Jump to content

help porting offlineLPV


jay1ne

Recommended Posts

I'm looking for help porting OLPV to work with the deffered lighting verison of the T3D engine. The current setup up is plugged into the shading pipeline and I'm trying to port to the lighting which is what the current verison of T3D is based on..


The idea would be to get it ported so it can be tested and possibly added to the main repo. Ultimately becoming an out the box feature.


Currently it works well for the deferred shading pipeline and if the lighting verison works as good as the shading verison, then there isn't a reason why it shouldn't be added. IM me if interested.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Afaik, the offline LPV actually can't be included into the main repo because of copyright issues. Something that has been vividly discussed, and I don't think the author ( @andrewmac ) will allow the GG MIT header.


Tbh I support him in his position on the matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh well.. Probably the reason why this community has dwindled to almost nothing and the engine is making small growth..Honestly I don't understand the position of creating a feature just to sit in cyber space never to be touched..i guess whatever floats ppls boats I guess...Its kind sad to see a engine that started off with so much potential fade because of things like this..oh well theres always other engines..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh well.. Probably the reason why this community has dwindled to almost nothing and the engine is making small growth..Honestly I don't understand the position of creating a feature just to sit in cyber space never to be touched..i guess whatever floats ppls boats I guess...Its kind sad to see a engine that started off with so much potential fade because of things like this..oh well theres always other engines..

 


Actually, quite a lot of stuff IS going into the engine. It's not like no one is implementing new features or anything like that.


However, due to the current situation with the copyrights of the main repository, Andrew doesn't want the work he's done for the LPV stuff be integrated without a mention of his contributions to it. I don't recall if there was a final decision on addition attributions or not, but even if not, nothing stops someone from doing their own implementation of the same feature to be integrated officially.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah i know features are being added and that great, i was just venting earlier..

So the reason its not is over credit..wow...i remember when t3d was in the betas and there was a lot I mean alot of talented ppl that put things into the engine and they didn't complain about credit. On the flip side I wouldn't see if a person waiting to have their name credited why that would be an issue. Me personally if it was me i wouldn't care. The end result should be bringing attention to the engine...

Edited by jay1ne
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's more a case of finding it an issue that GarageGames actually owns the copyright as much as it is wanting personal copyright. It can be quite annoying that you spend days on some feature and/or changes and then have a "GG owns this" stamp placed on it.


But porting it is still a good idea, then people can easily implement it into the engine by themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed!!!


I see pros and cons..nonetheless it is T3D and the feature(s) are be written specifically for that engine so if the rights go to garagegames then really it shouldn't be an issue. Daniels walkabout im sure took many hour to create and his nav mesh editor the same but now navmesh is apart of the main branch, the pbs work az is doing. I haven't asked him but I'm guessing if it being developed for T3D that he wouldn't mind either..i don't know maybe i been apart of the community so long that I don't see the issue of them owning code specifically made for the engine...it's not like you can plugin the code in another engine and it works..ijs

Egos need to go in order for the engine to grow.

If the engine grows everyone benefits!!!

More games being developed = more attention = more ppl using the engine = more ppl work to implement items on the roadmap..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed!!!

Daniels walkabout im sure took many hour to create and his nav mesh editor the same but now navmesh is apart of the main branch

 

Recently, sure, but Daniel used to sell walkabout. I paid for it, I'm sure many did. He deserved the money, it's good work.


I'm not asking for money for my work (not to imply that's a negative thing), or any kind of compensation. I just want my name to remain on it, is that really asking so much?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope i mentioned they should allow to..if im not mistaken the current lightning solution was created by a community members..so i agree thats the least they can do is allow an author's name to be on what they create. Nonetheless it's a feature specifically for this engine..on gg side they should allow it, if that's it..imo its a small thing to ask.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Update:

I restarted an attempt at porting to lighting..followed all the steps, regarding adding all the files and adding paths. During compiling I had a group of color values that kept giving me errors. I decide to comment them out and it built without any errors. It now starts the mission without freezing like it did my last attempt. The olpv icon shows up and the options are selectable. The only call stack error is point to reflections:

 

ShaderData(OfflineLPVPropagatedShaderData): samplerNames[0] = "$" are diferent to sampler in shader: $lpvData : register(S0)
ShaderData(OfflineLPVPropagatedShaderData): samplerNames[1] = "$" are diferent to sampler in shader: $prePassBuffer : register(S1)
ShaderData(OfflineLPVPropagatedShaderData) sampler $lpvData not defined
ShaderData(OfflineLPVPropagatedShaderData) sampler $prePassBuffer not defined
C:/Torque/Torque 3D NXT - development-OC/My Projects/olpv_lighting_test01/game/shaders/common/offlineLPVReflectP.hlsl(51,22): warning X3206: 'mul': implicit truncation of vector type
C:/Torque/Torque 3D NXT - development-OC/My Projects/olpv_lighting_test01/game/shaders/common/offlineLPVReflectP.hlsl(51,11): warning X3206: implicit truncation of vector type
C:/Torque/Torque 3D NXT - development-OC/My Projects/olpv_lighting_test01/game/shaders/common/offlineLPVReflectP.hlsl(70,15): warning X3553: can't use gradient instructions in loops with break, forcing loop to unroll
ShaderData(OfflineLPVReflectShaderData): samplerNames[0] = "$" are diferent to sampler in shader: $lpvData : register(S0)
ShaderData(OfflineLPVReflectShaderData): samplerNames[2] = "$" are diferent to sampler in shader: $matInfoBuffer : register(S2)
ShaderData(OfflineLPVReflectShaderData): samplerNames[1] = "$" are diferent to sampler in shader: $prePassBuffer : register(S1)
ShaderData(OfflineLPVReflectShaderData) sampler $lpvData not defined
ShaderData(OfflineLPVReflectShaderData) sampler $matInfoBuffer not defined
ShaderData(OfflineLPVReflectShaderData) sampler $prePassBuffer not defined 

 

Any help would be appreciated!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've contacted Dave Wyand about the possibility of keeping credit instead of assigning all copyright to GG. That would probably mean changing the OSA agreement. Incidentally, I've actually done just that when I imported a library to go with googletest. I asked GG about that and from what I remember, the answer was 'sure whatever'. The whole status of contributions (which are marked MIT and © GG) and libraries (many of which we have included in lib/ as source) is unclear to me. What's to stop us putting Andrew's code in lib/, keeping the same copyright, and using it?


The flipside of the coin is that I and a couple of other SC members want to see T3D becoming more 'distributed', so that improving the engine is less a question of pulling every single thing we can find into the main repo, but instead providing easy ways for users to discover addons, pull them down, integrate them, and rate them. That way Andrew can keep his code, and users can get it without it having to be in the core engine.


Finally, I personally feel that deferred shading is the way the engine will head, anyway, so porting LPV back to deferred lighting will become redundant in the future. Who knows how far that will be, but hopefully within the year.


Also, thanks for the kind words about Walkabout, Andrew :).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sound great! My reason for trying to port to lighting is because I was using 3.7..which currently uses lighting.

I wouldn't mind using shading (actually things look and operate just about the same on my cpu)..As I mentioned I have other shaders that were written for the lighting pipeline, so I would have to have those ported to shading and unfornately I'm not skilled in writting shaders to do it myself without help...so that's my reason for wanting the port.

Not saying the development for T3D is keeping me from moving forward with my project but I been trying to focus on the art side of the project until the engine was in a state I felt was stable and had certain features and tools..With the art side pretty much finishing up. I'm now looking at getting a prototype going..I would hate to have rocked with T3D all these years to only move the project to another engine because it lacked a feature I was looking to have...Yes the feature wouldn't make or break the game and how it plays but it would add to the graphical part of things. Having eye candy makes the game more attractive..You can't sell your game by words alone..Alot of ppl are visual, and by seeing eye candy in screenshots ppl make their decision by what they see, so having pretty feature(s) along with easy to use tools helps and draws attention to a engine.

Anyways is good to see different flavors of the engine..with lighting, shading, and PBS..but in my imo all of them should get the same attention but I'm not in the SC so its just my opinion..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well since no one is wanting to help. Maybe if I was willing to paid for the help would that motive??

Well I'm willing to pay something if someone could do it. I can't pay alot because for one it's finished code that is just needing to be ported. And two it shouldn't be alot of work..If interested please PM me and we can neigotate!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...