Oh, you’re wondering how to make it 3D while keeping it turn-based? Umm…well that would certainly take a good deal more thought lol
Turn-based AND tile-based.
If you drop even one, 99% of current code becomes effectively obsolete. And at that point you might as well make a new game from scratch and just use CDDA as reference.
Well, not like we’re talking about something that’s likely going to be done anyways. I mean you could do 3D tilesets over the base game. Would look pretty sleek possibly, if the game wasn’t so heavily tile-based. I mean, say you did have a cool 3D character, your vehicle would still drive like a clipping 5x12 brick lol
XCOM proves pretty clearly that being completely tile-based does not prevent the game engine from rendering a sleek picture.
Take into consideration my remark about vehicles at least. Not all in game assets might be able to adjust smoothly to 3D.
Again, the example of XCOM shows that there is no intrinsic problem with rendering multiple-tiles entities (that’s what cars are, essentially) and their motion.
Well the ones in xcom aren’t craftable. A little bit different when you’re constructing vehicles that use entire tiles for parts.
Ok, and what’s the problem with that, other than the fact you will have to create 3D models for all the custom components?
It would be doable, but it wouldn’t look nearly as clean as say xcom. Especially when the vehicle is diagonal, and it would take a lot more work to create a 3D vehicle appearance using the various components in a single tile. Such as a drivers seat for example. The seat, controls, frame, roof, and whatever other devices, along with how nearby vehicle tiles might change its apperance. Like going quarterpanel/window/roof would cause a sloped window.
There is no “diagonal” in 3D. The model simply rotates freely.
As long as you can create 3D assets that stitch together well in the first place, rotation will not be the issue.
There is diagonal when it comes to tiles. A fixed 3D model would clip into nearby tiles…
No, it will not clip if you make it visually a bit smaller than the total maximum area that the tiles take (by a factor of sqrt(2) for a 2x2 square model, etc). Again, that is pretty easy and not an issue.
You would still need to account for the tile occupancy and the object location. A diagonal vehicle wouldn’t occupy the same space if it was a fixed object, so you would have to make some changes either in removing the vehicles occupied space from tiles it doesn’t occupy or rework it’s occupied space from the current version. Make it a larger square so it can turn freely in a static space. But then you’d have to decide how to deal with receiving damage tiles parts don’t visually occupy.
That is being done automatically by the tile-based gameplay engine that has not changed. 3D is just a visual representation that does not feedback back into gameplay.
Again, XCOM proves pretty clearly that this approach does not create much clipping. You will get a occasional “shot through the wall” and the like, but, again, I fail to see why it would more of an issue than it was in, say, XCOM 2.
I’ve never played Xcom, so I wouldn’t know much about the game. But I’d imagine the crafting mechanics would cause conflicts.
What kind of “conflicts”, exactly, will crafting cause in 3D that it does not in 2D?
Well, in 2d you just have a top tile as visible. In 3d you’d have to rethink which objects take precedence on the 3d model.
How is that related to crafting?
That would still be the case even if all items were pre-crafted.
i would personally prefer implementing the use of spritesheets to do animations with over 3d, I believe cataclysm is just too large and complex for the amount of models that would be needed without completely changing the way the game is played / viewed and would probably require far more work then adding support for spritesheet based animation (and again this would also generate work for the artists as well ), plus you would also have to think about all the people that play cataclysm on an older rig that won’t be able to play 3d.
so… i just finished research on the game requirement if CDDA is made on Unreal Engine (or other higher game engine) and as it turns out, it would be bad news, as the RAM needed will be increased (minimum of 4gb, possible reaching 8gb) and the rest of requirement is related on medium-high PC… lower PC can’t play it (it just stutters, and sometimes freeze when there’s too much zombie on sight)
if its going to make the game better while sacrificing lower PC player, im not agree with that, i just don’t like seeing game improvement that would cost massive works to artists and dev team + leaving the player with low-spec PC behind. a simple game with tileset/ASCII graphic but has massive gameplay feature/content + mod and stuff and development that would not weight down the artists and dev team is already perfect. and with constant update almost everyday on the game is also really good, and to think that if the game is set on higher engine then the constant update will be much harder and much more longer (1 update per 3-4 weeks)