vidkid7 Is On Your Ignore List.

Nalates wrote:

I don't think we even know which Plasma they are going to open source.

I think Cyan's customers have more interest in the versioning of Plasma than Cyan does itself.

Regardless, you are right; the open-sourcing of the engine will probably use whatever latest iteration Cyan has, for convenience. That would include the capability, added in Myst V, for higher texture resolution than Plasma originally supported.

If someone's priority were to rebuild Uru from scratch, then they could certainly rebuild Uru with a larger and richer collection of textures. Show me someone with such a priority, however, and I'll show you either someone who should lend a hand to these guys or these guys, or someone who has too much time on their hands.

Nalates wrote:

Without a license for use of the Cyan content we can't know what we can do in regard to changing engines.

The license for use of "Cyan content" shipped with the games. It won't be changing anytime soon.

Nalates wrote:

Is the latest Plasma legacy compatible?

...no? Projects built on the current Plasma engine will be unable to build a legacy? They shall never bequeath nothing to nobody?

Nalates wrote:

If we can change engines

Wait, how are you changing the subject over to this again?

Nalates wrote:

If we can change engines, why not move Uru to Team Fortress or Second Life, other than its a ton of work?

...ah, right, it's okay to change topics if you do so by asking a question. Got it. Neat trick.

Nalates wrote:

If Cyan allows one to change engines, why not use a drastically different engine other than Plasma/PhysX/DriectX?

Given that there are people interested in refactoring Plasma to use OpenGL rather than DirectX, and given the possibility that the potential open-source release will not refer to any specific physics library, it's fair to say that in time Plasma will be drastically different from itself today.

Also, your trick is getting old.

_________________
quahog42 | theclam | lazugod

Just wondering if Plasma is capable of doing parallax mapping?

_________________
Spam,spam,spam,spam,spam,spam,spam,spam,spam,spam,spam,spamI LIKE SPAM!!!

sarpedon2 wrote:

Just wondering if Plasma is capable of doing parallax mapping?

Normal mapping, yes. Parallax mapping, no.

_________________

What about lightmaps, while we're on the subject?