Jump to content

Fixing the dotXSI 3.0 Exporter for 3ds Max...


Recommended Posts

Posted

He needs to post his heirarchy then, he probably has control objects under model_root and if there are no polymeshes weighed to them they get dumped by the carcass compiler, more than likely the cause of the broken animations.

Posted

Yeah no baking is needed, I confirmed that the other day using Keshire's rig.

 

Ok it looks like your pelvis isn't having any position data written out. Make sure your pelvis bone is 'position constrained' to your rig's pelvis equivelant. Also, don't forget to make sure your motion bone stays perfectly still during any animation.

 

 

Don't forget - Ghoul2 doesn't allow you to have a 1:1 copy of your animation, so you may get some small anomalies (ie finger/face twitching, etc).

Posted

seems animations are the biggest bitch to do when exporting, though now It seems I finally need to update my 3dmax version since it seems to be giving me issues in windows 7

Posted

Nice! The thing with the basepose at frame 0 is that animations are calculated in relation to that base pose. Is not a shortcoming of the ghoul2 system but something that even with today's mocap equipment they have to do. They usually start every mocap session standing in the reference (Da Vinci) pose.

Posted

I wish when I did the multimedia course in school you had wrote this code back then, had to use 3 different modeling programs and try to join all 3 together on the fly, Max, Lightwave on mac, and some other one for the designer printer, but most used XSI exporting, cept half the time lightwave didn't want to co-operate with the windows based machines running max

Posted

Yeah no baking is needed, I confirmed that the other day using Keshire's rig.

 

Ok it looks like your pelvis isn't having any position data written out. Make sure your pelvis bone is 'position constrained' to your rig's pelvis equivelant. Also, don't forget to make sure your motion bone stays perfectly still during any animation.

 

 

Don't forget - Ghoul2 doesn't allow you to have a 1:1 copy of your animation, so you may get some small anomalies (ie finger/face twitching, etc).

 

The thing with the 1:1 animation is because of the rounding they have after you compile the animations I believe. Sometimes the problems aren't noticeable, but sometimes they are and a lot.

Posted

 

Nice! The thing with the basepose at frame 0 is that animations are calculated in relation to that base pose. Is not a shortcoming of the ghoul2 system but something that even with today's mocap equipment they have to do. They usually start every mocap session standing in the reference (Da Vinci) pose.

I get that... but out of curiosity then, why do the Raven released dotXSI animations not include the root pose on Frame 0? Does it really need to be in there for Carcass? Or is carcass happy as long as you include a root.xsi file of the basepose when compiling multiple files into a .GLA? or is it needed for GLAmerge only?

Posted

Honestly, I would have to run a few tests to answer you that. But as far as I remember, they compiled all the animations using a configuration file where all the files that had to be compiled into one .gla where listed. So perhaps, as long as the first file, the root.xsi file, has the refpose the next files don't need it. This is just a guess. I know GLA Merge needs the first frame to be the base pose because that's how the program ASk made knows where to cut and paste (so to speak). Carcass certainly doesn't need it, since it only compiles data (it doesn't know if the frame 0 has the correct basepose or not). The .gla file needs the first frame to be the basepose and the .glm files must be created using the same basepose to match.

Posted

^This is mainly it, the root pose can be wherever, and any animation can start from wherever frame you want it to start, in terms of custom skeletons, the glamerge needing the root pose is like Corto said, a requirement of the program and nothing else. I've tested this and also the source animation files many of them will start on something like frame 14, I don't think the frame number is taken from the .xsi file, only the amount of frames.

Posted

The frames are taken from the configuration file you have to build before starting the compile process. Each file is listed with the starting and ending frame inside of that file. That's how the batch compiled everything, Raven didn't compile and the merged all the gla files.

Posted

The plugin is broken when trying to export position data on max bones. However, position data is exported on dummy objects and Char Studio Biped so I recommend using either of these instead.

 

Archangel is working on a fix.

Posted

Well it appears the original code has issues when an object uses procedural type controllers or constraints... hopefully I can have it fixed soon.

 

Until the code is fixed, if you should run into this issue, the workaround is to export-select your skeleton & mesh objects and bake out the animation to an FBX file. Re-import this baked FBX file and then do a scene export to dotXSI.

Posted

It's just plain easier to constrain your bones to a CS biped (ie Keshire's rig) than to use control objects and IK chains. Or, you can just use biped by itself which is ideal for custom models needing a new skeleton + animset.

Posted

Good News!  I've traced the root cause of the problem for the "broken animations" ( ...like @@AshuraDX and I were experiencing).  In the code they do a test on all objects to see if it is animated, and if this test returns "true" then they export the fCurves (i.e., Animation Data)... however, those objects that are animated indirectly using Constraints or IK Chains will fail this test; and as a result are omitted during the animation export phase.  :blink:

 

I've fixed this issue... and have tested it out on a few things.  I also verified that I am able to compile a model with carcass.exe and play it in ModView.  

 

Hopefully there aren't any more bugs... I'll be releasing new beta versions for everyone to continue beta testing phase.

 

Thanks!  :)

Tempust85 likes this
Posted

Nice work.

 

Too bad we can't seem to get some attention from the coders on the site for things like this since Michael admits to being an amateur at coding but is able to pull this off. If we could convince the coders of this site to help out with things like this all major software being used to mod this game would have support for dotXSI, MD3, GLM, ASE and MAP.

 

You should keep going if you can and maybe update the old MD3 and GLM plugins to work with newer max versions.

Archangel35757 likes this
Posted

Nice work.

 

Too bad we can't seem to get some attention from the coders on the site for things like this since Michael admits to being an amateur at coding but is able to pull this off. If we could convince the coders of this site to help out with things like this all major software being used to mod this game would have support for dotXSI, MD3, GLM, ASE and MAP.

 

You should keep going if you can and maybe update the old MD3 and GLM plugins to work with newer max versions.

 

I wholeheartedly agree with you!  :)

 

Actually, this guy (Hugo Apellido) at maxplugins.de here:

 

<http://maxplugins.de/max2011.php?search=Hugo Apellido&sort=Author>

 

has generated newer versions of .map exporters, .bsp level importers, .GLM importers, and .MD3 importers/exporters for a number of versions of 3ds Max up to R2011.  However, he's missing some critical ones for Max 6, 7, 8.  I've tried to contact him but haven't gotten any response.  If anyone knows how to contact this guy please let me know.

 

One of the plugins that is still missing for 3ds Max is the ROFF exporter that allows you to generate custom complex paths for scripted map object animations (i.e., vehicle flight paths, etc.).  I plan to build a ROFF exporter soon.  I also want to fix the broken dotXSI importer...

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

^It only has a following because it is free and open source, it's not like it can do anything any other program cannot and it's interface is just terrible.

 

Oh and they way the viewport renders 3d geometry is just weird, like there's no depth.

 

If they started charging money for it I bet no one would buy it.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...