Jump to content

Unable to walk through house


beli Lorefield
 Share

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 2239 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

I've been building a house in blender, however I cannot walk through the house. 

Yes, I've read the tutorals.. I've tried changing it to prim and still nothing works.. here are the screen shots.. 



Any help would be appreicated.. I can upload it someone if somoene wants to take a look.. just tell me where :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The short answer is that you need to make a custom physics model for your house.

 

You can either use flattened cubes that do not touch or planes that do not touch.  There are lots of posts on this in the archives and by searching Google.

 

Here are some screenshots of a building I just finished recently. The OPEN part has physics you can walk into. The big solid cube is used on the closed area of the building as it is just for outside looks and not "livable" :D.

 

Hope that helps some. The reason why the finished photos looks "flipped" is that I made a mirror version. Nothing important about that. Just didn't want to be confusing. That was the photo I had already taken.

 

Note how the cubes do NOT touch each other.  You may want to analyse your physics model before upload. You may want to break the model into pieces for oftentime lower land impact.

 

LOTS of variables. The beta grid is your friend :D.

 

NOTE: I don't make the most elegant physics models. Others do better (I do make elegant maps *wink*) but this gives you an idea. There are videos up on YouTube also that explain the general process.

 

PS. In the case of houses windows are typically ignored as they will have glass in them. So the only places that need to have openings are the doorways.  IF I would have been concerned about walking on the roof "correctly" I would have made separate cubes for the area around the perimeter and then one for the roof - ceiling. I wasn't, so I didn't.   Sure others will chime in here with more info. There is plenty to learn.

 



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Belli,

Can't help it but I have the impression you kept your building as one large mesh.

If so I would recommend you to break it in pieces for following reason.

1. you're physics will end up too complex and they're quite lag creating stuff.

2. You can use more texels on your mesh and have a better appearance of you textures afterwards

3. floors are typically done in a separate mesh, will make life a lot easier if you need to make holes for staircases etc.

4. Very good chance that the Li of the building will end up a lot cheaper as a whole then one huge mesh item.

When you make physics shapes want want to keep an eye on following.

1. Sorry to say so but I don't see any advantage in using cubes as physics shapes. Why would you use 12 triangles if you can do it with 4.

2. Agree that windows are in most cases neglected, unless you really want to jump out of your windows. Use triangles in physics shapes wise.

3. Personally never had problem with planes "touching" each other and yes I did make some large house already. Combine verts, you can use n-gons and triangles for physics shapes for sl to reduce number of triangles. (ngons = a face with more then 4 sides)

(for rl modelling you really don't want ngons in your model and no or very few triangles depending for which engine you model, sl is another story)

4. If you make a physics shape, make sure you make it as large as the most extreem (x,y,z) coordinates. The shape will position itself perfectly where it should be. If not you will have it off position when uploaded with all related problems.

5. Analyse... depends in most cases it is not necessary, in case of holes you sometimes need it to be able to pass through the hole sometimes not. Depends the situation and is best tested on aditi.

Hope this helps, you can always contact me inworld if you like.

Good luck,

Zed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 2239 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...