Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


Model with texture animation and particle emitters


Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

  • You cannot reply to this topic
3 replies to this topic

#1 Janissary   Banned   -  Reputation: 45

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 12 March 2013 - 01:28 PM

Hi.

 

 

How could I implement a 3D model with particle emitters attached to it and how could I implement a texture animation on them?

Please see the example below, I hate to give this kind of example, but...

 

33woaah.jpg

 

The Phoenix in the lower left and the creature in the lower right have a particle emitter creating beautiful effects.

 

The tower on the upper right and the creature in the lower right have a texture animation on them.

 

Like, how could I achieve this, should the emitters properties be located in a separate material/shader file etc. ?

 

 

 

---

I'm sorry for the terms I use, some may be incorrectly used, and I also apologize for my English.

 

Many thanks.



Sponsor:

#2 TheUnnamable   Members   -  Reputation: 762

Like
1Likes
Like

Posted 12 March 2013 - 05:55 PM

These models are composed of separate nodes. Each model file contains its own meshes, skeletons, particle emitters, effects, etc. Then, it is up to the program to handle these nodes and render each of them.



#3 Krohm   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 2968

Like
1Likes
Like

Posted 13 March 2013 - 01:47 AM

Considering Warcraft 3 is heavily scripted (using Lua if memory serves), I wouldn't be surprised if each of those object actually executed a script to create a particle system at generation and keep them sync'd with their world positions.

 

Texture animations are a thing. Particle systems another. Let me elaborate a bit.

 

Texture animations.

If memory serves, those textures are not animated, they are scrolled. The easiest way to do this at the time War3 was released was to provide a non-identity texture transform matrix. If memory serves, there was a D3D-specific render state to set to enable this functionality.

This would cause each vertex (s,t) coordinate to "move" in the texture and fetch different texels.

 

With vertex shaders that's even easier as we can just pull the matrix as we want and deal with it.

 

Texture animations, in the sense of multi-frame textures actually requires no modifications at all in a low-level renderer. What it takes is to have a special "texture sequence" resource and a system (likely part of hi-level renderer) which keeps track of the passing time. It can therefore fetch the correct texture to the low-level renderer. As long as you can figure out if a texture resource is "plain 2D" or "sequenced 2D", it could theorically be implemented without even modifying the model itself.

 

Particle systems.

Those are much more complicated. As the above post notes, the model will have to be enriched with supporting information. Personally I don't think a model should ever have knowledge of a particle system attached to it. In my opinion, it would be best to export joints/sockets/connection points and then use those in a script to spawn a particle system.

I have been told most DCC file formats support particle system in model files. I don't think that's a good reason to make the runtime model format more complicated than it should (PS will have to be iterated in engine a few times anyway) but I suppose everyone is free to have his/her own opinion.

 

edit: somehow messed up text size.



#4 Janissary   Banned   -  Reputation: 45

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 15 March 2013 - 07:44 AM

Great, thank you very much for your replies, guys.






Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.



PARTNERS