Stimpson Posted May 3, 2004 Report Share Posted May 3, 2004 Hi, im curious. I just came across something on gaming news, can't remember where, but breifly scanning it, it was talking about solid models being used in games instead of just surface models. Now bear with me. I do CADD and lots of solid modeling. Im just out of school and i dont have tremendous knowledge of gaming, but im wondering if infact solid modeling will be the next step in computer gaming, if not already. I use Autocadd and inventor, and the dxf format is kinda the standard file type that speaks to all of them. Would this possibly be a usefull skill if i wanted to get into the gaming industry in the future? I also sketch alot, and put those ideas into CADD models quite often. Any thoughts on this from you experts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supreme Cmdr Posted May 3, 2004 Report Share Posted May 3, 2004 CSG is useless for building games because the internal solids are not visible and just take up volume space if constructed as such. Some models have no choice buy to model internal volumes, but its not a way of resources. Most models used in games are just as well be hollow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stimpson Posted May 3, 2004 Author Report Share Posted May 3, 2004 RgR, I see. But think of this. I can find center of gavity of any of my solid models. If you plug in a material density say plastic versus steel, you can have that object act accordingly. Or in other words, you can have real accurate physics. Say you fire a shot and it hits a model, a predetermined chunk of that model blows apart. Like an artillery shell hitting a road. Now you have an altered model. Just plug in some kinda algorithm, to determine a range of sizes of chunks to come apart. And that rubble is still left sitting around. And you could pick up one of the chunks and throw it, and it still feels and flys like a chunk of the origonal rubble. I guess what im saying, without knowing game programming to well, is that i think that solid models would be easier to mess around with than surfaces. Less things to keep track of, and you can plug in real physics quite easy. Another thing is, accuracy. I can make the solid models accurate down to .0005 of an inch if need be. Model an M1 tank, and that model is real damn true to life. [ 05-03-2004, 06:03 PM: Message edited by: Stimpson ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
street228 Posted May 3, 2004 Report Share Posted May 3, 2004 wait, 10 to 20 years, for some real powerful computers, and that would be an interesting implimentation for, physics accurate, CAD designs!! "could you imagine....the resources needed? :shocked: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stimpson Posted May 3, 2004 Author Report Share Posted May 3, 2004 I could imagine, game engines all having real life physics stats incorporated into them. The designer just plugs in what material type his/her models are made of, and the rest is calculated. The physics are already there, no need to (redesign) them. Objects in game could be realy open to interaction, and behave so much more like the real thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
street228 Posted May 3, 2004 Report Share Posted May 3, 2004 "gimme a $4000.00 pair of vertual reality glasses,a 'full feed back vertual reality suit', and hook me up to the main frame!!!" what do you get? "real life...written into the script of one's own choosing! LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supreme Cmdr Posted May 4, 2004 Report Share Posted May 4, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Stimpson: RgR, I see. But think of this. I can find center of gavity of any of my solid models. If you plug in a material density say plastic versus steel, you can have that object act accordingly. Or in other words, you can have real accurate physics. You can have physics that is accurate enough for games, without any of that useless and processor intensive information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joel Schultz Posted May 4, 2004 Report Share Posted May 4, 2004 quote:Say you fire a shot and it hits a model, a predetermined chunk of that model blows apart. Like an artillery shell hitting a road. Now you have an altered model. Just plug in some kinda algorithm, to determine a range of sizes of chunks to come apart. And that rubble is still left sitting around. And you could pick up one of the chunks and throw it, and it still feels and flys like a chunk of the origonal rubble.If you know how your model was built, and if applicable the reasonably small and finite number of chunks it can be deconstructed (exploded) into, you could always compute those physics values offline during model development and code them in as part of the models' information, rather than waste CPU time doing it realtime. No need for CSG then in the in-game models. Even that is still probably an utter waste of development time spent on better things, IMHO, unless you're trying to write an accurate "real world" simulator, like a flight game. Who other than a physicist would notice "hm, that thing's center of gravity should be more to the left"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now