so within the next few months, then I just need to know so I don’t continue to hang around outside this particular door.

StarTrader wrote:

Yes, Schmack’s tool is now producing good 1-part surs. But it doesn’t yet do multipart and does not place Hp hit detection shapes into the sur.

This is causing no hit detection on mounted weapons, right? Despite the weapons having their own sur files.

Yes. And if you actually read the thread you would see that we came to that conclusion several times now - and Schmackbolzen has repeatedly said that he will add these two things when he has time.

Now, what’s your problem? Seriously?
I and everybody else are also waiting for the fixes, but we dont take the pretentious attitude and say that others dont give a damn.

You know, you could simply have asked for an update from Schmackbolzen but that would have been too less of a drama, right?
Congratulations - mission accomplished in that regard.

the croc is grumpy last time, that’s it. give him a porkchop and he’ll be fine

I can confirm that, at least so far, just using a handful of HpIDs (no weapons), we have had no crashes, perfectly working SURs and hit detection on weapons. w0d has theorized that the weapon hardpoints may be used to speed up collision detection for weapons; a good thing to have, but not essential. This sure makes sense if you look at how they’ve been behaving so far.

ST, I’m tired of your incessant rants on the subject. Anything you’ve said in your past 10 posts, you’ve already said too often to count. You want it. WE GET IT. Now stop polluting the forums with this and do something productive. If your post(s) had been about thanking Schmack and asking for progress, I wouldn’t have minded, but you have to slander, bullshit and insult other people along the way and that I can’t accept. Stop it or there will be consequences.

Well, here’s a minority thanking you for your work Smackbolz. DiscoveryGC 4.86 is coming along smoothly on the modeling side, and most non-multipart models have been given a new, tight-fitting SUR using Milkshape and your tool.

We’ll hold off with the dockable and animated ones that still need a better fit, until your tool has functionality for that. Old clunky spliced surs until then - just means you can’t use many parts.

AeternusDoleo wrote:
We’ll hold off with the dockable and animated ones that still need a better fit, until your tool has functionality for that. Old clunky spliced surs until then - just means you can’t use many parts.

Actually, you can create hitboxes with unlimited parts. Tutorial his here: http://the-starport.net/freelancer/forum/viewtopic.php?topic_id=2017&forum=26

If the video isn’t there I’ll upload tomorrow.

Schmackbolzen - please contact me via PM if you would like to, I am tired of these argument-hunters. They can give out piss and sarcasm but can’t take it. I am only interested in your development of this tool, if you can then I will be delighted, if you can’t then I understand. Many thanks as always.

StarTrader wrote:
Hi Schmackbolzen

The holidays are in full swing as far as I know, and hopefully you are enjoying your free time too.

If you will continue with the converter to make it multi-group, and maybe add the basic hardpoint shapes that the original exporter already puts in (but this is not essential for this converter as long as the HPIDS are included), then you will have two dedicated and grateful fans.

Only 2, because clearly nobody else is interested, no-one else has said so here or anywhere.

So clearly they do not want it and will not use it even if you do complete it.

As you know I have been criticised by several members for being selfish in asking for it before, since nobody else really wants it, so it is only for me and now Ezekiel also said he wants it.

Nobody else said they want it.

Not FF, not W0dk4, not the Discovery developers, not any other team developers, and not anybody else either.

So nobody else needs it.

Not for their current mod, and not for any future mod either.

So this means all your work will be only for me and for Ezekiel.

Yes, I am rubbing their faces in it.

So I have an idea - I might be able to pay you a moderate commission to develop it only for me and for Ezekiel, since nobody else wants it.

In this case of course, you and I will own the rights to the converter, and I will not release it to anyone else, only to Ezekiel, under a no-distribution agreement, and I will ask you to not release it to anyone else without my permission too.

But if you do not want to continue with it in the next month or so, then no matter - but please say so now, so that I don’t continue to hang around waiting any more.

After all, only I and Ezekiel really want it.

And my need is for my personal use only.

So I await to know if you will continue shortly please.

I know that when the next term starts (or if you start in a job) you will not be able to work on it.

Many thanks.

Why would anyone develop anything if they don’t see adequate support for it?

This is what I wrote. Yes I prodded and poked a bit, to encourage the others of you silent ones who are also waiting to say so.

The antagonistic response of some of you was ridiculous.

Incessant? Since when? And I am not the one to be accused of slander, FF. Go read.

You have developed a habit of responding badly to me, no matter the subject. This is biased and immature, I don’t care if I am in your “bad books”, you have a really bad attitude problem not only with me but also with several other people and it is unwarranted, and it’s all yours to grow up and resolve. Stop threatening that it’s your server and that there will be repercussions, this really is childish.

ST you can sepparate the sur into multiple groups manually with a hex editor if you really need to make the multi-part sur, its a little more time-taking but will work (i made for a 2-part turret, when the sur builder failed to make the 2 parts properly).

Thanks Cata123, I know, and there are of course other ways to do this too.

But we need a tool that will do all of this, because of the time the other ways take.

Since using this sur maker, I’ve come across a error that I don’t understand. When ships run into each other, there is a large amount of lag or the game crashes all together. The same happens in mission against the ships. Here they are if someone would look into it for me. Note: They use vannila weapons.