RHW (RealHighway) - Development and Support

[apeguy]

This is just a random question that popped into my head - Has there been any talk or plans for a FLEX-DDI, seeing as a FLEX-SPUI has been made? I didn't see anything about it in the seminar presentation, but has there ever been any consideration for it? It would be good to have something like that in-game.

Speaking of FLEX stuff, will the FLEX-SPUI piece be updated for project 57, i.e. able to be used for L1, 3 and 4?

[jondor]

The DDI piece is perfectly fine the way it is because the RHW crosses over regular OWR-2 drags.  That's all normal non-specialized override code.  In the future there may be an additional piece to support AVE-6 if someone decides to make it, but it will more than likely also be a regular puzzle piece.

[Tarkus]

And regarding FlexSPUI expansion, since there will be L1 Elevated Avenue Viaducts, there will be an L1 FlexSPUI.  There will not, however, be an L3 or an L4, as there won't be Elevated Avenue Viaducts at those levels.

Eventually, there will be more varieties of FlexSPUI--namely, one for AVE Type B/Dual Left TuLEPs, and some involving triple-tile NWM networks.  That probably won't happen until after NAM Version 31, however.

-Alex

[mike3775]

After reading the transcripts and scrolling through the slide presentation on the RHW seminar, I have to say this:  "Thank you NAM team for giving up any semblance of a life in order to make this game even better than before"   

Seriously, I can only imagine how much time and effort every NAM member has put into various aspects of the NWM and RHW, and I bet many if added together, would probably come close to 3-4+ yrs

[gn_leugim]

Well I see then 3dmax is a must, I may be able to get it as I read something about it being free for students and I am still registered on my college.

So I'll look into it then

There should not be a problem getting familiar to it, as it works pretty much as gmax as far I know, so once I get it I believe I can start modelling fast. 

Also, and if I get it right, there is only need to do the L2 as the other are obtained using Cogeo's wonder program I am right?

[Tarkus]

Also, and if I get it right, there is only need to do the L2 as the other are obtained using Cogeo's wonder program I am right?

That's exactly correct.   That's how I've been able to get all the models in place for the multi-level ERHW-4 and EMIS so quickly.

Speaking of which . . . still trying to stabilize this little guy . . .



-Alex

[jdenm8]

*drop* *scurry, scurry, scurry*



Some of the errors in that pic have been fixed now, so that picture does not accurately represent the current status of the mod.

[Will12]

Wow! The NAM and jdenm8s mod

[io_bg]

*drools*

[gn_leugim]

  nice nice

Well, I was playing arround, exporting and importing the models I have on my plugins folder to see some of the specs and I came up with this creation of mine



its a ERHW4 S curve :p

I found some errors I have to correct, but I think I got the thing XD

[jdenm8]

Just a small thing that could probably be improved from me, it might be a good idea to remove the pylons. Most non-diagonal or Non-Transition RHW puzzle pieces have pylons placed as T21 props. I don't know if this is one of those errors you mentioned.

Other than that, it's certainly quite nice and certainly fills a hole.

I'd recommend exporting it now and overriding the models of the plain RHW-4 S-Curve and see how it fits compared to the standard ERHW-4 models in practice, as well as ensuring that it fits the profile of the ground curve. Having two S-Curves that are different shapes looks odd and it's a real waste of time to path.

[gn_leugim]

Just a small thing that could probably be improved from me, it might be a good idea to remove the pylons. Most non-diagonal or Non-Transition RHW puzzle pieces have pylons placed as T21 props. I don't know if this is one of those errors you mentioned.

I was unaware of such thing, but that is an easy thing to correct.

I'd recommend exporting it now and overriding the models of the plain RHW-4 S-Curve and see how it fits compared to the standard ERHW-4 models in practice, as well as ensuring that it fits the profile of the ground curve. Having two S-Curves that are different shapes looks odd and it's a real waste of time to path.

that's more the thing I have to make right yet. as far it concerns the exporting and overriding the ground S curve model I'm not pretty sure I can do it yet ^^ I'll try thou.

EDIT:

I did something meanwhile. I took the ground model textures and apply them to a plane which I overlay on the model, but below the barriers so you can still see the outline of the model:



Also, as you can see, I took 2 models from the RHW dat files to put next to the new one(in red in the next pic) to see if they align and appear to do so:

[apeguy]

That's a great model gn_leugim, It'll definately fill a gap in the ERHW-4 network.

[noahclem]

That's spectacular gn_leugim!    An extremely useful piece. Besides being portable to the other levels it could also be used for DDRHW-2x ERHW transitions.

How is the poly count going with that? It seems so smooth that it must be exceeding the puzzle piece limit--though trust me, I'm no expert 

Since no one else has started harassing you yet I might as well start    How about modeling width transitions for ERHW? ie L2 RHW4-to-L2 RHW6

Great work as well JD!!! Are you planning on going diagonal in the future? I know the capacity issue doesn't work but the aesthetics of adjacent RHW-4s would be really nice.

And of course it's always great to see your progress Alex 

[gn_leugim]

thank you

After erasing all superfual stuff (helpers and guide lines) I got a 384 polygon count

EDIT: I have to remake the piece (or make a second version as I can be wrong) because the model is not entirely symmetric. I'll be back posting stuff soon

[Tarkus]

I should also add, that polygon count is per tile rather than for the entire model.  If you're coming up with 384 for the whole model, you're definitely well within specs.  The model looks fantastic and within specs. 

In other words, gn_leugim, you are officially awesome, my friend!

-Alex

[gn_leugim]

  oh ty 

Now I'm not sure if I made all right as you can imagine, I start experimenting and going down to business a bit blinded regarding how you do it. I did it on my way.

And I have some questions as you can imagine.

Do I insert pylons or not? (as jdenm8 said)
The "per tile" segregation of the model is done on reader on in max?

among other things. I might have much to learn yet ^^

[noahclem]

I knew the poly count was per tile but phrased it wrong. Glad to here we're within the proper range here!

EDIT: I have to remake the piece (or make a second version as I can be wrong) because the model is not entirely symmetric. I'll be back posting stuff soon

I can only speak for me but it seems close enough as it is. And congrats on the "officially awesome" comment, they don't come around without a good reason 

[Tarkus]

I'd advise keeping the pylons off . . . if they are going to be built in, we can add them in later as well using a little trickery with cogeo's tool.  The FLEXFly specs do propose having a FLEXFly S-Curve piece, so pylon-less would also be the way to go there.

The slicing of the model is typically done on the Max end, with a Cube primitive and a Boolean object, to cut the model into 16x16 pieces.

-Alex

[MandelSoft]

The slicing of the model is typically done on the Max end, with a Cube primitive and a Boolean object, to cut the model into 16x16 pieces.

Or you can use the Slice Plane tool to do that. Same result...