Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: What about pak.256??  (Read 10857 times) previous topic - next topic

What about pak.256??

What we will gain if someone develop pak.256?
More detailed models?

Re: What about pak.256??

Reply #1 –
Sure we gain much more detailed models, I've been making some tests, and results are simply awful. Problem is size must be <= 255 at the moment. Also we gain lot of work to redraw stuff :P

This is a simple test I did a couple of days ago; it is a railcar compiled with "pak254" switch for makeobj, and put into pak128 game:
http://files.[ simutrans [dot] us (site down, do not visit) ]/image/show/hGGUofMFLO/big-cph.png

Another problem will be planes/ships size. For pak128 is being used 192px for planes and 250px for ships... These should be also increased, but makeobj won't allow anything more than 255 by now.

Re: What about pak.256??

Reply #2 –
WOW!

Can we make makeobj without that limit?

Re: What about pak.256??

Reply #3 –
I'm not sure, but I guess it would be hell. Anyway, it's true that 256 is a more "beautiful" number (programatically), but I wouldn't mind at all for having 1 or 2 pixels less... 254 isn't such an ugly number, is it? ;D

Re: What about pak.256??

Reply #4 –
Quote from: Zeno – on
I'm not sure, but I guess it would be hell. Anyway, it's true that 256 is a more "beautiful" number (programatically), but I wouldn't mind at all for having 1 or 2 pixels less... 254 isn't such an ugly number, is it? ;D

Well, We can name it as pak256 again, who will even check that xD
I am asking because this is the natural way of developing Simutrans. So, Is there any posibility of crating pak154/6 xD

Re: What about pak.256??

Reply #5 –
recent makeobj has no limit concerning size of images. But for vehicle in curves, 256 is very very much the sensible limit.

Re: What about pak.256??

Reply #6 –
What do you mean by "sensible limit"? Is it a problem of alignment or a technical (programming) problem?

@prissi: Btw, I've noticed that latest version under development doesn't work like the current stable (50) when working with over-sized images. I have compiled some ships with the "pak250" switch with both versions, and with 50 it is playable under pak128, but with 51 looks completely moved away. May I recieve some information about that (here, pm or new post)? At the moment all planes and ships in pak128 (and are quite a lot) are compiled with pak192 and pak250; I would like to know if this could be affected in a future and how should I fix it. Thank you. Admins, feel free to move this comments to a new/other thread if you feel it shouldn't be asked here.

Re: What about pak.256??

Reply #7 –
to do with curves, the larger the image tge more glaring the jump in images as a vehicle enters or leaves a curve

Re: What about pak.256??

Reply #8 –
Thanks kierongreen. Actually it would be the same problem than now, but bigger ;)

Quote from: prissi – on
recent makeobj has no limit concerning size of images. But for vehicle in curves, 256 is very very much the sensible limit.
I use a recent v51 version, and still doesn't allow me to use PAK256 switch. It seems PAK255 limit is still activated. Maybe my makeobj is already obsolete... Could you confirm this, please?

Re: What about pak.256??

Reply #9 –
With the new version a new version of makeobj will be released, that will not have limits to be reached soon, including the limit of 65514 bytes for images maximum size. Images can be up to 32767 pixels with an offest in the same range. This required to step up the pak version to 1.3, since in 1.2 all objects are only 65kB size at largest (this was one of the reasons, why pak was not used for samples.)

Since this requres more memory on the disk, makeobj will use the old pak format, if it can.

Re: What about pak.256??

Reply #10 –
Ok, I think I understand (almost) everything. I will patiently wait for the new stable makeobj version. Thank you for explaining, prissi.

What about pak.32767 ??

Reply #11 –
What we will gain if someone develop pak.32767?
Real size models?


































:biggrin: :airborn:

The more you give, the more people will ask,  8)

Re: What about pak.256??

Reply #12 –
Quote
What we will gain if someone develop pak.32767?

We will gain an awful lot of pixels !  :D

And we could handle a serious decrease in dots per inch on monitors of course...
Bob Marley: No woman, no cry

Programmer: No user, no bugs


Re: What about pak.256??

Reply #13 –
Quote from: Combuijs – on
We will gain an awful lot of pixels !  :D
Yes, and loose a lot of painters! Well... I mean the few active ones :P

Getting 128 pixel images trhough 3d modelling is quite affordable... 256 pixel images becomes really hard; real pro 3D skills are a must with those sizes; to say nothing about pixel art... with such number of pixels I guess it would be simply mad.

Moreover, anything over 256 is absolutely impossible for an amateur 3d modeler like me, so I would become a translator or something else 8)

Re: What about pak.256??

Reply #14 –
256 pak size should be pretty good for painting in special pixels on 3D renders.

Re: What about pak.256??

Reply #15 –
Quote from: fabio – on
What we will gain if someone develop pak.32767?
Real size models?

Wow... world record XP
Version using: Simutrans v111.0
Paks: pak64, pak96.comic, pak128 openr582, pak128.Britain, pak128.Japan, pak192.comic
Using: Paint.NET, Paint, Photoshop, SketchUp
Future Addon(s): Building (Link)
Current Addon(s): Eye-See Mart and Several Building addons  Ask me any questions. I'm free.
 

Re: What about pak.256??

Reply #16 –
it occurred to me that you can also use large images for bridges too.
It would be a lot of work trying to align everything, but it should be possible to paint arches or wires that span over multiple tiles.

The only down side, is that it will only look proper at a specific length.
This one needs to be constrained to an 8 tile length.
http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/256_bridge_demo.png

with a larger tile size, it should be possible to paint in a full sized suspension bridge.