wadaltmon

I think having a basic setup tutorial would be helpful (as getting a window and camera set up with your API isn't exactly standard), but beyond that, the only thing I'd want is for everything in the API to actually be documented and searchable. There are a lot of things within LW4 that are simply not in the documentation, and are things one would run into pretty easily when going beyond basic functionality.

Nice! This is exactly the kind of light source I was hoping to see in the next engine ?

@TheConceptBoy I think you've already done this with one instance. Is it possible to parent an existing or newly created model to a specific bone of an existing rig in LW?

You spawned your gun as a Model* and your enemies as Entity*. If you change that, does it make a difference?

I remember you were talking about animation time not being 1-to-1 from Blender to LW. Maybe bone-based animation does not abide by delta time, but the physics system does.

Can confirm, ran this project and spawned 33 characters before my frames went down below 30. On debug, I spawned maybe 12 and my framerate went down to single digits.

If the argument is for or against separately inputting the various maps, I'd say I'd like to have all the maps separate. Makes it far easier to establish and then change just one if necessary or for testing. Granted, with one Male you'd just be re-exporting one map and replacing that in LW/TE, but you'd have to go through a middleman to mix the exports into one.

Is it standard to mix the various maps into a single image? If so, why would that necessarily be better off than keeping them separate?

I have the maps themselves already exported from Substance Painter, just displaying them in Blender by basically assigning all those maps to separate objects in Blender (assign each individual object its own set of diffuse, normal, metallic, roughness). So I probably won't actually be re-exporting the maps from Blender, just the model itself will be exported. So in LW, does each texture that I apply have to be UV mapped to the overall model, or could it be UV mapped to a given subset of vertices on the model after I export it all as a single FBX? Sorry if I don't use the proper terminology with this stuff; I'm not hugely entrenched in the whole art aspect of games creation.

Hi everyone. I've got a gun object that has been created with Blender, and with textures/maps imported from Substance Painter. It's a single gun, but it's made up of several objects each with different materials and map sets (diffuse, normal, etc.). I've got these imported into the Blender 2.8 shading tab with their own nodes , and I also modified the overall specular value in the nodes too, but that should not be an issue as I think you can modify that in LW's material editor. I'd like to export the gun as an FBX to use as my first-person view model, and texture it with all of these maps and materials. Does Leadwerks allow me to use multiple materials on the same FBX model? If so, how would I go about doing so? It is also worth noting I plan on using a pseudo-PBR shader, as seen here: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=401506836&searchtext=Pbr . As such, I have a diffuse map, normal map, specular map (inverted roughness map colors), metallic map, and a skybox map (probably from the default skybox given with Leadwerks).

But then that begs the question of what maps the tool will have to know how to merge, which brings us full circle

All those maps are exported as separate images.

Is there any way PBR can be implemented in LW4? I have made a lot of stuff in substance painter 2019, but it looks awful when not using PBR. I've seen some projects implement it I think, but I'm not sure if they were through some established method or through just some one-by-one custom solution. I am fully aware Turbo will have PBR support built-in. But it isn't out yet as a full release, so...

To answer your question from my status update: I'm not really sure if this is what you mean, but Substance Painter can export a PBR material with color, metal, roughness, normals, and height (bumpmap).

I own LW4 of course and I'd be down to test Turbo against it and also as directly as possible against Unity, Unreal, and maybe Godot, Xenko, and others that could be suggested. (not GameMaker Studio 2, as that engine is massively expensive and isn't really suitable for 3D graphics imho). Of course this would be once Turbo goes into full release.

That's a bold claim, one that I'm sure comes with a few implied stipulations, but an intriguing one nonetheless. I'll be sure to test this out once Turbo is available in its full version for subscription. Thanks for the response.

I think he's disappointed that new features are not being added to LW4 as they are programmed, as they are instead being relegated to Turbo (for example, PBR could be added to LW4, and in fact already exists in user-made projects, but is being relegated to Turbo while competing engines surpass what LW or Turbo will have the capability to do at the same time). Josh does keep LW4 updated, but it's mostly with bug fixes and long-needed improvements anyway. All that said, I don't speak for Jorn, this is just speculation. I'm okay waiting for Turbo for such features to be implemented, but the real question is what features Turbo will employ to make it actually appealing to use over competitors.

Generally I've seen 2 schools of thought: delete all of App.cpp and put your code in here while leaving main.cpp alone, or delete all of main.cpp and leave App.cpp alone. I've had success by leaving App.cpp be and writing all my code in main.cpp. Delete all the code that's in that file, stick an include for Leadwerks.h and using namespace Leadwerks at the top, and then create a bool main() with a while (true) loop in there, and you're set to go.

I was just talking about this with someone on Discord and immediately after I posted this topic they directed me to his website. Apparently in April he expressed disdain with the stagnation of development on LW (given the focus on Turbo's development) and has stopped using and recommending it for games. Also he felt that the amount of messages he was getting due to some of the outdated stuff in those tutorials was not a good look, so he took them down. Unfortunate, as they were extremely helpful. I still found some of his source code on Github though.

Anyone know why Aggror/Jorn Theunissen removed his Leadwerks tutorials from YouTube? They were incredibly helpful, even though they were for LW3. However, he removed them fairly recently...

So I'm a little fuzzy on how Lua functions, but when I was porting the carry objects Lua scripts, I saw a function like this Collision function. So if you write a function Script:Collision(entity, position, normal, speed), it's called whenever a collision happens with a given entity? How would I go about creating/using such a function in C++?

How low are you talking? My masses are at 0.5. Perhaps setting the friction of the joint could work? Righto! I ported this code to C++, exactly what I needed.

Would anyone know how to make an object move faster toward a Ball joint? It moves very slowly toward the ball joint that gets attached to the object.

It worked, but it didn't really fix the magic carpet problem. Certainly made it more forgiving like you said, but still possible. Also the slow and random way your held object moved toward the mouse was not quite what I was looking for. Definitely a good solution, but as far as what I want to accomplish in the final game, not quite the type. That said, the quality of the tutorial was still top notch.

I don't think that's it. If I set the character model to be taller, remove the outer cylinder, and make it so the held object can collide with Characters, it does the same thing with the character model itself. And yes @TheConceptBoy: If we had that in C++ in an extensible form, this would be a non-issue.