.obj -> .sur converter
-
Yes, I do recommend remaking them because I also fixed some bugs from the old converter, which leads to incorrect numbers in all the current created .sur files. This also seems to fix the flying through sometimes.
For the impatient, here is a little update (attached below). As you can see some new options and I cleaned up the GUI.
Things left to be done: Grouping all multipart groups with the same name to one appended group (currently they all are separated and give a warning in the log), implementing the “group belongs to” option and some minor fixes.
-
This is shaping up to be ridiculously good. Keep up the nice work Schmack
-
To all who are waiting: We are in the final testing state. Everything is finished and a release depends only on how much bugs are discovered in the last checks. If all goes well I release today.
Changelog:
v. 1.1 BETA- Fully support every feature of the .sur format
- New more accurate way of checking whether a shape is convex
- OBJ loader now reads more variations of the format
- Fixed all known cases where the .sur file was not correctly generated
- Some new options like merging close vertices and using only the outer convex hull for collisions
- Model cleanup before and after conversion
-
Schmackbolzen wrote:
To all who are waiting: We are in the final testing state. Everything is finished and a release depends only on how much bugs are discovered in the last checks. If all goes well I release today.Changelog:
v. 1.1 BETA- Fully support every feature of the .sur format
- New more accurate way of checking whether a shape is convex
- OBJ loader now reads more variations of the format
- Fixed all known cases where the .sur file was not correctly generated
- Some new options like merging close vertices and using only the outer convex hull for collisions
- Model cleanup before and after conversion
<iframe width=“560” height=“315” src=“http://www.youtube.com/embed/4pXfHLUlZf4” frameborder=“0” allowfullscreen=“”></iframe>
-
It’s out
The multipart support is working very good. I tested it with 4 groups connected to each other, like a train with 4 wagons. -
Been playing with the new version. A definite improvement over the last one. I’m only using it in single group models myself but even so, the hitboxes now actually register which they didn’t do before, (you could get the shield down but the hull wasn’t interested).
Not tried the multipart but i’m sure others will chime in with their reports. Managed to find a couple of models it wasn’t interested in making sur files for, but that’s ok. Keep up the good work.
-
@Goulash:
Actually there should be no models which don’t work (except for too much vertices). If you are absolutely sure it’s not a problem with the .cmp file (wrong group names etc) then could you please send me the .obj and .cmp file and your settings so that I can test it myself.@All:
Skotty has said he his willing to write sort of a how to text, but this will take some time.Also don’t hesitate to post your feedback. It has taken a lot of time to finish the tool and of course I want to know how it is working for you.
Also if I forgot to explain something just ask, it is difficult to think about all the questions one might have.
-
Very many thanks, Schmackbolzen, your long effort is very much appreciated as always.
And thanks to you too, Skotty, for your testing, I know how long it takes.
Just a quick query: are the default settings good for most vanilla ships?
Or what settings are better?
Thanks again.
-
You can leave the default settings. They work good for nearly every sur (I never had one of my surs where I needed to change these settings).
Just make sure to create convex meshes, I recommend the Convex-Plugin for Milkshape for this. -
Skotty. wrote:
You can leave the default settings. They work good for nearly every sur (I never had one of my surs where I needed to change these settings).
Just make sure to create convex meshes, I recommend the Convex-Plugin for Milkshape for this.I have the plugin Skotty, but am I suppose to use it if you don’t mind me asking.
-
Schmack, got a question.
I’ve used your older version of the exporter for all the models, 200+ in the FW:ToW mod. We’ve tested every hitbox the best we can and from we can tell, everything is working. It’s a fabulous tool.
That being said, would you recommend I reconvert all the .objs again using this version of the exporter or should I just leave it as is
Is there any advantages in reconverting them with this version?It’s only about 2 1/2 hrs of work as I have all the .objs saved.
-
Yes, I recommend it. The recognition of convex shapes now is much better plus there was an error which lead to garbage at one offset. FL doesn’t seem to use it but you never know. Also because of the better recognition the files should be smaller, which also means faster. It would be interesting if you could post numbers of the file size difference. That should give an indication of how often the old recognition was wrong. Also in some cases the triangles of a particular group got mixed up which might not always have been noticed by you.
-
Schmackbolzen wrote:
Yes, I recommend it. The recognition of convex shapes now is much better plus there was an error which lead to garbage at one offset. FL doesn’t seem to use it but you never know. Also because of the better recognition the files should be smaller, which also means faster. It would be interesting if you could post numbers of the file size difference. That should give an indication of how often the old recognition was wrong. Also in some cases the triangles of a particular group got mixed up which might not always have been noticed by you.OK. Thanks Schmack!
-
@Ezekiel: Thanks!
@Sushi: I just was thinking. Since you were experimenting with the hardpoint stuff, you could test to include the geometry for all your hardpoints on a complex model. Then you could make assumptions about how much performance improvement this gets. Since you noticed quite a boost through the bsp tree this also should be noticeable.
I am trying to read .cmp files as a next step, so if your release is not in the near future you also could wait with converting all of them again and automatically let the tool include the hardpoint geometry.
-
Schmackbolzen wrote:
I am trying to read .cmp files as a next step, so if your release is not in the near future you also could wait with converting all of them again and automatically let the tool include the hardpoint geometry.What are you saying here exactly? Convert straight from .cmp to sur?
