this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2025
1088 points (98.9% liked)
Programmer Humor
23849 readers
1650 users here now
Welcome to Programmer Humor!
This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!
For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.
Rules
- Keep content in english
- No advertisements
- Posts must be related to programming or programmer topics
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Well yeah, we have a character model for the giant demon and the giant demon has a huge use case.
A scarf? That's a model extension. Either you're asking me to create a whole new character with a scarf baked into the mesh that will deform weirdly as the character moves, or you're asking me to implement an accessory-anchor system all for the sake of a scarf (albeit other accessories might use this new framework) which will then need a physics/cloth sim to even look half good.
It... shouldn't be that difficult?
It's literally adding another piece of gear, like gloves, breastplate, helmet, etc. Now just repeat the process for a scarf.
A character model is made up of "slots". The head slot, the chest slot, the legs slot and so on. When you equip a piece of gear, it replaced the body mesh in that slot. So a helmet model replaces the head, a cuirass replaces the chest, I think you follow. If you want a piece of gear to only partially cover the character, you need to create a new slot. But gear is easy to implement, since it conforms to the character's "body" and uses the same animations.
Now add a scarf. First, you need to create a new slot, so that equipping the scarf doesn't replace the head or chest. And then comes the question of animations. Are you going to have the scarf just lay flat against the character? That's the easiest approach, but it'll be completely static, look like ass and probably clip through at least some of your armors. You could use a cloth sim. If your scarf mesh has enough polygons, it'll look the best. But it's also computationally expensive, especially if you go with mesh-based collisions for maximum eye candy. And what types of objects can the scarf collide with? Just the character, or world objects as well? Every object the scarf collides with will create a whole new slew of physics calculations, all the time, dropping your performance in the gutter like a mob snitch. Or you could create a bespoke rig for the scarf. It'll look better than a static object and won't have a notable performance hit, but won't look as good as the cloth sim, especially since it won't collide properly with whatever else your character is wearing. And you'd need to create matching animations for literally every animation the character can possibly do. Every. Single. One. Your animators would want to murder you. And they will, when you come back to them a little later and say "Okay, real impressed with the scarf, now let's make 5 different ones. And I want capes."
TL;DR: It's not just another piece of gear.
Yes it is. It's identical to adding a cape.
TL;DR: skill issue
I didn't think I'd have to point out that adding a cape is a similar pain in the ass. Dynamic objects like scarves and capes are not the same as a shirt. If your character framework isn't set up for them from the start, implementing them is not as simple as "just plop it in there bruh".
Yeah, skill issue.
Right. Go add capes that aren't just rigged to the existing skeleton to Jedi Outcast or Morrowind, then come back and tell me how easy it was.
Already done.
Soft-body physics aren't hard.
In fact, I challenge you to do it yourself so you can see exactly how easy it is.
Took you three minutes to implement soft body physics in the Quake 3 engine, huh? Show your work.
Why are you mentioning the Quake 3 engine?
Cause that was the task. Add soft body physics to Jedi Outcast, which is running on a modified Quake 3 Arena engine. Or create a new animation rig and redo all of the character animations. And you did it in three minutes. So show your work.
Where is it mentioned that is that task?
Also, where are you getting 3 minutes from?
Since you were so insistent that it's simple, I told you to go and implement non-rigid capes to two old games that never had more than a rudimentary physics engine, and report back just how easy it was. And seeing how your reply, three minutes later, started with the words "Already done," I can only assume that you did it. So do tell, how easy was it?
"It's simple" didn't imply usage of game engine nor time.
I also never said simple. I said easy.
I challenged you by trying it yourself to see how easy it is. Have you tried doing it yourself? I'd wager not, and probably win said wager.
Here's a 5 minute tutorial in how to do it in Godot to get you started: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GURxA8MvkkM
Now, reply to me with further excuses for why it's "too hard."