Portalized (GUI update)

nullsquared · Post by **nullsquared** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 4:03 pm

DEvil HUnter wrote:so awesome!
keep up

round portals also possible?
or in general other shapes?

It's just a model. Stars/circles/ovals/etc. is all possible by molding a model for it.

Ellandra · Post by **Ellandra** » Wed Mar 05, 2008 5:06 pm

HelloHello.. been keeping an eye on this thread for awhile now. Nothing new been posted for awhile though

quite interesting to know how the project is developing

nullsquared · Post by **nullsquared** » Tue Mar 11, 2008 3:34 pm

The polished beta is in the works (editor shown):

It's all WYSIWYG (what-you-see-is-what-you-get), with dynamic lighting/soft-self-shadowing and physics as you go (as you create geometry in the editor it is automatically physics-ized and automatically dynamically lit and shadowed). You can push the game state on top of the editor state to do what Crysis does with its editor - make stuff, and immediately jump into it.

altren · Post by **altren** » Tue Mar 11, 2008 3:39 pm

Cool! Are you going to show some demo?

nullsquared · Post by **nullsquared** » Tue Mar 11, 2008 3:43 pm

altren wrote:Cool! Are you going to show some demo?

No demo until the beta itself

twilight17 · Post by **twilight17** » Tue Mar 11, 2008 4:20 pm

Um.. Just in case my graphics card can't run this... Could you tell me what card you use? Thanks

nullsquared · Post by **nullsquared** » Tue Mar 11, 2008 4:26 pm

twilight17 wrote:Um.. Just in case my graphics card can't run this... Could you tell me what card you use? Thanks

What card do you have? Does it support multiple render targets? (look in the Ogre log, like Multiple Render Targets: <#>) What shader model is it?

Portalized will run on very high mode in shader model 2 and cards with 4 MRTs. High mode will be shader model 2 with no multiple render targets. Medium will be as high, but with less instructions. Low will be shader model 1. Minimum will require no shaders, no textures, nothing - just a 1 bit hardware stencil buffer.

twilight17 · Post by **twilight17** » Tue Mar 11, 2008 4:46 pm

nullsquared wrote:
twilight17 wrote:Um.. Just in case my graphics card can't run this... Could you tell me what card you use? Thanks
What card do you have? Does it support multiple render targets? (look in the Ogre log, like Multiple Render Targets: <#>) What shader model is it?

Portalized will run on very high mode in shader model 2 and cards with 4 MRTs. High mode will be shader model 2 with no multiple render targets. Medium will be as high, but with less instructions. Low will be shader model 1. Minimum will require no shaders, no textures, nothing - just a 1 bit hardware stencil buffer.

Ok I can run it... but anyway... What card do you have? I've been looking for a good new one

nullsquared · Post by **nullsquared** » Tue Mar 11, 2008 8:26 pm

twilight17 wrote:
nullsquared wrote:
twilight17 wrote:Um.. Just in case my graphics card can't run this... Could you tell me what card you use? Thanks
What card do you have? Does it support multiple render targets? (look in the Ogre log, like Multiple Render Targets: <#>) What shader model is it?

Portalized will run on very high mode in shader model 2 and cards with 4 MRTs. High mode will be shader model 2 with no multiple render targets. Medium will be as high, but with less instructions. Low will be shader model 1. Minimum will require no shaders, no textures, nothing - just a 1 bit hardware stencil buffer.
Ok I can run it... but anyway... What card do you have? I've been looking for a good new one

A 8800GTS. I suggest you get this one, too, but the new G92 architecture one. What card do you have right now, and what shader model is it, and how many multiple render targets does it do?

twilight17 · Post by **twilight17** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 5:50 am

Doesn't matter - getting this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6814130325

twilight17 · Post by **twilight17** » Wed Mar 12, 2008 3:53 pm

Or... should I get this?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6814130334
OR!! wait till 9800s?

Ellandra · Post by **Ellandra** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 11:52 am

nullsquared wrote:The polished beta is in the works (editor shown):

Looks totally awesome, can't wait to try it!

hpesoj · Post by **hpesoj** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 2:47 pm

Hey Null, maybe someone has already asked this, I can't remember, but can you have 3D portals, like a sphere or cylinder mesh? It'd be pretty cool to be able to walk around a portal 360 degrees, and get 360 degree access to wherever the other side of the portal is.

Joe

twilight17 · Post by **twilight17** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 4:17 pm

hpesoj wrote:Hey Null, maybe someone has already asked this, I can't remember, but can you have 3D portals, like a sphere or cylinder mesh? It'd be pretty cool to be able to walk around a portal 360 degrees, and get 360 degree access to wherever the other side of the portal is.

Joe

I was thinking about this, then It hit me that if it was a full 360* (cant do the little degree thing) then the world would try to fall through it, since it doesn't have any edges!

CaseyB · Post by **CaseyB** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 4:36 pm

twilight17 wrote:
hpesoj wrote:Hey Null, maybe someone has already asked this, I can't remember, but can you have 3D portals, like a sphere or cylinder mesh? It'd be pretty cool to be able to walk around a portal 360 degrees, and get 360 degree access to wherever the other side of the portal is.

Joe
I was thinking about this, then It hit me that if it was a full 360* (cant do the little degree thing) then the world would try to fall through it, since it doesn't have any edges!

It would be a Black Hole!

nullsquared · Post by **nullsquared** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 3:41 pm

You can't interconnect space through 3D. Would entering the sphere portal at (P+R) exit me at P'+R', or P', or P'-R' (P = position, R = radius)? How would dual-sided collisions work?

Answer: they wouldn't

.

hpesoj · Post by **hpesoj** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 4:38 pm

I had been thinking about this a bit more while showering today

, and yeah, I realized that it wouldn't work to go in on the outer surface of a sphere, and exit the outer surface of another sphere. Wouldn't it however be possible to exit on the inner surface of a sphere? Granted that for a sphere, the inner space would be isolated from the area outside the sphere, and would thus be somewhat useless (apart from the player experiencing a change in scale maybe). An open-ended cylinder would be a more practical shape, non-isolated shape, although this could again only be used in a limited capacity -- all the player would experience is two circular shaped psuedo-portals (the ends of the cylinder) when they enter, or look into, the confines of the cylinder (apart from the change in scale again).

For 3D surfaces, I'd imagine the visuals and physics would be far more complicated? Probably not worth it, unless confusing the hell out of a player is one of the aims of your game

. Still, an arrangement of flat portals in a "cylinder" to make 360 degree access would be quite cool.

Joe

nullsquared · Post by **nullsquared** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 5:15 pm

hpesoj wrote:I had been thinking about this a bit more while showering today , and yeah, I realized that it wouldn't work to go in on the outer surface of a sphere, and exit the outer surface of another sphere. Wouldn't it however be possible to exit on the inner surface of a sphere? Granted that for a sphere, the inner space would be isolated from the area outside the sphere, and would thus be somewhat useless (apart from the player experiencing a change in scale maybe). An open-ended cylinder would be a more practical shape, non-isolated shape, although this could again only be used in a limited capacity -- all the player would experience is two circular shaped psuedo-portals (the ends of the cylinder) when they enter, or look into, the confines of the cylinder (apart from the change in scale again).

For 3D surfaces, I'd imagine the visuals and physics would be far more complicated? Probably not worth it, unless confusing the hell out of a player is one of the aims of your game . Still, an arrangement of flat portals in a "cylinder" to make 360 degree access would be quite cool.

Joe

There's no point for that, since all you'll ever be able to distinguish it as a 2D segment. If you want to make such a "3D" portal, you might as well just rotate the portal each frame to face the player, or something.

hpesoj · Post by **hpesoj** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 5:53 pm

If you're referring to the last thing I said, I just meant having an arrangement of portals, with frames, arranged in a circle. It might be hard to use such an arrangement in a puzzle, but I was just commenting on how it would look cool

.

Conclusion: 3d portals = not that great

On another note, I saw your earlier videos of your engine, where you had gravity flipping. Are you planning on using this feature in Portalized?

nullsquared · Post by **nullsquared** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 6:14 pm

hpesoj wrote: On another note, I saw your earlier videos of your engine, where you had gravity flipping. Are you planning on using this feature in Portalized?

Of course

! Not just gravity flipping, but wall walking. And it's actually more versatile than Prey's, you can make a spiral and walk on it fine.

nullsquared · Post by **nullsquared** » Tue Mar 18, 2008 1:34 am

Progress is being done:

Completely dynamically lit and soft-self-shadowed geometry that is created on the fly. One button, "m", automatically converts everything into optimized meshes. Another button, "p", automatically converts the (currently unconverted, it ignores the "done") current scene into a physically-represented scene. You're then ready to start placing physics-based objects, mainly ScriptedObject's.

I'm also working on the level serializer and deserializer. This is quite unique, since it stores external files as they are needed. ScriptedObject's Lua scripts are saved externally, able to be reused. All of the meshes are saved externing, basically allow one to use the Portalized/Disorder Engine WYSIWYG editor to make Ogre meshes.

The editor itself is currently a bit "ugly" in terms of controls. Obviously, I'm fixing it up.

Also, in case you're wondering of the smaller "viewport". That's actually a second scene manager rendering the first scene manager's content from a texture. I'm setting this up to use a differred renderer. This allows for many portal tricks, *cough*freelightingthroughportals*cough*, given that everything ends up in the same screen space.

Denis_ · Post by **Denis_** » Fri Mar 21, 2008 12:26 pm

you are making realy good work

i like it

Eriksrocks · Post by **Eriksrocks** » Sun Mar 23, 2008 9:49 pm

I've been watching this project since it started back on the Narbacular Drop forums. It has obviously come a long way since then. This project is absolutely stunning. So, anyways, I was wondering when we get to test it. Have you released it in anyway yet. I can't tell you how anxious I am to just mess around with Portalized. I don't even want the WYSIWYG editor, I just want to play with the portals!

And also, is there a main thread for this project? I've seen threads all over, on Facepunch, here, on GameDev, etc. Is there an official website or which thread do you frequent most?

FYI: portalized.org and portalizedgame.com are not taken. You might want to grab those if you have the cash. I can see this game getting very popular.

Thanks, Erik.

twilight17 · Post by **twilight17** » Sun Mar 23, 2008 9:51 pm

It looks REALLY amazing, but I think you are going a bit over the top witht eh shaders. Not to be ignorant, but I think you should completely focus on the portals, and dynamics of them.

Eriksrocks · Post by **Eriksrocks** » Sun Mar 23, 2008 9:56 pm

twilight17 wrote:It looks REALLY amazing, but I think you are going a bit over the top witht eh shaders. Not to be ignorant, but I think you should completely focus on the portals, and dynamics of them.

I think the graphics are just as important. He mentioned back on the Narbacular Drop forums when things got ugly, that he was making a game and not an engine. Yes, the portals are the most fun aspect and are what most people are excited about, but graphics matter just as much for a game. And personally I think the graphics look great. I agree that the lighting could be toned down a little bit (more of ambient light rather than lots of shadows), but other than that it looks amazing.