View Issue Details

IDProjectCategoryView StatusLast Update
0000267Gameplay + OpenGL[All Projects] Featurepublic2017-03-05 11:43
Assigned To 
Status closedResolutionsuspended 
Platformx64OSWindowsOS Version10
Summary0000267: Support `skyrotate` or Similar to the Software Renderer (or for Every Style Skybox in the Hardware Renderer)
DescriptionRight now there appears to be no way to change the rendering orientation of the skybox in the software renderer or, according to the wiki, the hardware renderer for skyboxes that are not of the Quake 2 style.

It would be nice to have control over the orientation; at least on the axis perpendicular to the map plane in the software renderer and any axis in the hardware renderer for any skybox style.
Steps To ReproduceN/A
Additional InformationThis would be especially helpful for the SkyboxViewport actor when controlled by an ActorMover that is set the face the actor towards the direction of travel.
TagsNo tags attached.



Graf Zahl

Graf Zahl

2017-02-14 09:57

administrator   ~0000576

It I read this correctly, what you need is to change the angle of the skybox viewpoint actor. You can do that with ACS and SetActorAngle.



2017-02-15 14:19

reporter   ~0000608

Last edited: 2017-02-15 14:20

View 2 revisions

Am I correct in assuming then that the function SetActorAngle is not overriden by the flags 2, 4, and 8 of ActorMover; or that they will make the adjustments relative.

Graf Zahl

Graf Zahl

2017-02-15 14:22

administrator   ~0000609

No idea how this works precisely, but if you want to see a skybox connected to an ActorMover, in Daedalus there's a map that is using this for an extended scripted intro for its third hub. You may want to look at that for reference.
Graf Zahl

Graf Zahl

2017-02-24 12:20

administrator   ~0000751

I have no idea what I should do with this.


2017-03-05 11:43

reporter   ~0000868

Well, I could have been imagining it, but it seemed that not using the Face Direction of Movement flag on the ActorMover use to make it look more fluid, but now it looks the same, so I guess this request isn't really needed, so it should be closed.

Issue History

Date Modified Username Field Change
2017-02-14 07:45 6XGate New Issue
2017-02-14 09:57 Graf Zahl Status new => resolved
2017-02-14 09:57 Graf Zahl Resolution open => no change required
2017-02-14 09:57 Graf Zahl Note Added: 0000576
2017-02-15 14:19 6XGate Status resolved => feedback
2017-02-15 14:19 6XGate Resolution no change required => reopened
2017-02-15 14:19 6XGate Note Added: 0000608
2017-02-15 14:20 6XGate Note Edited: 0000608 View Revisions
2017-02-15 14:22 Graf Zahl Note Added: 0000609
2017-02-24 12:20 Graf Zahl Status feedback => closed
2017-02-24 12:20 Graf Zahl Resolution reopened => suspended
2017-02-24 12:20 Graf Zahl Note Added: 0000751
2017-03-05 11:43 6XGate Note Added: 0000868