Nope that's completely doable, its just that there's no good way to implement it easily.....yet.

Then as far as "high quality textures" go you should be be able to use them via U, and Y displacements. And as far as ease of use goes there no reason why tools cant be developed that anybody can use, but some people would rather focus on the broke easy way out.

It may be broken now, but do you honestly think it was so bad ?

(admittedly it would have been nice to be able to load a model but whatever)

There was nothing wrong with it; in fact, I think it was a cool idea that was implemented nicely. I don't think the devs had intended for this to be a replacement, do you?

It is a really cool feature, but I don't like needing to use files outside of the .cap when can avoid it.

this doesn't need to turn into a "box vs. sprite" community divide, does it? can't we all get along ?

> I don't think you needed the math library for that genesys

>

For "pow" I don't need the math header?

>

>

> It may not be a major function, but the 3D box has spawned a lot of creativity from users on this community.

> The sprite mesh has little chance of replicating or surpassing the 3D box (being 2.5D in nature)

>

> Plus, I'm not sure what good Z positioning for a sprite is seeing as it can be easily faked with events.

>

> That being said, I am fairly pleased with this build.

> I'll check later to see if my latest project works in 0.99.42

>

Lets put it this way. It makes 3d box obsolete. We just need better tools for working with mesh's.

Any way its not just setting the z position of a sprite, its setting z position of a sprites verticies.

Check this for an example:

http://files.getdropbox.com/u/666516/3dmeshbox.zip

Ah maybe I'm wrong, but you have no control over pitch or yaw with a mesh distorted sprite correct?

If that's the case than it is still inferior to the old 3d box.

Also, I was aware of the control of a sprites verticies. I only mentioned Z positioning because I think Ashley had to move the "camera" position in construct to allow this elevation change and that is why 3D box is busted. (I may be wrong, it is just what I remember hearing)

> It isn't stable. Stop.

>

Quit whining it's stable for a beta release.

The 3d box is not a major function. It is an experiment that lived, end of story.

Look at it this way, would you rather have a complete 3dbox with limited functionality, or sprite mesh that can replicate, and even surpass it?

It may not be a major function, but the 3D box has spawned a lot of creativity from users on this community.

The sprite mesh has little chance of replicating or surpassing the 3D box (being 2.5D in nature)

Plus, I'm not sure what good Z positioning for a sprite is seeing as it can be easily faked with events.

That being said, I am fairly pleased with this build.

I'll check later to see if my latest project works in 0.99.42

or if you just need them to look more 3D, than you could pre-render them using software like blender, or anim8or (or 3dsmax )

http://www.nerve.com/CS/blogs/61fps/arc ... phics.aspx

I'm not even talking about the render. You can't change pitch or yaw anymore.

Something to do with the sprite Z position options I think...

Is 3D box still busted?

That would also technically make it backwards incompatible

Can you post the source for the INI object? I have a few ideas and I think the INI object may lead me in the right direction. please ?

These photos say otherwise

Oh, sorry

HWA = Hardware Acceleration.

I just wish direct-x was not a requirement all of the time...

I agree *dreams of easy RPG style over worlds*

Haha

But it makes me wish we had a non HWA version of construct