Improvements you want the most!

[mace-x]

lol
that´s so true, now it´s a pain in the ass to do them, and they are not even dynamic.

[DJ99X]

We will never have track object shadows rendered dynamically. At this stage, just having a rider/bike shadow would be awesome

[Phathry25]

We will never have track object shadows rendered dynamically. At this stage, just having a rider/bike shadow would be awesome

Never is a strong word, are you willing to stick by that forever?

I was talking about Rider/Bike shadow. After some time away, coming back and seeing no shadow under the bike and rider just looks foolish.

[jlv]

We will never have track object shadows rendered dynamically. At this stage, just having a rider/bike shadow would be awesome

If anything it would be easier to do dynamic shadows for everything. Half dynamic and half static sounds like it would be a mess. It will probably be fully dynamic or no shadows at all when I finally do it.

[Shadow]

Might I suggest fully dynamic then, because from the newer tracks we see that the environment shadows play a big part in making a track look good.

[DJ99X]

Really? Coulda sworn you said that wouldnt happen. Come to think of it, maybe that conversation was about self-shadowing

[magnusson]

when you think about it the only sound in game is the bike sound would be allot better to have more sounds, like if you case a sx jump it would sound like this


not like thats what i want the most i'm just saying, never tough about it before....

[mace-x]

you where saying Dj?
i really would love this to happend, let´s hope so

[jlv]

Really? Coulda sworn you said that wouldnt happen. Come to think of it, maybe that conversation was about self-shadowing

I might have been thinking of trying something cheesy that wouldn't need FBO's. I don't think that would be worth it at this point since it seems like FBO's are working in most drivers now.

[mace-x]

plane collisions, with editable surfaces, like tileinfo for objects.

would that be hard to do jlv?, i mean, the ground is a mesh, so teorically you have mesh collision, why cant we have objects to collide as a mesh?
or help david to get working the collision program he where doing

[KaWiRACING#42MOCABY]

i think we need new rider movements like leaning and weight shifting effecting the bike. cause when i ride i lean and basicly sit on the edge of the seat and on jumps ive got my legs back and feet of the pegs idk if anyone else thinks the same but i think we need to focus on this then go to the 450's so we have a new style and and new power over the bike.

[DJ99X]

plane collisions, with editable surfaces, like tileinfo for objects.

would that be hard to do jlv?, i mean, the ground is a mesh, so teorically you have mesh collision, why cant we have objects to collide as a mesh?
or help david to get working the collision program he where doing

Heightfields use different sorts of collisions to mesh collisions

[ddmx]

plane collisions, with editable surfaces, like tileinfo for objects.

would that be hard to do jlv?, i mean, the ground is a mesh, so teorically you have mesh collision, why cant we have objects to collide as a mesh?
or help david to get working the collision program he where doing

jlv actually helped me out quite a bit with collision specs and figuring out what all was in the jm file. As much as I'd like to write the full program myself, it'd be naive to not think that it'd be better for someone with c/++/# to do it. I guess I'll just think of myself as one of the first to put my foot in the door, now someone needs to kick it open!...servatis??

[mikez#411]

New bone structure and new rider moments, fo' sho.

Physics first, visuals second.

this.

[totorox]

up. And if rider movements and structure is most wanted, you should begin by structure... I found maybe usefull blender addon for JLV here http://ivogrigull.com/.
I hope JLV will not lose too much time making motions, there's a ton of little gameplay additions to code instead of making motions maybe users can make beter and having bigger impact on the game quality.