Насладитесь...
Unofficial Fallout 3 FAQ (version 0.4) by NCR_Ranger, with additional material gathered by StillLife, Sammael and Briosafreak
NOTE: This FAQ is build around ideas that the developers of Van Buren/Fallout3 have posted in several message boards, on interviews and through replies made by them to questions the FAQ team has made. Many things stated here still can be changed, since we are on an early stage of the development of the game.
This game has the code name Project Van Buren. Since the BIS devs have been talking about Fallout3 features is that enough to say that that Van Buren is really Fallout3, while you can`t announce it yet?
What, like posting concept art, rules systems, races, and the like isn't? No big mystary here. If O.J. Simpson had as much circumstantial evidence about his case as this project has had posted on this board (edit:BIS board) and fan sites, then he'd be picking up his soap with his toes right now... maybe that's a bad example, but you get the point.
Q: When can we expect an official announcement for what game Van Buren is?
J.E. Sawyer _ ЇI have no idea. Those decisions are not up to development.?
What·s the ESBR rating?
We're making Van Buren as an M game.
What·s the production timetable for Fallout 3?
We have longer than the IWD2 cycle, even after it was postponed.
Will weapons in Van Buren be made more realistic?
Not for the simple sake of being more realistic, no. But we might look at "realistic" reasons to balance weapons. A very simple example might be as follows: most semi-automatic pistols have a higher capacity and firing rate than most revolvers. People still use revolvers today because they are often a little more accurate than sa pistols and because they are extremely reliable (almost impossible to jam). Using a "realistic" element like that to make a certain weapon type more valuable in a specific way is good. But just making something realistic for the sake of being realistic isn't a good way to go, IMO.
Can we expect to see swords in Van Buren?
No plans for any swords in Van Buren.
Will the next Fallout be turn-based, or will it be real-time?
A Fallout sequel would almost assuredly have a turn-based mode and a real-time with pause mode, toggled outside of combat.
Why?
Real-time vs. turn-based combat isn't an aspect of character development, but it is an aspect of gameplay. Some people don't like playing through combat, even in a good system. Some people absolutely hate dialogue, even when it's well written. To accommodate different types of players, we do need to spread our resources.
Won·t that take a lot of time and cause balancing issues?
Summary: yes, balancing real-time and turn-based will take time. Yes, real-time and turn-based battles will not play out the same even under the most ideal circumstances. However, enough people are DIE-HARD ADAMANT about only playing one way or another that we believe it is genuinely important to pursue. Will turn-based combat be as balanced as it would without any real-time component? Of course not, but if the difference of that balance is minor, I believe allowing both of the die-hard groups to have a fundamental element of play to enjoy is important.
How will unarmed combat be handled?
If the advantage of firearms is range and damage at the cost of ammo conservation, and the advantage of melee is in reliability and good potential damage from powered weapons at the cost of (usually) range and less overall damage than firearms, then (IMO), the advantage of unarmed should be in flexibility at the cost of range and damage.
The highly skilled unarmed character should always have at least two moves to perform for each AP level between 2 and 10. Because interface limitations can be overcome in a future Fallout title, the unarmed character should have access to half of these attacks with one click-hold-release. Each move should have its own benefits and drawbacks so that a healthy amount of the moves stay useful throughout the game.
The moves could be split into these groups: hand attacks, hand combos, foot attacks, foot combos and hand-foot combos. For example, the character could have Jab, Cross, Uppercut, Elbow Smash, Backhand, Sucker Punch, Spearhand, and Ridgehand as standard hand attacks, each with their own AP cost, bonus or penalty to hit, DT modifier, and damage. However, the character could also gain "two-in-one" combos.
For instance, Jab-Elbow. The combo would do both moves, each at a different hex. The Jab would go into the targeted hex, and the Elbow Smash would go into the hex back and to the right. The combo would cost less AP than both moves individually, but it would be at a lower chance to hit with each attack, and would incur a fatigue cost. Another combo might be Cross-Backhand-Ridgehand, hitting the first hex targeted, the hex to the right, and the hex two more to the right.
Kicks could have the same general layout (with different moves, of course). The kicks don't even have to be crazy wire-fu'ed out. They can just be regular ol' kicks. Snap Kick, Axe Kick, Roundhouse, Back Kick, Side Kick, Hook Kick, etc. You could have the same sorts of combos. Roundhouse-Hook, Side-Back, Snap-Side-Axe.
The most complex combos would only be available when the character was fighting with no equipment in either hand, allowing hand-foot combos that could hit four, five, or even six hexes. Axe-Backhand-Round-Spear, Cross-Round-Back-Jab-Uppercut, Uppercut-Elbow-Side-Axe-Ridge-Spear. The high-skill complex combo unarmed character is like a mobile low-powered grenade, able to hit the hexes he or she wants when he or she wants from round to round. He or she never runs out of ammo, but has to accept that at high efficiency, he or she is accumulating fatigue and doing less damage than a comparable melee or firearms character. But with more than thirty moves to perform at high levels, never needing to equip or reload weapons, the unarmed character has ultimate flexibility for dealing with any close-range encounter with small to very large numbers of opponents.?
How will critical hits in combat be handled?
Well, overall I can say I'd like to see fewer damage multipliers, more crippled limbs, more severe penalties to hit the eyes, and crits that ignore a portion of
How skills are derived in the new SPECIAL:
ј they start at 0. tag! skills start at 20.
ј they do not have a % symbol behind them, as it makes no goddamned sense
ј the cost on a per-rank basis is 1 for ranks 1-50, 2 for 51-100, 3 for 101-150, and 4 for 151-200 (maxxxx). each rank bought for a tag! skill is doubled.
ј each skill has a bonus applied to all rolls that is equal to three ability score values (AG*3 or CH*2 + IN or ST + AG + PE, etc.)
ј perks that require skill values only look at the rank, not the rank + bonus. e.g.: you want to take Advanced Research; the prerequisites are IN 8, PE 6, science 175. If the character's science only has 168 ranks, but it's effectively 182 because of his high IN and PE, he won't qualify.
If you had a 55 Medic, it would cost you two points to increase it one rank -- but you would get an additional rank for free.
It's not half-cost; it's double ranks. I`m not opposed to skills with 100+ ranks. Penalties can always bring the ultra high skill characters back into the realm of reality. It does make the late game difficulties high enough that only people with high skills have a chance of making the checks, but i don't think that's so bad.
I think that perks don't actually all have to be the same value. However, the higher value perks should only be accessible by people with high (inefficient) skills. a skill generalist will get more bang for his or her buck by spreading points around. a skill specialist will make less overall progress, but will have access to more perks that make him or her even more badass with a skill than the rank alone would indicate.
(Quote from the SA forums)
How do you plan on enhancing the science skill?
One of the big "new things" intended for a Fallout sequel is the creation of a viable Science Boy path through the game. Item assembly is a significant component of that gameplay path. The idea is that items can be made at certain "labs" (conventional weapons and armor at a Mechanics Lab, ammunition and energy weapons at a Science Lab, drugs and medkits at a Medical Lab, etc.) with a high enough skill and the right found inventory items.
What changes will be made to the aiming system?
I believe that the different called shots should be made more useful overall. Eyes is clearly "the way to go" in the first two Fallout games. It shouldn't just be a "well, duh" choice. Limb crippling should be more common, IMO. Blinding should also have even more dramatic penalties, but the chance to hit the eyes should be reduced even more
What innovations can we expect in Fallout 3 regarding the skilldex?
My designs for the interface allow the player to interact with an object through skills in two ways:
Right-click on the object, select the skill icon, and a sub-menu pops up on the side. The menu only shows you skill options that can actually be used with the object. E.g.: If you right-click on a standard world NPC, you'll get Medic and Steal. If you right-click on a generator that can be fixed with Mechanics or searched for Traps, you'll get Mechanics and Traps. Pick one, and away you go.
Left-click on Skilldex. Move mouse over objects. When the cursor is over an object, you get the same submenu choices as if you had right-clicked, above.
Also, you would have a quick hotkey for going into sneak mode at will, since that is a reflexive action that requires no target, just a subject.
Will there be a car in Fallout 3?
I would like to see another car in a Fallout sequel. The car was useful and not crazy OMG powerful or "unrealistic", even within the setting. However, there probably should be only one car or possibly two (big and slow vs. small and fast).
However, Fallout 3 will probably have other... alternate means of transportation.
Where will the main story be located ?
The Van Buren storyline has been pretty well defined. The manner in which the game starts allows the PC to be from almost anywhere in the game world.
Will the player be able to pick multiple races?
No.
Why?
It wouldn't really "screw the story up", but it would certainly have a significant impact on the humanity-centric themes of Fallout games. One could argue that having ghouls and super mutants as protagonists in a story that explores human nature as a theme would be interesting -- it certainly could be, IMO. After all, ghouls and super mutants both started out as humans, so it's not like such themes would be totally inappropriate for them.
But the animations -- that's a lot of animations. Super mutants can't simply work as a morph of a standard human model. Their posture is completely different, and their limbs are so huge that it would cause clipping problems anyway (massively re-work every exported animation). My list of PC animations is about 180. "Monster" animation lists are normally much smaller (20 or less). So... it's not trivial.
Will there be talking animals in Fallout 3?
There will be no talking animals or plants in Van Buren.
Will there be many pop culture references like in Fallout 2?
There will be no pop culture references in any "ordinary" locations, though there may be one or two in extremely rare random encounters. Humor is part of the Fallout setting, though its use should certainly be more like Fallout than Fallout 2, IMO.
If another Fallout game were ever made and you just happened to be the lead designer by chance, would it continue with the bloodline of the Vault Dweller / Chosen One?
Probably not.
Would the game be a sequel, prequel or neither if you had the choice?
I'd make it a sequel. I suspect most of the old time players would like to see how life in the wasteland has evolved since the destruction of most of the Enclave. A prequel could be cool but -- not right now.
Can you make a list of things you think would need changing regarding the SPECIAL system?
The number of skills and what they encompass (especially the science skills), the critical hit subsystem, the DR/DT/armor subsystems, range penalties, called shots, and the unarmed combat subsystem.
How many skills will there be in Fallout 3?
Right now, I have a list of 14 skills: 3 combat, 3 diplomacy, 4 science (including Outdoorsman), 4 stealth.
Are you in favour of a single marksmanship skill, two firearm skills or the original Small Guns, Big Guns, Energy Weapons skills?
I'm now more in favour of [marksmanship] than having two firearm skills.
If Small Guns, Big Guns and Energy Weapons are combined into one, wont it make being a dedicated combat specialist too easy?
A dedicated combat specialist in Fallout 1 or 2 could put all his or her skill points into one or two combat skills, too (Small Guns/Energy Weapons, for instance). Of course, since (with the exception of the beginning of Fallout 2) ammo grew on trees and fell out of the sky, Unarmed and Melee were only useful as amusing alternatives. That's why I keep talking about having lower amounts of ammo and fewer firearm-using opponents.
Will ammunition be more rare then it was in Fallout 2?
I know this might seem crazy, but less ammo in the world also means less enemies using weapons with ammo. Why didn't Max get shot fifty times driving in and out of the refinery? Because out of all the raiders, only Humungus had one of the two or three guns in the movie. When he actually did fire that gun -- whoa, look out. Everyone else made due with crossbows, melee weapons, and their bare hands.
Fallout shouldn't be as bereft of ammunition as the Road Warrior, but ammunition should be a commodity -- something the player values, pays attention to, and spends accordingly.
How will CNPC·s be handled in Fallout 3?
1) By default, CNPCs (companion NPCs) are controlled by the computer.
2) CNPCs have an options screen similar to the one in FO2 that allows the player to define broad behavior patterns for the CNPC.
3) Outside of combat, the player always has access to the inventory of a CNPC. Their inventory screen looks like the main character's inventory screen.
4) The CNPCs have scripts that, among other things, define idiosyncratic behavior for those characters. E.g.: Sulik hates slavers, so when he sees characters marked as slavers, he gets LUDACRIS and ACTS A FOOL, possibly attacking them and definitely devoting all attention to them in combat. Battery gets angry at robots and machines, and being around them makes him generally belligerent, likely to beat people with a huge wrench rather than evaluate the situation sensibly.
5) When CNPCs are in the party, they get their own selection buttons on the interface as in FO:T. Selecting them allows the player to have basic movement, inventory, and skill use control over them. ONE AT A TIME. CNPCS not under current control out of combat follow the leader as usual.
6) Also, one button appears next to the CNPC tabs that is a toggle: AUTOMATIC/MANUAL. It can be clicked at any time, though its effects only come into play when it's a CNPC's turn to act. If the toggle is set to MANUAL, the CNPC's script and the current situations are then compared to a PC's speech skill in a check. If the CNPC is generally easygoing and is not flipping out due to wounds/intense hatred for current enemies/being high on psycho, the level of the speech skill required to exercise control is relatively low. Otherwise, the requirements get pretty high. At any time, the player can attempt to control his or her CNPCs manually as individuals, but they aren't required to, and they simply may not be able to due to their own shortcomings as a leader or the inherently independent/crazy nature of their allies.
Will weapons in Van Buren be made more realistic?
Not for the simple sake of being more realistic, no. But we might look at "realistic" reasons to balance weapons. A very simple example might be as follows: most semi-automatic pistols have a higher capacity and firing rate than most revolvers. People still use revolvers today because they are often a little more accurate than sa pistols and because they are extremely reliable (almost impossible to jam). Using a "realistic" element like that to make a certain weapon type more valuable in a specific way is good. But just making something realistic for the sake of being realistic isn't a good way to go, IMO.
Will we be able to create items in a Fallout sequel?
One of the big "new things" intended for a Fallout sequel is the creation of a viable Science Boy path through the game. Item assembly is a significant component of that gameplay path. The idea is that items can be made at certain "labs" (conventional weapons and armor at a Mechanics Lab, ammunition and energy weapons at a Science Lab, drugs and medkits at a Medical Lab, etc.) with a high enough skill and the right found inventory items.
Will there be a toolset/ editor for Van Buren?
No
Q: Why not?
Creating a suite of editors for the gaming populous is far more of a challenge than creating them for game developers. Game devs are used to using command line tools, and esoteric interfaces. Plus it's our job. We have to use the tools given us. If we release those tools as is (assuming we decoupled the editors from the database and fileserver) the percentage of gamers that had the desire to use the tools AND of those had the time to use the tools AND of those had the drive to learn to use the tools AND of those that actually finish a mod...
Sam Dark добавил [date]1067718444[/date]:
Q: Is there a chance that somewhere down the line that after the game is released, a toolset might be released?
I don't know, but I'm 99.999999% sure that if I ask I'll get a response of, "Maybe." I would definitely hold off on asking until after the game is out.
Who will be doing the music for the game?
Van Buren is currently composer free. It'll be a while before we get to the music part of the game.
Will the Enclave be featured in Fallout 3?
In short, no Enclave organization, no Enclave bases, no Enclave storyline. Just fragments of their existence scattered across the wasteland
Compiled Jefferson Engine Facts And Developer Quotes
This are a few pics showing concept art made for Van Buren. Remember what Sawyer said Їmuch like art for any game, maybe it's just a concept? and don`t draw many conclusions from them.
http://www.nma-fallout.com/images/Fallout3/fjunkcar.jpg
http://www.nma-fallout.com/images/Fa..._wasteland.jpg
http://www.nma-fallout.com/images/Fallout3/fareas2.JPG
http://www.nma-fallout.com/images/Fallout3/fdome.jpg
http://www.nma-fallout.com/images/Fallout3/gasbot.jpg
You can see here how characters looked like in Jefferson, the level of detail shouldn`t be very different in Van Buren
http://avala.yubc.net/~svt/avatars.html
1.0
Will the engine used in Van Buren capture the atmosphere of the universe it will entail?
Yes. I think it already does. The engine is capable of rendering very detailed scenes. In giving demos to people, I often forget to rotate the camera early one. A few people have asked, five minutes in, "So are only the characters 3D? I thought the whole engine was 3D.? 2D scenes will always have pixel-perfect accuracy, of course, but if our engine is good enough to make a number of people think they're viewing a 2D scene, that's not too bad. So, it will really come down to the style and quality of the art that our team produces. They are capable of some great stuff, so I have no doubt that we will be able to capture the appropriate atmosphere-J.E. Sawyer
What about a fixed isometric camera perspective like the originals?
The camera is locked at an angle. Moving the mouse to the edges of the
screen results in panning. Right and left arrow rotate the camera around its
focus on the terrain by 45 degrees. Up and down arrow go to directly
overhead and back down to 38.5 (IIRC) degrees, respectivel
Will Fallout 3 feature a list of portraits I can choose from like in Fallout Tactics?
Van Buren will feature no portaits, but players will be able to see a pretty detailed, up-to-date model of their party members on the character sheet and inventory screens.
Will you be able to customize your characters appearance?
ј You will have control over the following basic attributes:
* Build (normal, wiry, strong, fat)
* Skin color/texture (a number of variants within a number of different "races")
* Hair style
* Facial hair style
* Hair color
ј Even before adding equipment, you should be able to get a lot of variation.
There might be two or three textures per general skin tone. For instance, if there were three Caucasian/white skin tones, one might be grizzled and tough looking, a little on the tan side, one might be young and wide-eyed, and the last might be pale and sinister looking.
Will appearance affect stats?
No. It's up to the player to pick a character appearance that they believe fits the character's stats and their personal preferences. If someone wanted to make an incredibly strong, clumsy person with a wiry frame, that's their choice.
Will there be Їtalking heads? in Van Buren like those seen in Fallout 1 and 2?
I don't think we've ever stated that we were definitely cutting talking heads. The technology that BIS had when making FO/FO2 was pretty primitive compared to what's available now. Even if the artists just worked straight through Lightwave or Max, it would be a lot easier now than it was then. That said, it's not definite that they will be in, either.
What are the benefits of using a full 3D engine as opposed to using an engine like Fallout Tactics: Brotherhood of Steel, which had 3D sprites on pre-rendered backgrounds?
Well, for one thing, it gives the player more ways to view and interact with the environment. 2D isometric engines can cause the player to struggle when attempting to interact with things in the environment due to occlusion of walkable terrain behind foreground objects and "wall backs". A fully 3D environment also allows for a more cinematic use of the camera in cutscenes.
Instead of simply having to scroll back and forth or go to a pre-rendered FMV, a 3D engine can move the in-game camera on three axes, change FOV, and other nifty tricks.
Of course, the benefits of fully 3D character models is versatility for
equipment socketing and animation. Adding a new animation onto a layered sprite character is a time-consuming process that involves rendering out each frame of the animation for each equipment combo the character can have during that animation. That problem is entirely avoided in 3D with the proper setup. A character with dozens of different equipment combinations can have an animation added with almost no difficulty.
What about a zoom function?
Yes, you can zoom in and out within constraints. It can be as close as NWN
or almost as far out as an RTS like Age of Mythology.
What about Їfog of war?? (Fog of war is what they had in Balder`s Gate)
I am hoping that we will not have a fog of war, but a "dim haze of war" --
areas slightly dimmed where your character does not have line/extent of
sight. The haze of war would hide NPCs, but that's about it. So, you can
always zoom out to the same distance, but what characters you see is always
limited by the haze of war.
2.0 General info based on Sammael Jefferson FAQ
ј Black Isle has developed a new isometric 3D engine for Jefferson. Basically, Jefferson should look somewhat like a 3D version of Baldur's Gate (or other Infinity Engine games). The name of this new engine has not been decided yet.
ј ЇAt every step of the development of the Jefferson engine, we have examined its components and held them up to Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, Planescape: Torment, and Fallout. Our intention is to take everything that was well designed about those engines and incorporate them into Jefferson. At the same time, there are a lot of mistakes that we made in developing these engines -- mistakes that we hope to correct in the development of Jefferson. We are absolutely, positively dedicated to making Jefferson's engine better on every level than all of our previous engines. This includes development flexibility.? _J.E. Sawyer
ј ЇJefferson's development has involved a significant amount of technology R&D. We believe this R&D time is justified because the reception of the game should, with humble hoping, be very good across a fairly wide group of people. We have taken great pains to insure that we can apply the technology used on Jefferson to other projects without sacrificing the integrity of those projects. This can be very difficult, but, again, the payoff should be worth it. You can't develop technology for every situation -- that's just madness -- but you certainly can make choices that allow much more flexibility within the range of games that you typically make.
The Jefferson engine's scripting, for instance, would initially have made implementing true sequential turn-based combat impossible. A lot of the programmers, designers, and script-folk talked about how we could find a solution that allowed the possibility of TB combat, then implemented it. Will Jefferson have turn-based combat? Mystery! But the engine has the potential for it.? _J.E.. Sawyer
Comparison with other games (BIS and otherwise)
ЇComparing Jefferson's graphics to MW isn't really appropriate, since one is a first-person game and the other is a third-person isometric game. It's also not entirely fair to compare Jefferson's graphics to NWNs. NWN uses an entirely dynamic lighting model. This creates uniformly good lighting, but a lot of the subtlety is lost. It was also a requirement for their engine, since it's also a very flexible toolset. The Jefferson engine uses a static lighting solution for environments because we're not building it to be an end user toolset like NWN. We just want the levels and characters we make to look dope, fly, and phat. And they do, IMO.? _J.E Sawyer
ЇYou can't take the camera into the large intestine of an enemy and navigate through its body, either. If people want to play a first-person action RPG, they can go buy one. Jefferson is an isometric third-person RPG.? _J.E. Sawyer
Performance and graphics
ј ЇThe performance difference between a GeForce 2 and a GeForce 3+ is significant. That I can say with certainty. Some of the things we do in Jefferson will kill the fill rate of a GeForce 2, and most players will have to disable those effects for solid performance.
That said, the most important hardware requirement after a GeForce 3+ video card is having plenty o' RAM. Some of these levels are big.
Besides, if you want to live large, you have to go 1600x1200x32, volumetric shadows, and dynamic per-pixel lighting. It's the only way to fly.? _J.E.. Sawyer
ЇThe creature/character avatars in Jefferson are all ~1,000 polys. They all have about the same amount of detail, but individual creatures/characters might look more or less detailed based on a number of factors.? _J.E.. Sawyer
ј The PC models have over 300 animations each. (Edit: In Van Buren they will have 180 animations)
They include things like:
o Regular ol' attacks
o Combination (multiple) attacks
o Attacks against helpless foes
o Charge attacks
o Knockback/prone animations from multiple directions
o Lying on the ground dying in agony animations
o Limping
o Multiple talking gestures
o Salutes/bows
o "Use" animations (standing and kneeling)
o Pointing animations (standing and kneeling)
o Armor equipping animations
o Weapon equipping animations
o Jumping animations
o Acrobatic animations
o Climbing animations
o Reloading "launcher" weapon animations
o Unarmed punches, kicks, double kicks, jumping kicks, spinning hook kicks followed by twin punches, "Bolo Yeung"-style foot stomp on helpless victims, and a charge attack terminating with the attacker running up the target's body, kicking off, and flipping over.
There are multiple attack animations based on character's level of expertise and experience level. Thus there will be different attack animations.
ЇJefferson uses an isometric viewing angle. So far, the number of characters onscreen doesn't cause a geometric decrease in framerate. I did a test a few weeks ago where I loaded an area containing about 20+ characters, many with unique models. I then went up to the top of a cliff and looked all the way down on their teeny heads. The framerate was actually surprisingly high. There are some visual features that do hit the framerate, but they those features have alternatives that more than make up for their slightly "lower quality" with a boatload of frames.? _J.E. Sawyer
ј ЇThough you can still tell the Jefferson engine (which is, even as I type this, going through the process of name selection) is a 3D engine, I've had many people walk into the office and sincerely ask me, "Oh, hey, is this [2D game name]?" It really is very nice.? _J.E. Sawyer
ј The maps in Jefferson will use pre-burned light and shadow maps, which merge with the pieces of static geometry during the rendering process. On the other hand, there will likely be dynamic lights as well as shadows for dynamic objects. The overall effect should look pretty impressive, but the pre-burned maps mean that creating new maps for Jefferson will be a difficult endeavor. All geometry is affected by dynamic lights and static lights.
ј Finally, what kind of models-to-geometry clipping tolerance are you guys aiming for?
ЇWe recognize that clipping occurs, but we try to minimize it, especially on characters.? _J.E. Sawyer
Maps and environment
ј The game will have separate maps, not a continual world (Morrowind, Gothic, Dungeon Siege).
ј Buildings with several levels will have individual maps.
ј Will the interiors of buildings match their exteriors?
ЇThey will always come close. We have found that the vast majority of players do not notice even grossly incongruent interior-exterior relationships. As a general rule of thumb, we try to make sure our interiors are at least roughly the same shape as the exteriors, though we often increase the interior volume by up to 30% or 40% over what "realistically" would fit within the outside walls.? _J.E. Sawyer
ј The environment will be moderately interactive: more than it was in the Infinity Engine games, but nowhere near the level of Ultima VI.
ј Are doors and other pieces of geometry that can be interacted with models or special map geometry?
ЇI'm not sure I understand the question; everything in the environment is a model (well, except for effects, but even they are sprites on triangles). Basically, you can think of our levels as consisting of two types of geometry: static and dynamic. Static geometry does not change. It has no data associated directly with it. Dynamic objects have dynamic geometry; it's not part of the static level. Dynamic geometry can animate, disappear, etc. Characters have dynamic geometry. Doors that open have dynamic geometry. Containers have dynamic geometry. Anything with which a player interacts is likely to have a dynamic model.? _J.E. Sawyer
ЇThe Visual Effects Group editor for Jefferson is really, really excellent. We can create a pretty wide array of visual effects without much effort at all.? _J.E. Sawyer
ј ЇJefferson's scripting language is nothing like the IE's. It's a lot more like C (with arrays, enums, functions, if/else, for, while, switch, etc.) statements and commands. ?_Chad Nicholas
ЇCharacters are objects, but you have a script function do something to them via their entityID, which is a unique handle to that object. The Protagonist() is a function -- that returns the entityID of the protagonist -- because the value of the entityID is not known until runtime.? _Chad Nicholas
[Ответ]
