[MAPINFO] Multisky

ace · Post by **ace** » Sun Oct 09, 2005 3:22 pm

Okay, yes, we've had Doublesky for quite a while now, and it's done a good job. However, in a lot of situations, IMO, it doesn't cut it. I think that having a Multisky flag, with SKY1, SKY2, SKY3, etc would be even more customizable.

For example, a problem I'm having right now is that I would like it to rain at night. Now the problem is, I would like to have a starry sky, with a set of clouds that are making it rain. The problem is, the sky I have doesn't cover a lot so it would look awkward to have the rain coming out of the stars at certain points. So, if I were able to use a different cloud sky texture behind the first one, then more space would be filled and it wouldn't be a problem.

Yes I know, I could easily add the second one into the first and have it all at the same speed, but then again with a second sky, the speed could be altered and the ones in the front could be lighter while the ones in the back could be darker. This of course, would also allow for overlapping as well (with the different speeds and all).

And think of the different situations you could do with this, like slow-moving clouds in the front, faster ones after that, the slowest ones after that, and all in front of a sky that has a sun or moon or some object.

I just think it would make for more situations easier.

Post by **Caligari87** » Sun Oct 09, 2005 4:08 pm

Along these same lines, could we have selective blending for skys? It's a bit agrivating to only be able to have black transparent. If additive and regular translucency were added, things like clouds or such would be much better, especially if Multiple Skys were added too.

Post by **Xaser** » Sun Oct 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Heh, taht would kick serious ass if we could use additive blending for skies. I can imagine the possibilities...

Wills · Post by **Wills** » Sun Oct 09, 2005 5:24 pm

I don't like the sound of that.

Post by **Enjay** » Sun Oct 09, 2005 5:41 pm

With something like you want, I'd much rather do it using a skybox. What's more, because a skybox is just regular level architecture, you can modify it during gameplay to create all sorts of changes in weather or time of day.

Cutmanmike · Post by **Cutmanmike** » Sun Oct 09, 2005 6:19 pm

A skybox however doesn't give the same effect and look of a normal sky.

Post by **Chris** » Sun Oct 09, 2005 7:48 pm

If/When the stacked sectors issues get fixed, you could use those to make transparent cloud layers. A normal starry-sky skybox with a layer of translucent scrolling clouds..

ace · Post by **ace** » Sun Oct 09, 2005 8:08 pm

@ Caligari: Black is the only one transparent? Cyan seems to work for me...

@ Enjay:

Well, like Cutty said, it doesn't have the same effect. You can't make a ceiling texture, or a sector that wraps around (circle or square or octagon, etc.) with a texture you want the sky to be, look like a sky. After all, correct me if I'm wrong, but skyboxes are 3-dimensional, not one-sided, which means if you want the sky viewable from all sides, you have to have it close in somehow. If you could have a linedef move depending on the direction a player is viewing, it would be possible, but I really doubt that would be as effective as a real sky.

Plus, it simply wouldn't look like a sky normally does when scrolling, I believe, especially in the case of having a shape made up of the skies. So really, the most efficient way to do this kind of thing would be with multiple skies. Besides, I'm already using a skybox with the sky, and while I could attempt to make it so, it would not have the same effect.

@ Chris: Again, the skybox deal just doesn't cut it IMO, for this kind of thing.

Post by **Graf Zahl** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 3:59 am

ace wrote:@ Caligari: Black is the only one transparent? Cyan seems to work for me...

Normal transparency works as ever. But since Hexen uses black as transparent colors in skies there needs to be some special handling for that.

Tormentor667 · Post by **Tormentor667** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 2:30 pm

Cutmanmike wrote:A skybox however doesn't give the same effect and look of a normal sky.

Why should anyone want to use a skytexture if he could have a much more admireable skybox instead? Makes no sense to me! It's like working with Win3.11 if you could use WinXP instead!

(and now no Microsoft Flaming here please, it's just a picture

)

ace · Post by **ace** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 5:16 pm

Yes, skyboxes are better in a lot of situations, but for this case it isn't, IMO.

doom2day · Post by **doom2day** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 9:13 am

Tormentor667 wrote:
Cutmanmike wrote:A skybox however doesn't give the same effect and look of a normal sky.
Why should anyone want to use a skytexture if he could have a much more admireable skybox instead? Makes no sense to me! It's like working with Win3.11 if you could use WinXP instead!

(and now no Microsoft Flaming here please, it's just a picture )

square sky boxes feel weird and it is impossible to fit a texture on a circular one.

Post by **NiGHTMARE** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 9:54 am

doom2day wrote: it is impossible to fit a texture on a circular one.

No it isn't. Either make creative use of alignments (e.g. align the texture on the second linedef 1 pixel back from what it should be, the texture on the third linedef 2 pixels back from what it should be, etc) , or adjust the lengths of the linedefs until they all align perfectly.

doom2day · Post by **doom2day** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 12:30 pm

then what happens to the circle?
I get your point, but it is hard to do that when the lengths of your lines vary a lot.

edit:

The best thing one can do is use the sky1 or whatever as a wall like in a sky window in the skybox then do the special effects in the sector.

Post by **Enjay** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 12:47 pm

Don't forget line horizon is also your friend in a skybox.