Talk:Abstract Mapping: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mNo edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
this would run into conflicts on devs locating it for use later tho—'''[[User:Ts2do|ts2do]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Ts2do|talk]])</sup> 22:38, 25 Oct 2005 (PDT) | this would run into conflicts on devs locating it for use later tho—'''[[User:Ts2do|ts2do]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Ts2do|talk]])</sup> 22:38, 25 Oct 2005 (PDT) | ||
:Parenting does all sorts of things, so calling it "radar"-something is making it ''much'' more specific rather than more abstract. On the other hand calling it "parenting" defeats the purpose, because then only people who already know what it's called will find it. Maybe something like 'joining two entities', and toss in [[phys_constraint]]? —'''[[User:Maven|Maven]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Maven|talk]])</sup> 08:17, 26 Oct 2005 (PDT) | |||
Revision as of 08:17, 26 October 2005
What else should go here? What kinds of things do people new to Source mapping want to make but don't know the right names?
- Skies: basically link to the 2D skybox and 3D skybox articles, and maybe mention the Terragen article
- Special effects: catch-all for lasers, explosions, etc
- Sound and music
I believe skies are less abstract than other components...but if you want to have that article taht shows how to make the 6 images...that'd be good—ts2do (talk) 21:06, 25 Oct 2005 (PDT)
- It might not be abstract, but it would be useful. Like the Water article, it can help people doing mapping as well as people doing materials. —Maven (talk) 21:11, 25 Oct 2005 (PDT)
Also...consider adding a very specific abstract mapping thing that shows how the parent hierarchy system can be utilized would be nice—ts2do (talk) 21:07, 25 Oct 2005 (PDT)
- That's an excellent idea. I haven't a clue what to call it, though. —Maven (talk) 21:12, 25 Oct 2005 (PDT)
Well call it what it is...maybe a breakable radar that pivots..."Radar"...something else?—ts2do (talk) 22:37, 25 Oct 2005 (PDT)
this would run into conflicts on devs locating it for use later tho—ts2do (talk) 22:38, 25 Oct 2005 (PDT)
- Parenting does all sorts of things, so calling it "radar"-something is making it much more specific rather than more abstract. On the other hand calling it "parenting" defeats the purpose, because then only people who already know what it's called will find it. Maybe something like 'joining two entities', and toss in phys_constraint? —Maven (talk) 08:17, 26 Oct 2005 (PDT)