Mumbles

Indeed true, and assuming that you're going to be adding some clothes (instead of leaving her at page 3 standard), most of the criticisms will go away. But my point about proportions is that most people assume adult females to have a wasit:hip ratio of 7:10 (Except most will just say 0.7) That's simply not always true. In my case, I'm a UK size 8, with 32 inch hips, that would make my waist ... 22? Actually, no, it's 24. For adults, waist sizes under 24 are rare, no matter what the hip size. And they look wrong, if not disturbingly thin. If you pull the tape tight, you might occasionally get 23, but never any lower unless you've got anorexia or similar. My thought is that you might have read up the 0.7 ratio, and are sticking so close to it, that you're building someone with a severe eating disorder, without necessaryily realising it.

Chances are it's to do with 2.0 no longer being supported, thus a proxy server probably won't help... And basically, a proxy server is a "middle man" Instead of talking to the leadwerks server directly, your computer talks to the proxy server, who in turn, forwards your request on to the leadwerks server. When the leadwerks server responds back to the proxy, the proxy forwards the response on to your computer...

People without loads of programming experience will probably prefer it - it has nicer syntax if you're not familiar with the language. I remember Josh stated somewhere that he used to think it was a bit of a toy language until he tried it - then liked it so much, he integrated into the engine. I still think it's a bit of a gimmick, as so far I've just not needed it. I'm also not much of a scripter anyway - any scripting I want to do, I'll normally do it in bash or maybe perl, goes without saying that such scripting has nothing to do with my current top secret (a.k.a. ****) leadwerks project. Any scripting I need, I'll do with additional text files that go along side the media, and I'll make my program process those text files when the relevant resources are loaded. Sort of the same as .mat files. So while most might prefer it, I personally don't... Since learning the basics of OOP in uni, cpp is basically the only way forward in my mind, I can't see me going any other way

Oh dear... Somebody's been eating too many chow meins...

Well, with rocket science analysis. It would sound like you're a demo missing...

It can't import gmf ...But why would anyone need it to?

Biggest issue I think is the waist - what proportions are you building to? I suspect the waist is for too skinny for the hips size Also is this supposed to be a porn game? After walking two steps forward in real life, that skirt will have moved up slightly, and being as short as that... If it helps you, none in mine in real life are shorter than about 8 inches - and even they're a bit short.

I'll only pay for exactly what I want... That's usually tailor-made packs. Price I would normally leave down to the person making the pack - it is their hard work after all... Provided it's not too expensive I would normally pay, but only if it has everything I want. Anything missing and I normally won't go for it...

Apparently... (Equally spam comment as the one above...) But for non-spam, Blitz3D was the first engine I really used so I don't really know any other way.

Don't you mean: I'm sure that Mikey will play ball with "me".

Why would you need .smd support? For testing, and your own use, it's not much of an issue, but for anything that gets finished, using other people's smd files could get you in a fair bit of trouble. You can always convert your own media onto the gmf format

Anyone would think you were from Sweden... Are you sure you're from Finland?

email to support at leadwerks.com probably

It's a TGC order if that makes any difference. Right now, I'm feeling the pinch of fixed term accounts. But just couldn't pass up 6% in my position 11 months ago - too good an offer. I'll still see if I can try "the brother approach". Means I can get started with 2.3 a little sooner, and I've been waiting to upgrade for a while.

Wouldn't you just know that I couldn't realistically make my upgrade until the next tax year... (Yes, even something as low as about £25) Yet interestingly my brother paid for my original order - without any "labour charges. I wonder how he feels about paying for the upgrade - as its probably my best option...

I think you missed an even more recent edit to that message. Probably edited whilst typing yours

"now let get back tot eh opengl question" In that case I'll tell a little story about me and OpenGL... OpenGL > D3D But more seriously. Cast your eyes back to 1999 two hit multiplayer games have just been released. Unreal Tournament and Quake 3 Arena. UT only provided OpenGL as a fallback option, and running the game in OpenGL resulted in a message box along the lines of "Really, use DirectX or 3dfx Glide, they're better". Graphically, the game was pretty horrible, even on top settings, although you can't necessarily pin the blame on the underpinning rendering API for that. Quake 3 though was leaps and bounds ahead of its time. Viewing through teleport gates in high quality, nobody had tried it to that extent before. The quality of the player models and weapons were much higher, and it didn't support DirectX at all, but yet you could make that run on Windows 2000 without any sevice packs (whereas DirectX required that SP3 be installed). I dare say it would even run on Windows NT 4. UT certainly would not (unless you were using the OpenGL fallback option). You can play both games with fraps today on top settings and actually see the graphically superior Q3 running 20% faster (average of 600 fps over UT's 500 - both way above what they need to be playable). Back in 1999, it may not have been the same story. I wasn't playing either back then and certainly not benchmarking. Now come forward to UT 2004. Only now is the graphic quality starting to match Quake 3, but I found the D3D renderer in windows to be slow and sluggish to respond. Fraps would say the game was playing at 60 fps, but it sure didn't feel like it (and under 40 I would find the reaction delay to be too slow to be playable). Various tweak guides would suggest different settings, but none were working it still felt slow and horrible. I would finally tweak my ini files manually. OpenGL was not available as a renderer on windows, only D3D or Software. But the game did work on Linux, and the ini files contained quite a lot of OpenGL settings. SO I would manually edit the default renderer line from DirectX to OpenGL - worst case scenario, it would not load, or continue to use DX, so I tried it. Much longer to set up the window, but then frame rates skyrocketed to almost double, 110. ...And indeed most games I've played with the option to choose between OpenGL or DirectX, I've always felt OGL to be much faster and usually with no loss to graphical quality. And although I can't confirm because I don't have first hand knowledge, I'm sure I've read somewhere that DirectX is quite messy in terms of coding, whereas OpenGL is much cleaner (Josh would be the best person here to confirm that - or not). But if that's true, there's just no real reason to use DirectX these days. It doesn't seem to offer much better performance (if any at all) and you can't deploy it on even half as many systems as you can with OpenGL. By the way Carl, have you been drinking tonight? I've never seen your spelling so bad as in this thread... Actually, maybe I have - those spellings I swear were wrong have just disappeared completely...

What's so wrong with that idea? I remember when I first got a quad-core processor, XP just ignored the third and fourth cores. The Linux version I was using didn't support quad cores either, so it just advanced 2 system seconds for every real second... An old system got full usage out of a quad core whereas in windows, I had to pay for a new operating system (that I didn't really want) or run at half speed.

You can blame me, as is appropriate in many cases. We got on to user-defined keys, because it seemed to me, to be impractical to create so many one (or two) character-pitcure representing assigned keys. If it had been possible to create a large bitmap and reliably subdivide it into many smaller pictures (or someone to demonstrate it, if it is already possible), I would have recommended the 2D graphics idea originally proposed. To my mind, allowing the user to define keys is all part of a menu system, even though this particular feature is not at the root layer, usually it's nested inside "define keys" which is itself nested within "Options" at the root layer.

Wait a minute: Of which, not all licensees can use lua in the engine... Is this a sort of "Look what you could win..." type of promotion?

Oh, I didn't realise you meant staying open, as in: "Can't be closed". What I get, program closes the console then says "Press any key to continue . . . . ." Press any key, and it closes. Since I can't replicate the situation, I can only guess, and assume that ending the process cmd.exe doesn't have any effect?

You're not the only one who wants to build an online FPS. But a lot of people here are still trying to get fully accustomed to the engine. Indeed in time, I'm looking at making a few, getting gradually more complex. Starting out with something simple, making something close to counter strike first. Getting the basics of solo and team gameplay working with maybe a small collection raycast weapons. Then moving onto something like Quake, maintaining all of the previous aspects but now adding things projectile based weapons (like a rocket launcher), and maybe a capture the flag mode or something. By this point, I would presumably have a quite a solid grasp of the engine, and its capabilities, and be ready to start the game I had in mind all along. A tactical team based FPS (Like SWAT 4 if anyone's heard of that / played it). A game where running around like Rambo doesn't have its rewards, instead relying on good, solid communication and teamwork. In short, there are quite a few people here who are in the same position, and just can't wait to get started. Maybe in time, another community project would be started, one thats focused on multiplayer FPS action. For the time being though, there are quite a few members in the community project that Lumooja mentioned. The biggest advantages are that a fully ready game is likely to be complete much quicker than individual projects, and you'll also get to see other peoples abilities, you might see that there's a good programmer there, or a good artist that you want along side you in your project. So whilst there aren't too many fully fledged titles in the works yet, don't give up hope, soon there'll be a few, I'm quite sure of that.

I find the console only stays up if I run the project without debugging (CTRL F5), in either debug or release configs (and I only ever use release)

Remember, that's only going to make the body to its right, irrespective of the camera's angle Changing the last '0' for a '1' will make it constantly make it move to the right in the world, irrespective of both the camera's angle, and the body's own orientation. If you instead write: TVec3 AddForce = Vec3(10,0,0); AddForce = TFormVector(AddForce,camera,0); AddBodyForce(objectBody ,AddForce,0); That will add the force relative to the camera angle (if your camera is called 'camera'). The above three lines could be condensed into one, as follows: AddBodyForce(objectBody ,TFormVector(Vec3(10,0,0),camera,0),0); ...And if the camera is constantly rotated to match the body's rotation, that gives a first person style view. Without meaning to be nasty, if you've not watched the 'introduction to bodies' video tutorial, it's worth watching. http://www.leadwerks.com/files/Tutorials/CPP/Introduction_To_Bodies.wmv http://www.leadwerks.com/files/Tutorials/CPP/Making_A_Spectator.wmv

No formal documentation. Help is either here, or at http://www.leadwerks.com/wiki so, yes. You have to be online to read documentation