Reverse support. I checked in the .80 version
-
Selby Evans
- Posts: 620
- Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 6:00 pm
- Has thanked: 1840 times
- Been thanked: 822 times
Reverse support. I checked in the .80 version
--because of Ilan's question Wednesday -- I found no problems at all -- at Greyville (is running .80). I did not see my feet off the ground. I came in from Kitely intact and returned to Kitely (via Hypergate) intact. I did not give it a demanding test, but I saw no difference between Greyville and Kitely. --
-
Keith Selmes
- Posts: 175
- Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 1:13 pm
- Location: Devon, UK
- Has thanked: 174 times
- Been thanked: 153 times
- Contact:
Re: Reverse support. I checked in the .80 version
I don't know what the question was, but my default sandbox is now .80 with bulletsim and varrregion.
I didn't manage to translate my megaregion terrain exactly into a varregion terrain, but then I was trying for quickness rather than perfection.
Roughly correct is OK for now.
My vehicle scripts are all converted now.
There are some problems with BulletSim, but no worse than ODE.
In particular, I believe there are problems with scripted collision detection in attached objects, which seems to include vehicles.
There are some mantis reports relating to collisions.
Subjectively, I feel this version is more demanding on my PC, but running well enough that I haven't felt the need to spend time on diagnostics.
I upgraded a photographic software product last year, and it's a complete resource hog. Compared to that experience, OS .80 is quite benign, and I can still run other software alongside, without any obvious problems.
(The PC is quad core i5 with 4G ram and a GT520 graphics card.)
I didn't manage to translate my megaregion terrain exactly into a varregion terrain, but then I was trying for quickness rather than perfection.
Roughly correct is OK for now.
My vehicle scripts are all converted now.
There are some problems with BulletSim, but no worse than ODE.
In particular, I believe there are problems with scripted collision detection in attached objects, which seems to include vehicles.
There are some mantis reports relating to collisions.
Subjectively, I feel this version is more demanding on my PC, but running well enough that I haven't felt the need to spend time on diagnostics.
I upgraded a photographic software product last year, and it's a complete resource hog. Compared to that experience, OS .80 is quite benign, and I can still run other software alongside, without any obvious problems.
(The PC is quad core i5 with 4G ram and a GT520 graphics card.)