Re: WAD Conversion sketch

Uffe Friis Lichtenberg (uffefl@diku.dk)
Mon, 18 Mar 1996 11:47:35 +0100 (MET)

Date: Mon, 18 Mar 1996 11:47:35 +0100 (MET)
From: Uffe Friis Lichtenberg <uffefl@diku.dk>
To: quake-editing@nvg.unit.no
Subject: Re: WAD Conversion sketch
In-Reply-To: <199603162059.VAA05489@colossus.nero.uni-bonn.de>

On Sat, 16 Mar 1996, Bernd Kreimeier wrote:

> I thought again about the recent discussion of the
> possibility of a WAD conversion, and I recognized that
> I forgot one important detail. IMO the 2D BSP and a
> REJECT lump w/o special effects contains all information
> necessary to create a valid Quake BSP.
>
> We do not need a new BSP/REJECT builder for conversion.

Well, I tend to disagree. You do need additional information, as you
say in your 'WAD conversions sketch', like plane-bundling (trivial),
vertices (trivial), hull generation (not so trivial?), etc. But firstly
you do need a 3D BSP tree: remember all the floors and ceilings are
planes in Quake, and must thus partition the rest of the polygons in some
way. This could lead to a number of problems if not handled right.

My guess is that wad conversion would be easiest to implement if you had
two utilities: one to convert a wad to an intermediate file format
(perhaps the same used to distribute Quake levels) specifying polygons
(with textures) and entities, and another tool to build a valid .BSP from
this file format (ie. a 3D BSP generator, as well as texture reference
resolving and so on.)

Having it split up into two utilities would also make .DXF ->
intermediate file format, .3DS -> intermediate file format, etc. a lot
easier to manage, as we would be able to use all sorts of excellent 3D
editors already available to edit Quake levels, and let the second
utility to all the hard work afterwards.

But of course, it wouldn't be trivial to create a utility that builds an
efficient BSP tree. But it wouldn't be any more difficult than doing it
in 2D was.

> Any such converted map will still have only one floor
> and ceiling per z coordinate, or BSP and REJECT would not
> be sufficient for conversion. Nonetheless, the advantages
> seem to be worth the effort.

But where do you find wads that fulfil this requirement? I can't think of
a single one. (If I understand you right.)

> I refrained from posting a lengthy but still sketchy
> proposal to the list. If you are interested, you will
> find a pointer on the Quake Developers Support page,
> at
>
> http://www.nero.uni-bonn.de/~dn/q-sup/

Regarding the legal issues:

Maybe iD's licence doesn't explicitly forbid the creation/distribution of
add-on levels for Quake, but personally I feel that we should respect
iD's work and not bring out any fully-fledged editor before the
registered version becomes available. But perhaps I'm alone in this?

Zonk,
Uffe. [uphfe]
uffefl@diku.dk