Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Not sure where to go from here.

This topic is 5847 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

I have been writing a tile-based map editor for the past few months, and I have a pretty good working version. I would like to make an improvement on how the textures (grass, sand, water, mud, etc) are displayed. With tile based engines, your curved transitions between textures are limited by the size of your tiles. In other words, if I wanted to get a smooth shoreline, I'd have to make REALLY SMALL tiles so that the "blocky" shoreline wouldn't be seen. What I have thought of doing to solve this problem is first create a function that creates curved lines. Curved lines will naturally be made up of a bunch of connected straight lines. Then what I want to do is have a transition bitmap - in the case of a shoreline - between the water and the sand which will be rotated and blitted according to how the curved line dictates. That way, I could create completely realistic transitions between textures. This would also open up the possibility of random textures instead of pre-made bitmaps. I am not too sure how to implement this. My first idea was to create the shoreline, then have just the transition between the water saved. In other words, just create a bunch of small surfaces which will all containe a small piece of shoreline. They will be put together puzzle-like when the map is being drawn. Once the pieces are put down, the inside of the shoreline would be filled in. This would be like saving the edges of a circle in a bunch of small squares, then when after putting the edges down, the circle would be filled in. This may create some problems with large amounts of video memory used to save all of the transitions between textures in the game. The other idea was to simply put down the shoreline in real time, but I know that this would run IMMENSELY slow using Direct Draw. My third idea was to do what I've always dreaded: learn D3D. I heard that it can handle rotation a lot better than DDraw. If this is true, then I may have to do it. I hope that I haven't confused you readers too much with my babbling . If anyone gets what I'm saying, I would appreciate some help. Thanks in advance. --Vic-- Edited by - Roof Top Pew Wee on December 11, 2001 4:51:09 PM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites