Stunts Forum

Stunts - the Game => Stunts Related Programs => Topic started by: Cas on August 06, 2020, 04:37:09 AM

Title: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Cas on August 06, 2020, 04:37:09 AM
StuntsLegacyEngine
This first post will serve to keep at hand the information we're handling and to keep track of the status of the project.

The source code of this early version of the engine can be found at:
https://notabug.org/xlucas/sle (https://notabug.org/xlucas/sle)

For compiling, FreeBasic can be found here:
https://freebasic.net (https://freebasic.net)

For creating track objects, you can get Blender from:
https://www.blender.org/ (https://www.blender.org/)

Currently, the engine can render objects at arbitrary positions and one can move around, define new objects with any rotation and place them. It accepts OBJ files. Ground and sky are not being drawn. It's easy, but better keep it clean for now. Some bugs present.
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Cas on August 06, 2020, 05:02:44 AM
Alright. So now in more detail....

Source code and data files
You guys can get the source for this engine from the repository. I included a few data files, which so far are all text, so that should be fine, but I would like to be able to exchange data files more comfortably. I wonder if I can just edit the first post to add and remove attachments so that it's not accumulated, but just changed. Anyway, I'll try to find an optimal way to exchange this.

Getting the binaries
If you're going to be checking updates and modifying the source code, you can get FreeBasic and it'll be super simple. If you need me to pass the binaries, I can quickly get you the GNU/Linux 64bit executable, but for other platforms, it's pretty inconvenient for me to compile it. I have Wine on a portable computer and I have to pull it out, turn it on, copy the source to it, then compile it and then pass the binaries back. I could install Wine here, but it's like having two OSs running together all the time. I'd prefer to avoid it. But just let me know and I'll see what I can do.

Current status
If you've tried the previous engine and now you test this one, it will at first appear to you that I'm moving backwards :P  But behind the scenes, this engine is superior. I haven't yet turned on the sky and ground, but that's easy to do and I'm more concerned on other things. There's a config file where you can load a materials file, then several OBJ files that can make use of the materials in the first file. After that, you can place these objects anywhere on the map. With the arrows, plus A, S, D, W and PgUp/PgDn, you can move freely in the map. CTRL+D toggles debug information and [ and ] will change the distance-to-screen. Everything is in meters. The engine uses a coordinate system just like the one in Blender, with Z going vertically. I like it because it looks nice with the right-hand rule and makes more sense for an engine in which Z has phisically a different meaning from that of the other two dimensions. Visibility can be changed by modifying the source. It's set at 1200 meters.

Creating objects
You can use Blender to create object files. Going to File->Export will do the trick. Blender, by default, uses the same coordinate system and also works in meters. But!  I found that, at least the newest version of Blender, swaps Y and Z when saving OBJ files. This makes sense because other software will frequently use Z for depth, but I dislike that coordinate system as, to follow the right hand rule, you're forced to have Z grow towards the camera or otherwise Y grow down. Because of the swap in Blender, I decided to make my source code swap the coordinates back. In other words, work on your model as if the coordinates were exactly as shown in Blender. If your object appears rotated, though, let me know or check the LoadObj routine.

Materials
When you export an object in Blender, it will create two files: an OBJ file and a MTL file. You can load many OBJ files and many MTL files in the configuration, but it makes more sense to only load one material library. As you create materials in Blender, you're allowed to rename them. The name you give them will be passed to both the MTL and OBJ file. You could just append MTL files to one another to make one large material library. If you want to reuse a material you used for another object, just give it a similar colour while working in Blender, but make sure to assign it the same material name. When you load the OBJ file, the material will be loaded from the original MTL. Sounds confusing?  Just play around or ask me. I'll be making a new simpler format for this purpose soon.

Bugs
I'm having a problem since the previous engine (although now I understand part of it and before, I understood nothing). Even though the triangle clipping routine works, I get strange artifacts when triangles cross the camera plane. I am not totally sure if the problem ocurrs when the cross the zero plane or just the screen plane. I suspect the first. You'll see some glitches when this happens.

While the clipping routine does look OK and you can see how it works when you move the clipping distance forward, this clipping distance gives the impression of not being in proportion with the distance-to-screen. Could this be just an illusion?  No idea. But despite this, it is clear that rendering works better with the clipping routine active.

Some non-bugs are rather things to be done. Like, rotation can easily be optimised by creating a fixed matrix for each rendering iteration and then applying the same matrix to every object instead of repeating the calculation. Layers are not being taken into account, nor is pseudotransparency, like in Stunts, but that can be activated very easily. Same goes for the horizon.
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Cas on August 23, 2020, 03:36:24 AM
Sorry about my absence here, but I have been working on the engine. It doesn't look like a lot, but I added horizon (which needs to be rewritten, as it's not perfect), I sorted out the clipping problems I had and I managed to optimize vertex rotation by creating a static matrix. The engine now can load .trk files (only the few elements that have already been recreated, of course) and I would like to make a configurable version so one can easily add and remove element bindings without having to edit the source.

With things working like they do now, I'm thinking the engine is more ready to become an X-Wing clone than a Stunts clone, but there it goes. Physics is going to be pretty hard to accomplish.
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Daniel3D on January 16, 2021, 10:56:41 PM
Cas. I had something nagging in the back of my mind about something I've seen that I thought was interesting.
Today I found out wat it was.

Maybe I interesting:
Scala programming language.

I have a book (software engineering from scratch) on it where you can build an OS.
So as far as I understand, no dependencies.
(Not sure. I'm not a programmer)
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Cas on January 17, 2021, 07:56:53 AM
Uhm!  I'm taking my first read about it!  From what I see after a very quick look, there are very good intentions here. It looks like the idea is to create a "Java done right". I am very critical of Java, so that sounds very interesting, but the thing I dislike the most about Java doesn't seem to be in the list of the things that Scala wants to change, ha, ha: the fact that Java forces you to use OOP. On the other hand, it does make several very good points. The code looks much cleaner in Scala and even though it's very OOP, I am kind of able to read it without getting lost (and it's my first look at it).

The lack of dependencies, which you mention, is surely true about Scala, because while I dislike Java, that one also depends only on a Java Virtual Machine and Scala can produce Java byte code, so it should share that property. If I have to mention one thing I do like about Java, it's precisely that and Scala has it too.

It says in the article that Scala is part-OOP/part-functional, but I don't see in the examples non-OOP code because apparently the person who wrote the article likes OOP. I'll continue to read more to have a deeper impression of it :)  Thanks!

And about the engine... I have to retake this and I'm feeling so lazy!  I've been thinking of simplifying the engine and make it load Stunts 3D shapes but make it work always on the ground, without banking (like a classic car engine). From there, I could begin working on the physics... acceleration, breaking, grip, gear torque, etc. Once I can really handle that, I can add the third dimension back again.
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Cas on February 13, 2021, 07:54:09 AM
Alright. Back to the engine topic. I finally overcame my laziness and got my engine working in a different sense: I made it display the shapes from 3SH files. Now I've noticed that while they look very good, there are a few things that don't look the same and they won't unless I either modify the shapes or modify the engine, but while the latter would normally be the obvious, I have some reasons to prefer the former, so I ask for your opinions.

What happens is this. Stunts uses a culling and layering system that consists of three attributes:
- Culling flags (bits that tell you for each orientation whether you have to draw a primitive or not)
- Z bias (a bit that groups primitives by priority: first draw all primitives with Z-bias 0 and then all primitives with Z-bias 1)
- 2-sidedness (a bit that indicates a primitive can be seen from both sides; otherwise, they are only seen from the side where points run counter-clockwise)

My engine uses a different system and I thought it'd be compatible, but I've noticed exceptions. It goes like this:
- No culling flags
- Layer number (like Z-bias, but instead of going from 0 to 1, it goes from 0 to 3, so you can stack more polygons)
- 2-sidedness (same as Stunts)
- Automatic primitive ordering by how far their average vertex position is

And yes, automatic ordering manages to make culling flags unnecessary in almost every circumstance... Except when you want to draw line segments on top of a surface, like the barn door or the "Joe's" sign. Because segments have only one "side", the only way to tell whether they're on top or not is layering, but this makes these lines visible from the other side of the shape!  Solution?  Either implement culling flags or replace the segments with other primitives, such as thin rectangles, so that they can be one-sided.

Another problem comes because Stunts shapes were created taking culling flags into account. In some circumstances, the shape could've perfectly worked without the culling flags, but Stunts developers made some objects Z-biased and gave them culling flags because Stunts does not have an automatic primitive-ordering system. This is the case of gas tanks in front of a gas station. Solution?  Again, either implement culling flags or remove the Z-bias from those objects.

I don't feel like implementing culling flags because they would add up yet one more check and make the engine slower and more convoluted. Besides, when you're creating 3D shapes, being able to not thinking about culling directions makes design a lot more straightforward, in my opinion. But then, instead of creating a program that you can just place in Stunts directory and run it, probably the files will have to be converted first into another format and these details be taken into account.

Any opinions are welcome and if they add ideas, much more! :)
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Daniel3D on February 13, 2021, 10:32:30 AM
Well. Conversion only goes for shape file's. So the original track pieces, scenery and cars.
The only have to be converted once.
So I don't really see a problem besides that I would have been cool to have used the original unaltered.
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Cas on February 13, 2021, 10:47:11 PM
I'm still not 100% decided. Maybe I implement culling flags after all... but given that all new objects to come will not need those flags and cars don't appear to need them already.... I have doubts. Also, because Stunts cannot sort primitives, the developers had to split some objects into two or more models, to make sure that one is drawn before the other. By creating a new set (which could perfectly look almost identical to the original), we could just make them one thing each.
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Cas on February 17, 2021, 02:47:32 AM
A look into some engine tests. I found a bug and fixed it. It's loading the shapes well. I haven't configured all shapes, but I can make a translation table and it will be easier. Track opcodes are a mess!  Why didn't they just ordered them all rotating counter-clockwise?  No!  Each track element has its particular distribution.

Anyway, I wanted to run this test with a few of the elements. In spite of the non-optimised routines, it runs very fast. I thought I was using heaps of memory, but no... Not even four megabytes. Not drawing the ground and the sky right now. I can add them quickly, but when not leveled, I'm doing something wrong with pitch and it doesn't match, so I have to rethink that part.
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Cas on February 19, 2021, 02:44:44 AM
OK. Some more objects added, plus ground and sky. The engine still runs fast. There are a few concerns:
- Stunts shifts ramps automatically when on land slopes. I feel like it'd be better to create shapes for these. On the other hand, if somebody ever makes a new ramp style, it'd nice to have it automatically converted, but also prevents you from designing the way in which you would convert it
- Similarily, Stunts automatically changes the road material, so no extra shapes for dirt and ice. I could create new shapes for that or make a routine to do it automatically, like Stunts. For now, these things are not supported, so only paved roads
- Line segments sometimes are drawn when they're not supposed to because of the difference in culling systems. I can fix this by creating new designs
- No pitching or rolling with this ground and sky. While everything else rotates OK, I still don't have a good routine to rotate the ground and sky. It should be easy, but I have left it for the end.
- Windmills use an animation based on colours that change live. Those black regions are supposed to be sometimes transparent, sometimes brown. I can recreate this, but I prefer to do it in another way, so this is flexible and other objects can have animated things as well, so I'm not implementing what the original windmill would require. Instead, I will have to edit the windmill later.
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: KyLiE on February 19, 2021, 05:18:09 AM
Wow!  That looks amazing! :) I don't think I've ever seen so many Stunts objects rendered on screen at the same time!
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Daniel3D on February 19, 2021, 09:05:51 AM
It looks amazing. Can't wait to drive test it.
(I know. I skip a few steps... Just excited by the looks)
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Cas on February 19, 2021, 10:49:05 PM
With the high resolutions we have now (and this window is not even regular HD), small objects render well even relatively far and because computers are fast, there's no need to set the visibility so close. One thing I don't like very much is what road centre lines look like when they are far. Makes me think maybe there's still a reason to use lower detail shapes from a certain distance onwards. The current engine uses only one shape per element, but I could add that possibility later.
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Cas on February 24, 2021, 04:21:01 AM
Still working on the rendering engine. It already works well (except I haven't made the ground/sky routine), but I was trying to tune it so that it renders Stunts original shapes as similar as possible. I guess I will have to give up a significant level of similarity to concentrate on what's important. I have no way to guess how the original engine interprets the Z-bias, but it's not the same as what I do, no matter what. With new shapes, there should be no artifacts, but inevitably, many will be present while using the original shapes... yet, at least, it will render the thing.

Later on, when there aren't other more important things to do first, I'll turn this into a Z-buffering renderer or at least, allow the option of using Z-buffering. I don't think of it as a priority now because it's a lot slower than what I'm doing and I'm sure Stunts didn't do it either. With Z-buffering, though, all culling problems would disappear.

As you can see in the picture, now materials can be changed freely. I also managed to convert ramps to horizontal. I have to test those to see if they align well, but it looks like they do.
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: KyLiE on February 25, 2021, 12:36:12 PM
Stunts never originally changed the ramp surface from paved even if the neighbouring track pieces were dirt or ice.  Is this a new feature that you are adding?
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Cas on February 25, 2021, 09:18:50 PM
I just wanted to demonstrate that it can be done. In fact, I believe Stunts internally can do this; it just chooses not to give the option. Original Stunts shapes do not include dirt and ice, so they have to be converted from the paved versions. This means that Stunts has a routine that performs this conversion, so I implemented this same thing. The conclusion is that Stunts could use it on any object that has pavement materials, but it limits this. I'm not surprised that it puts a limit for things like ramps, because it looks weird, I must admit, but for slaloms, tunnels and chicanes, it'd probably look OK. My engine can do it easily, but again, I think Stunts can too.
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Cas on February 28, 2021, 07:14:56 AM
OK... This is an update... an important one!
I'm uploading the current state of the engine. The zip file includes the binaries for Linux 64bit and Windows, plus a couple of configuration files the program uses and the two game?.3sh files from Stunts. These last two files, you all have them, but because they have to previously be unpacked, I preferred to just pass them.

To test the engine, you will need a track, any one. Just copy the track file to the directory and run the program. It will ask you to enter the track file name. If you omit the extension, it will assume ".trk". Use the arrow keys to navigate over the track terrain and A and Z to move up and down. Also, < and > to "strafe". Visibility is set to full track. With very, very populated tracks, you may notice a very mild slowdown. I'm surprised that it takes so much to slow the engine, as it can still be greatly optimised and as I said, visibility is going to infinity (almost).

Of the strange things you will notice, there is one that I know exactly how to fix, which is the fact that large objects (bigger than 1x1) may look incomplete on top of hills sometimes. Apart from that, almost every other strange artifact is due to the fact that I use a culling algorithm that's different from that of Stunts and I have no way to guess exactly how Stunts does it, so it will always be different. A solution for all that is to redesign all shapes (not necessarily from scratch; a few modifications on each may do the trick). The most annoying thing is the tunnel as it is seen from outside.

Let me know what you guys think
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: GTAMan18 on February 28, 2021, 07:21:41 AM
This is a helpful software if you want to see the map from 3D before driving it, but feels like Test Drive 1's keyboard controls (Only reacts to 1 keypress at a single time)
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Daniel3D on February 28, 2021, 07:42:46 AM
Wow. It looks good.
Can't install it just yet. But I can't wait.
You said you'd have a fly over ready by the end of the month three weeks ago and I wasn't sure you would make it.

Great job.
I'm really looking forward to seeing the physics engine work. Then we can drive in higher detail.

And maybe online multiplayer this summer  ???
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Cas on February 28, 2021, 08:53:39 AM
Hey, guys!  Thanks for your reviews :)

Quote from: GTAMan18
feels like Test Drive 1's keyboard controls (Only reacts to 1 keypress at a single time)
It's only the graphics engine you're testing. I've done nothing about input and physics yet. The idea of this demo is to showcase the graphics capabilities and also, yes, with a few touches, it can work as a track previewer. I still have a few things to do before getting to physics.

I'm really looking forward to seeing the physics engine work. Then we can drive in higher detail.
And maybe online multiplayer this summer  ???
To get into physics, I have to do a few things still. First, fix that problem that causes incomplete large objects on hills. Then, make the horizon rotate (the track elements can be rotated in every way, but still not the horizon). The landscape and clouds are not being drawn, but I could leave that for later. What I should do is facilitate creating new track elements or new versions of existing ones so the visuals can be improved. With that possibility open, I can start to write some physics.

About multiplayer, it all depends on how easy or hard physics turns out to be. I've never tried making something like that. Making a game multiplayer isn't very hard if you've left the "slots" for that during the making. And probably, before multiplayer, I will have to think about sound. In many games, that can be left for the end, but hearing the engine and the skidding is very important in a cars game.
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Daniel3D on February 28, 2021, 09:20:09 AM
hearing the engine and the skidding is very important in a cars game.
That's very true. And important for debugging.
Although in the beginning there is no direct need for high end sound effects. Pc speaker style generated sounds are good enough for the beginning.
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: GTAMan18 on February 28, 2021, 09:36:38 AM
So you are creating Stunts v2.0?
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Daniel3D on February 28, 2021, 09:49:16 AM
That is the general idea. Since there are wishes for improvement but no source code the only option is to remake it.
Hence the research on corner signs, camera placement and what quirks define the game.

I can't program myself but I am a happy supporter of the project. (For a big part because I want to see it succeed unlike for instance Ultimate Stunts)
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: GTAMan18 on February 28, 2021, 10:07:12 AM
Ultimate Stunts just feels off in terms of gameplay, those cars have worse controls, I hope this project will have a very good handling model of cars (As the other Stunts fanmade projects have much worse, than the vanilla Stunts)
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Daniel3D on February 28, 2021, 04:20:54 PM
Exactly. And TrackMania for instance has similar gameplay, the original version has most if not all the track elements of Stunts, sort of the same game modes. It even stores replays by player inputs.
But it added a scoring system and options you have to buy or unlock. Frustrating as hell..
It's completely the other end of the spectrum in my opinion.

CAS wants to update and add features but stay true to the look and feel of the original. All old content can be imported. So all custom cars will be available to. But they may be converted to accommodate the new features. You will drive car0 and not car1 for instance.
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Ryoma on February 28, 2021, 05:34:16 PM
You will drive car0 and not car1 for instance.

That's sound good to my ears. I am always disapointed when I saw my car under stressed with a lot of détails and on stunts.
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Cas on February 28, 2021, 07:59:57 PM
What I'm making is not a new game; it's a new engine for the same game. Of course, it's not trivial to make it feel really like Stunts, but since that is my number one objective in the project, I guess I'll end up getting closer in that aspect than any other previous one.

About car models, I still haven't reached that part, that is, my engine can already load car models, but still not put them on track and such. So there are many alternatives on which to use. My engine uses floating point vectors, so models can be scaled from any base shape. The best option, I believe, is to create a new car format that can carry floating point vectors and can surpass the limit in number of vertices and primitives. You will be able to convert either the car0, car1 or car2 if you want of an original or custom car into this format and you can also create a new model from scratch specially designed for it (with more primitives or vertices than Stunts cars). Still, I think we shouldn't go much further than the 255 primitives. I think a car with some 500 primitives will look very good already. The engine allows up to 32767 primitives, but that would be too slow.
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: GTAMan18 on February 28, 2021, 08:06:48 PM
Are you planning to also remove the 32 car limits, and make tracks bigger than 30x30?
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Daniel3D on February 28, 2021, 09:50:31 PM
Yeah,
More cars, bigger grid, more levels of track and terrain.
Possibly:
- underground tunnels and new track elements.
- Besides different track types also different terrain types (like sand, dirt, snow and/or rock)
- content manager to upload/download share and create new cars, track or scenery
-Multiplayer modes

But first. Get to equal the original. Then build on.
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Cas on March 01, 2021, 12:08:18 AM
Are you planning to also remove the 32 car limits, and make tracks bigger than 30x30?
This is pretty much like Daniel said. I'm concentrating in being able to reproduce Stunts first, but I'm leaving all the "slots" for the new things we all want to be able to add. Some are super easy to do, like the two you mentioned. They are immediate. Others require some work, but not necessarily a lot. For example, multiple layers is not hard to implement, but I have to be tidy and it forces me to create a new track file format.

I want to add more features, but more than that, I want other people to be able to add more features. That is, I want to make this engine "moddable".

One thing that a few people here don't like very much is that I chose FreeBasic to make the engine. I really had no choice. C is more standard, but it provides no graphics and I do not want my project to depend on external 3rd-party graphics libraries. But I can make it easy to plug C-based mods into the engine.
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: KyLiE on March 01, 2021, 12:02:19 PM
OK... This is an update... an important one!

I've just tried it and even as a 3D track viewer, it is very impressive! :) I'm looking forward to the future development.
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Cas on March 01, 2021, 05:43:38 PM
Thanks!  Once we get the current race in R4K running again, I think I should add a project page there for the engine just like that of Bliss. I think I should be thinking of a permanent name now. Legacy sounds nice, but it's kind of cliché and SLE is an illness, ha, ha...
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: GTAMan18 on March 01, 2021, 06:47:24 PM
Ztuntz, or 4D Zportz Driving?
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: GTAMan18 on March 01, 2021, 06:55:50 PM
Legacy sounds nice, but it's kind of cliché and SLE is an illness, ha, ha...

The name Legacy would be really a bad idea, because of legacy, people thing about retro/nostalgia, and would be confused, when they get a Stunts engine
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Daniel3D on March 01, 2021, 07:16:03 PM
Stunts Rebooted
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Ryoma on March 01, 2021, 08:39:36 PM
Stunts return...
Stunts begins...
The Dark Stunts...
Stunts The Mission...
Stunts 2...
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: GTAMan18 on March 01, 2021, 08:55:57 PM
The ztuntz version of Stunts
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Daniel3D on March 01, 2021, 09:24:24 PM
More Stunts.                 < I like that one...
21st century Stunts
Just Stunts
Stunts [2.0]
Multiple Stunts
Stunts Resurrection

"" We all know Stunts..
but now there is a sequel.. 
MORE Stunts.. get it now.. ""
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: GTAMan18 on March 01, 2021, 09:53:47 PM
21st century Stunts  ;D  ;D
You're so good at names
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Cas on March 02, 2021, 04:21:32 AM
I think it shouldn't contain the word Stunts, since it's an engine, not a game based on Stunts. So, to give an example, at a moment I considered calling this engine e3, because it's based on the third attempt made from scratch. Then when running Stunts with it, we could call it Stunts/e3. This is akin to how Linux in GNU's kernel and people refer to the system as GNU/Linux.
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Daniel3D on March 02, 2021, 07:47:06 AM
O, I understand now what you mean.
We were thinking of names for the game.
Not for the engine.

CRE3g / CAS race engine 3th gen.
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Ryoma on March 02, 2021, 08:10:04 AM
I think the game is good as is but this engine CAN je interesting for the replay...we will have more details and less frustration...
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: GTAMan18 on March 02, 2021, 08:43:13 AM
I think it shouldn't contain the word Stunts, since it's an engine, not a game based on Stunts. So, to give an example, at a moment I considered calling this engine e3, because it's based on the third attempt made from scratch. Then when running Stunts with it, we could call it Stunts/e3. This is akin to how Linux in GNU's kernel and people refer to the system as GNU/Linux.

Not containing the word Stunts? What about Ztuntz?
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Daniel3D on March 02, 2021, 09:42:18 AM
It's about the engine, not the game itself.
CREaTurE
Cas Race Engine Third Evolution

As reference, see the ego engine..
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ego_(game_engine)#Game_using_the_engine (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ego_(game_engine)#Game_using_the_engine)
Title: Re: StuntsLegacyEngine
Post by: Cas on March 08, 2021, 09:03:05 PM
Alright. I've placed the engine in www.raceforkicks.com and gave it the temporary name R5E. The idea is that it's a project that I started later than R4K, so that's where the 5 comes from and the E is of course for Engine.

I'm currently kind of stuck trying to start with the physics part. I can more or less easily make it move more fluently, like a car, but collision is bringing me headache. That's what I'm trying to move into now.