Archive: 20 posts

---

Hi, I'm having a bit of trouble with the 3d glitch (or 50 layers or whatever you want to call it). Is there any way to get rid of the 3 layers that sackperson can walk on without getting rid of any of the other front layers? http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/346/aphoto21.jpg (http://img263.imageshack.us/i/aphoto21.jpg/) Basically I want of get rid of the red X, which covers all the 3 layers Sackperson can walk on without getting rid of anything else.

2010-04-14 17:47:00 Author: kirbyman62 Posts: 1893

---

No I don't think there is a way. Unless someone else knows.. You would have to redo the back, then make the front 3 layers ahead. I don't have an object that extends from back to front like that so I can't speak on if that is actually possible to even do that.

2010-04-14 19:29:00 Author: OneEyedBanshee Posts: 1370

---

No I don't think there is a way. Unless someone else knows.. You would have to redo the back, then make the front 3 layers ahead. I don't have an object that extends from back to front like that so I can't speak on if that is actually possible to even do that. I have one that extends all the way from the back to all the way at the front, but I want a hole in the normal 3 layers that sackperson can walk on. I thought you could shrink the front tool (in depth not size), and push it forward. But I'm not sure how to.

2010-04-14 19:41:00 Author: kirbyman62 Posts: 1893

---

Yeah, creating what you want to create is possible, but not by simply taking what you currently have and "deleting" a middle section. Whenever you delete a section of a material, it deletes every part of that material block that is aligned with the section you are deleting in the Z-Axis. If all you have is one piece that extends from far foreground to far background, you may need to either obtain or create some more tools for yourself. There's plenty of people and threads on this forum that you could obtain or learn how to create such tools from respectively.

2010-04-14 22:09:00 Author: Jagrevi Posts: 1154

---

If you use Aya's tutorial on how to re-create the layer glitch (https://lbpcentral.lbp-hub.com/index.php?t=23874-How-To-Recreate-The-3D-Layer-Glitch#post414086), you'll be able to put it in any layers you want.

2010-04-14 22:14:00 Author: Doopz Posts: 5592

---

If you use Aya's tutorial on how to re-create the layer glitch (https://lbpcentral.lbp-hub.com/index.php?t=23874-How-To-Recreate-The-3D-Layer-Glitch#post414086), you'll be able to put it in any layers you want. I think limiting to a subset of the foreground layers might be a little trickier than that. The background layers are more flexible, however, so you might be able to use an emitter to push an object from the background into the foreground akin to the method described in the TheAdipose's video tutorial I link to from the introduction of that post.

2010-04-14 22:32:00 Author: Aya042 Posts: 2870

---

more info on the 3d glitch can be found here: http://www.youtube.com/user/MrMorris1980#p/u/4/VYRGeojQMr4

2010-04-16 02:10:00 Author: Luos_83 Posts: 2136

---

more info on the 3d glitch can be found here: http://www.youtube.com/user/MrMorris1980#p/u/4/VYRGeojQMr4 So can you shrink and then 'push forward' with the front layer tool?

2010-04-16 17:02:00 Author: kirbyman62 Posts: 1893

---

you dont need to push forward, with the tools adi made you can emit them where you want, whatever layer you want.

2010-04-16 18:02:00 Author: Luos_83 Posts: 2136

---

What Luos_Desruc said, check out that video... the only way to do it. Not hard at all if you understand about getting objects in the background.

2010-04-16 18:21:00 Author: oLMCo Posts: 96

---

What Luos_Desruc said, check out that video... the only way to do it. Not hard at all if you understand about getting objects in the background. So I create an object that goes all the way in the background, do what Adi says, and it will be where I want it? I thought you could only emit normal objects (ones in the 'normal' layers) into the back/foreground.

2010-04-19 12:42:00 Author: kirbyman62 Posts: 1893

---

No, you create two objects… one that goes in the background, and the other that goes in the foreground. You emit them so they are both completely in the back and foreground… leaving the three playable layers free. I’ve tried it, it works… I wouldn’t recommend something I wasn’t sure off. Now if you don’t know how to accurately emit things… then just do this… Take two elongated background blocks, make one of them shorter with L2 by three layers, then capture the shorter one, emit it, move emitter and reemit that will bring it in to the foreground. Then capture that and do the same again. That will send it back in the background… but it will be three layers shorter from the back instead of the front now. Capture this and the original block (one that’s not 3 layers shorter) together, and do the emitter thing again to send them to the foreground. The shorter one will be the one you’ll use, and then just make the back layer by shortening a elongated back ground layer. It works… so as a last resort, send me a friend request and I can show you and maybe explain better. Hope that helps =) Good luck.

2010-04-19 13:35:00 Author: oLMCo Posts: 96

---

it deletes every part of that material block that is aligned with the section you are deleting in the Z-Axis. in 3d, the z axis is the vertical one. X being from left to right, Y from back to front, and Z being from down to up. "Z-Axis gameplay" means you are able to jump up/down, not back/front. just a little sidenote thingy.

2010-04-19 16:18:00 Author: Luos_83 Posts: 2136

---

No, you create two objects? one that goes in the background, and the other that goes in the foreground. You emit them so they are both completely in the back and foreground? leaving the three playable layers free. I've tried it, it works? I wouldn?t recommend something I wasn?t sure off. Now if you don't know how to accurately emit things? then just do this? Take two elongated background blocks, make one of them shorter with L2 by three layers, then capture the shorter one, emit it, move emitter and reemit that will bring it in to the foreground. Then capture that and do the same again. That will send it back in the background? but it will be three layers shorter from the back instead of the front now. Capture this and the original block (one that?s not 3 layers shorter) together, and do the emitter thing again to send them to the foreground. The shorter one will be the one you?ll use, and then just make the back layer by shortening a elongated back ground layer. It works? so as a last resort, send me a friend request and I can show you and maybe explain better. Hope that helps =) Good luck. OK, I'll give it a try tonight and if it doesn't work I'll contact you via PSN. Thanks for all your help everyone

2010-04-19 17:48:00 Author: kirbyman62 Posts: 1893

---

X being from left to right, Y from back to front, and Z being from down to up. Source? I've always seen Z-axis refer to front-to-back, so X and Y axes are the same in 2D and 3D.

2010-04-20 15:09:00 Author: Aya042 Posts: 2870

---

Just open 3dsmax, maya, unrealed. If a level is 3d, and look from it from the topview, you will have your x/y axis as a map, z axis being the layers of height. http://mods.terranova-exp.com/tutorials/3dsmax5/images/tut_image_01.jpg http://ic.tweakimg.net/ext/i/1254124251.jpeg http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Z-axis from: http://planetunreal.gamespy.com/static.php?page=UT3Essential It's the first official bonus pack from Epic, and of course it's full of essential maps. While it only contains three maps (of which two are remakes), it's still more Unreal for free, so you can't complain. Facing Worlds returns in UT3 form with a brand new look, with Necris and Izanagi towers facing off high above a rocky landscape. Morbias also returns in BP1, and is also a huge amount of fun when packed with 16 or more players for the ultimate in hi-octane carnage. There's also a brand new Necris-themed map called Searchlight, which focuses on Z-axis gameplay, making vertical combat skills important.from: http://wiki.beyondunreal.com/Legacy:Z-Axis Legacy:Z-Axis From Unreal Wiki, The Unreal Engine Documentation Site Jump to: navigation (http://wiki.beyondunreal.com/Legacy:Z-Axis#column-one), search (http://wiki.beyondunreal.com/Legacy:Z-Axis#searchInput) Z-axis is one of the key elements to Map Flow (http://wiki.beyondunreal.com/Legacy:Map_Flow) and Map Design (http://wiki.beyondunreal.com/Legacy:Map_Design). In mathematics, Z-axis is the vertical axis in a Wikipedia:Cartesian coordinate system (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartesian_coordinate_system) – in FPS games , it refers to the use of height. The use of height can dramatically change the way a map flows, for good or ill. Vast drops into chasms and lakes of lava will put people off those routes (and possibly the map) especially if the bridges are easy to fall from. Being able to drop into position directly behind someone from a ledge can add an element of strategy and suprise to a map that would otherwise be missing. The other thing adding the magic z dimension to your map can do is make it appear much large than it actually is. Adding a level or two to a map can increase the perceived size of the level without actually making the dimensions of the map much larger. This means the action is not slowed down as much as it would be if the map had simply been enlarged. I know my z-axis "Z-axis" Is something you hear a lot in the fps scene, but its commonly used in 3dsmax and lots of other games, their engines and actually everything you see in a movie probably uses z-axis for height. Since the unreal engine is now one of the most (commercially) used game engines I can assume that everyone that works with 3dsmax and/or unreal editor will tell you that height is z axis.

2010-04-20 15:19:00 Author: Luos_83 Posts: 2136

---

If a level is 3d, and look from it from the topview, you will have your x/y axis as a map, z axis being the layers of height. Well, if you're using axes fixed relative to the 3D model, then it depends on where your camera is. If you're using a plan view, then X and Y are the same as the 2D equivalents, and Z becomes in and out of the screen. For an arbitrary camera position, there will generally be no exact relationship between the screen axes, and the axes used when defining the 3D model. The convention I've always seen in the past is that if you're always referring to axes relative to the current camera position as seen on the screen, then Z is always in and out of the screen. From an arbitrary article on 3D graphics theory (http://www.gamedev.net/reference/articles/article795.asp):- X and Y are perpendicular to each other in the 2D plane. It's the same as the plane of your screen, for example. Well in 3D, we can get depth by putting the Z axis perpendicular to that entire plane altogether, going either into or out of your screen.

2010-04-20 16:02:00 Author: Aya042 Posts: 2870

---

But nowadays camera's in games can move around, rotate and what not. And more than often the camera is considered an "object. like in both 3dsmax and unrealed. if a camera goes up, its going up on the z-axis, if its going left x, and going back/front its y. Looking at your overly not understandable for the common person quote all I can think of is this: You are looking at it from a coders point of view, not from an 3d artist/enviroment artist/gameplay design point of view. Thats why in most game companies you have coders that are like a buffer between the core coders and the visual artists, they will "translate" what the visual artist wants into something the coder understands. Maybe there is a different axis assumption between the two groups, but for the past 12 years Ive learned and always used z-axis as "vertical" even in conversations with the coders I worked with. I think the standard nowadays for 3d applications and engine is Z axis is up and down/vertical. Ive never ever heard anybody in the industry mention z axis being back to front. it doesnt make sense. Well, if you're using axes fixed relative to the 3D model, then it depends on where your camera is. If you're using a plan view, then X and Y are the same as the 2D equivalents, and Z becomes in and out of the screen. For an arbitrary camera position, there will generally be no exact relationship between the screen axes, and the axes used when defining the 3D model. Well actually the axis are relative to a fixed grid that does not rotate, and the camera uses this for location, (in editors/apps) if for instance its the over the shoulder camera like tomb raider.. the camera linked to Lara, Lara is still moving over this fixed grid. How can I explain this easily.. All 3d enviroments/objects are created on a floorplan (top view) this is considered by most engines and people using them as the x and y axis. If you then put the floorplan in front of you (perspective), you get a 3th dimension aka height and this is considered the Z axis. I can understand where you are coming from, especially with the theory/assumption from your quote and in your defence isnt a wrong one, but for the general editor/3d app using people vertical gameplay will always be reffered to as z-axis. But there is also a catch... take for instance the intro from Sonic 3, front plane has bushes, mid plane is where sonic walks and back plane consists out of max. 5 layers for (fake) background. Though this gives you the illusion of depth in a flat sprite based game, this is not z-axis. As the game is 2d, jumping will be in Y axis, and moving left/right will be in X axis. Looking at lbp as a floorplan, from the top view all you see is the floors of your 3 thick layers. _______ _______ _______ _______ like this poor asci. Like that, meaning if sackboys directional left/right movement is considered the X axis, moving back/front will be Y axis and then pulling the top view in perspective in front of you.. up and down (jumping) will be z-axis. Im talking too much, we are both not wrong, but yours is the more philosophic coder view (sorry couldnt find any other words for it) while mine is the more commonly used in the industry one.

2010-04-20 16:36:00 Author: Luos_83 Posts: 2136

---

we are both not wrong, but yours is the more philosophic coder view (sorry couldnt find any other words for it) while mine is the more commonly used in the industry one. That's probably all there is to it really. I've written 3D graphics libraries from scratch in the past, but it was so long ago (nearly 20 years), I can barely remember. I seem to recall having to translate the the model coordinates into coordinates relative to the camera position, which can then be translated into the 2D coordinates as rendered on the screen. I think the confusion stems from the representation of the first two sets of coordinates, in which you're thinking of the first thing, and I'm thinking of the second. Either that or the Z=height convention just didn't exist 20 years ago. Consequently, with 3D graphics, I still use the convention whereby X and Y are the same as the 2D equivalents, and Z is depth, so with LBP, I think of Z referring to which layers are in use, which seems to be the same convention that Jagrevi was using. At the end of the day, it's all arbitrary anyway, so as long as everyone uses the same convention when referring to the axes in LBP, it doesn't really matter which one you use.

2010-04-21 11:32:00 Author: Aya042 Posts: 2870

---

A few days ago I taked to this old coder friend of mine, he has written many grafical codes for nes/snes based games and retired around the time Nintendo came with the N64. I explained this conversation with you to him and it made him laugh a little and explained some stuff. In the old nes/snes age everything was sprites and like the Zelda games you where looking at the game from top view. Now if you take mario for instance, that was a side-scroller. But for both grafics coder and grafics artist this was still considered top view like i.e. a zelda game. And thats actually how it is in LBP, though sidescroller we are in theory looking at it from above, hence that back to front layer is Z-Axis. (he made some funny comment about mario actually being disabled and had to crawl on his side to resque the princess) anyways, hope that clears some stuff up aya

2010-04-25 12:48:00 Author: Luos_83 Posts: 2136

Posts: 1077139    Threads: 69970    Members: 9661    Archive-Date: 2019-01-19

Aus dem Archiv wurden alle persönlichen Daten wie Name, Anschrift, Email etc. - aber auch sämtliche Inhalte wie z.B. persönliche Nachrichten - entfernt.
Die Nutzung dieser Webseite erfolgt ohne Speicherung personenbezogener Daten. Es werden keinerlei Cookies, Logs, 3rd-Party-Plugins etc. verwendet.