Free Descent 1/2 data

All other topics around Descent and D2X-XL

Moderators: Frustikus, simX, Aus-RED-5

User avatar
karx11erx
D2X-XL Master
D2X-XL Master
Posts: 8112
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Wilferdingen, Germany
Contact:

Free Descent 1/2 data

Postby karx11erx » Thu Oct 16, 2008 10:33 am

A completely free D1/D2 is still a desirable goal for me.

Currently the following areas need work:
  • Textures: Many available in hires already. We need some more doors, about half of the robot textures, and some animated textures to be done. Could easily be converted to 64x64 palettized bitmaps for other Descent versions. Cockpits could also come from TEW, or from Pumo mines.
  • Sounds: Not much here, no volunteers in sight. :(
  • Robots: We could probably use the Descent: The Enemy Within (TEW) robots. I am pretty sure the authors wouldn't object to that.
  • Physics data: Extract and store them in XML or so.
Megagun
Posts: 57
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2007 8:31 pm

Postby Megagun » Thu Oct 16, 2008 4:50 pm

Hm, TEW is interesting...

Anyways, there are two ways you do this..
1) Create original Descent compatible datafiles and use highres textures where needed (more or less what I tried to do with Freescent back in the days)
2) Modify the sourcecode to in essence eliminate the need for Descent's datafiles..

I'm guessing you want to go for #2, and that'd probably be the 'easiest way out'...
Perhaps there's a way to use the shareware data for physics, and TEW as the singleplayer missions/bot/model sources?


Physics data: Extract and store them in XML or so.

Wouldn't be legal unless you ask the user to create his own XML file from his own Descent datafiles, which then wouldn't be free. :(
User avatar
karx11erx
D2X-XL Master
D2X-XL Master
Posts: 8112
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Wilferdingen, Germany
Contact:

Postby karx11erx » Thu Oct 16, 2008 4:51 pm

Megagun wrote:Wouldn't be legal unless you ask the user to create his own XML file from his own Descent datafiles, which then wouldn't be free. :(

I know, but tell me another way to model the D2 physics short of completely rewriting them.
Megagun
Posts: 57
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2007 8:31 pm

Postby Megagun » Thu Oct 16, 2008 5:01 pm

Well, what I thought about a few days ago was to create a program that could convert a directory of files (images, music, 3d models, scripts) and 'compile' them into the required datafiles.
Then, create the needed scripts that are then compiled into said datafiles, and you'd end up with your own free implementation of D2-like physics. And with a bit of maths, I bet you'd be able to create your own free implementation of the *exact* D2 physics..

Unfortunately, that's not an easy task at all, but it'd be the cleanest, across-all-engines way of doing it.
The easier way would be to kick out the physics-datafile-reading part in XL, and recode that.

It's going to be messy either way, though.. :(
User avatar
Theftbot
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 7:51 pm

Postby Theftbot » Fri Oct 17, 2008 7:19 am

ever thought of using brush based level(map)s-so much quicker to build
User avatar
heftig
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 5:29 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

Postby heftig » Fri Oct 17, 2008 8:55 am

D2X(-XL) uses the PhysicsFS library to access data, doesn't it?
User avatar
MetalBeast
Posts: 922
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 7:25 pm
Location: Frankfurt/M, Germany
Contact:

Postby MetalBeast » Fri Oct 17, 2008 9:35 am

* Textures: like Diedel wrote, many are done already, the rest could be done in short time, if all 2d artists here would work together.
* Sounds: we could use free-sounds for first step, there are many av., we could also use some sounds from other open-source projects.
in second step, we still replace them wirh high-quality new made sounds.
* Robots: D2X-XL supports ASE robots, at least animations must be implemented, after this making new robots should be no problem.
* Physics data: are they copyrighted in any way ?, dont think so.

It would be fine, if d2x-xl could support Q3 BSP support, so making high-quality-levels would be much easier.
User avatar
karx11erx
D2X-XL Master
D2X-XL Master
Posts: 8112
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Wilferdingen, Germany
Contact:

Postby karx11erx » Fri Oct 17, 2008 11:13 am

heftig wrote:D2X(-XL) uses the PhysicsFS library to access data, doesn't it?

No. Afaik there is no Windows-native version of PhysFS available, and I am not gonna cross-compile it.
User avatar
karx11erx
D2X-XL Master
D2X-XL Master
Posts: 8112
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Wilferdingen, Germany
Contact:

Postby karx11erx » Fri Oct 17, 2008 11:14 am

D2X-XL cannot support other level formats than segment based one because the entire path finding and collision detection depends on it. I could as well throw the current source code away if I wanted to change that and mod some up to date game.
Sirius
Posts: 1990
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2007 10:29 pm
Location: Bellevue, WA
Contact:

Postby Sirius » Fri Oct 17, 2008 8:31 pm

Yeah, while non-segment based does have its advantages it would take a while:
* Robot path finding works nicely with a segment engine; you need a different system for anything else (usually node-based)
* Things like doors and triggers will probably work differently
* There'll need to be a different system for energy centres and other "cube types"

Oh, and a biggie:
* DLE-XP would need to be virtually entirely rewritten
User avatar
heftig
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 5:29 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

Postby heftig » Fri Oct 17, 2008 8:33 pm

karx11erx wrote:No. Afaik there is no Windows-native version of PhysFS available, and I am not gonna cross-compile it.


Weird. Maybe it was added to D2X after you forked XL. According to the homepage, VS6+ can compile it.
User avatar
MetalBeast
Posts: 922
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 7:25 pm
Location: Frankfurt/M, Germany
Contact:

Postby MetalBeast » Fri Oct 17, 2008 8:52 pm

Sirius wrote:Yeah, while non-segment based does have its advantages it would take a while:
* Robot path finding works nicely with a segment engine; you need a different system for anything else (usually node-based)
* Things like doors and triggers will probably work differently
* There'll need to be a different system for energy centres and other "cube types"

Oh, and a biggie:
* DLE-XP would need to be virtually entirely rewritten


In BSP maps, path-finding is made based on special path-points,
which you can set in editor(for SP maps) or ingame (for multiplayer maps).

And you would never need DLE-XP again, you would have GTK-radiant,
which is "a bit" more comfortable ;) So no need to rewrite anything ;)

I do not think, creating a map converter is imposible, it could be tricky, but feasible.
There are my possibilities, how you can build your map, so it is possible to build it this way,
it can be convertible to descent format.

The simplest unit in GTK is a brush, brush is a simple cube / 6 faces object.
Also you can put the texture only on one face, if you want.
So using 6 brushes and you have simple descent like map-unit (box)

I have already build a simple test map this way:
Image

Image

Image
User avatar
karx11erx
D2X-XL Master
D2X-XL Master
Posts: 8112
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Wilferdingen, Germany
Contact:

Postby karx11erx » Fri Oct 17, 2008 9:57 pm

I know how brush based level editors work (I spent my time with Worldcraft back in the days of Half-Life 1). I will not start adding a render engine or level parser to D2X-XL that can read such files. That time would be better spent on using a better engine.
Sirius
Posts: 1990
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2007 10:29 pm
Location: Bellevue, WA
Contact:

Postby Sirius » Fri Oct 17, 2008 10:14 pm

I can see where you're coming from. I'm certainly intending to use a new (or at the bare minimum significantly newer) engine for one of my upcoming missions because it gives much more design flexibility - and will probably be able to look better than D2 can handle to boot...
User avatar
darkflamewolf
Posts: 690
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 9:14 pm
Location: Minot, ND

Postby darkflamewolf » Sat Oct 18, 2008 3:08 pm

I'm confused, you want this to be a stand-alone program apart from Descent? Is that why you want new textures, new robots and things. So if it were to go commercial, you wouldn't be sued for infringement? I'm confused as to what you're trying to do.

Return to “General Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests