Game-like navigation through 3D models

[Christiaan]

Edit (Mar 2023): 

This wish was originally for Vectorworks itself, and I would still love to have this kind of navigation built into Vectorworks, but where we could *really* do with it, for the sake of our own clients is VGX web views.

 

What I want is real-world navigation physics:

• Awareness of solid objects, default mode should be that you can't walk through them. 
• Ability to walk up stairs
• Ability to walk through doors/gates. Or, even better, VGX would parse the model for doors/gates and animate opening them when you walk through them.
• Ability to climb through windows, as item above
• Ability to jump/climb over objects
• Gravity, jump over an object and land on the surface below etc.
• When you click on first-person mode it should set you down softly on the nearest horizontal surface with a smooth animation.
• The viewing height should remain consistent relative to the surface you're on.
• And perhaps with a stepping motion rather than a smooth camera effect (with the option of smooth motion), or an option for third-person navigation (i.e. you can see your character in front of you)

 

We should be navigating VGX models like this:

Original post:

I'd like to be able to walk through a model like you can modern 3D game, with awareness of physics, such as gravity.

Graphisoft have attempted this in ArchiCAD, although it looks a little ropey:

http://graphisoft.vo.llnwd.net/o1/AC10/ACClips/AC10_35.mp4

from:

http://www.graphisoft.com/products/archicad/ac10/demo/

[Matt Overton]

On 4/1/2023 at 11:22 AM, VIRTUALENVIRONS said:

Hi Matt

I am sorry, but I can't agree.  I don't know if you have ever noticed that when you do an Extrude along a path, when you go to edit, your curve is a NURBS curve.  As I understand it, Vectorworks is now NURBS based.  So walls, roofs, etc. are much like the first windows.  It was an interface that sat over DOS.  The same as Extrude along a path.

So, programmers would have a difficult task to overcome that, if they could.  Collision avoidance, gravity etc, need a lot of information, that is not available In 2D planar objects.  I am pretty sure that walls, roofs etc. are hybrid planar objects.

Having said all this (having a glass of wine), they NURBS geometry would easily handle gaming attributes.

 

was told many years ago - "don't worry about technical implementation, that Is the engineers' job. Just worry about the the why it's needed"

 

 

[VIRTUALENVIRONS]

10 hours ago, Matt Overton said:

was told many years ago - "don't worry about technical implementation, that Is the engineers' job. Just worry about the the why it's needed"

 

 

If that were only so, it would be wonderful, wouldn't it.  But sadly that is not the case.  There are two driving factors.  The bottom line and "bang for the buck". I suppose they are one in the same in many ways.

Everything we have been cordially discussing (not always the case) is an expensive wish list.  Not only expensive to implement, but more importantly expensive to support.  If the numbers are not there for people who will use these tools, then it is a losing proposition financially.

 

Follow the money......kind regards

[Jeff Prince]

1 hour ago, VIRTUALENVIRONS said:

If that were only so, it would be wonderful, wouldn't it.  But sadly that is not the case.  There are two driving factors.  The bottom line and "bang for the buck". I suppose they are one in the same in many ways.

Everything we have been cordially discussing (not always the case) is an expensive wish list.  Not only expensive to implement, but more importantly expensive to support.  If the numbers are not there for people who will use these tools, then it is a losing proposition financially.

 

Follow the money......kind regards

 

Nope, Matt is right.

The users should be driving the wish list and the engineers and accountants should be running the feasibility numbers.

Lot's of Vectorworks innovations over the years seem to come from the engineer's desk with little or no user input.  Consequently, lots of users try and reject many of these features because they do not operate intuitively or have some critical missing feature.  Fortunately, that all seems to be changing, slowly.

 

This whole discussion might spark a creative solution with an engineer or business partner that delivers a solution quickly and inexpensively.  Most of these big softwares are cobbled together using different program's building blocks, so why not a walkthrough with gravity and such.  The solution probably already exists and ready to be plugged in with minor adaptation or offered as a companion.

[VIRTUALENVIRONS]

Hello Jeff, you're a little late.

"The needs of the many, outweigh the needs of the few."

 

No one said Matt was wrong. "follow the money".  it would be really nice if every second yearly upgrade was free, wouldn't it.  But, they would go out of business.

I think you missed the basic premise.  The cost of supporting and more critical, the ability to support it for the few.  The wish list tools are not the only tools that are difficult to support.

 

Have a look at this model below.  I built this with 2015 eight years ago.  Although it was well received by VW's, they were quite surprised. 

 

 

,