Minecraft Forums

Quote from amerem»

Sweet so lol what are you guys using to do models cause I would like to try my hand at it lol I kinda wish we had a rendering system like the custom steve mod personally haha if I knew how to do it id make my own train mod haha

anything that does .java models is fine. Personally I would recommend an older version of MCAnimator that supports .java or if you have a little cash to spare (and intend to do a lot of modeling for MC), BDCraft Cubic is an amazing tool.
The current rendering system of TC will only support .java for trains, and that would probably need a massive overhaul before we could even think about branching into obj support. (not to mention obj is a horrid format in mc, can't even animate it unlike .java)
Theres an issue pull about custom trains on the 1.7 github with more information.

For tile entities, like rails, I believe we use .obj through a TESR, I haven't gotten too far into that part, too much non-working stuff to bother getting in-depth with the parts that are working, lol.

Quote from amerem»

For an updated render I meant something like This but for trains, this uses the bullet engine on the physics side I think someone said, however maybe a similar method could be used for the trains and rails in the future?

This sort of thing would be rather unnecessarily advanced for the level of detail that TC uses, especially because the kind of animations that would be used could easily be covered in a .java graphic. The level of detail not so much, but you don't want that level of detail because it would clash with the other content of the mod.

Quote from Xenoniuss»

But blue... In Zora no Densha we have animated buttons/levers aswell as panthographs, and those are all .Obj... So yeah... I'm 100% sure it's possible... ^^

The way Zora explained it to me, assuming I understood correctly, most of those animations in ZnD are covered by moving individual .obj parts to create an illusion of animation after render, this is not actual model animation but rather programmatic object animation.
This sort of thing would not work without redesigning TC on a large scale because TC was designed for trains to only use a singular model file with inbuilt animations, and that sort of multi-object rendering will go far beyond just simple filetype support, since it would change a number of variables and calculations that define positions, rotations, placement, etc. Not to mention the differences that would be between rollingstock and trains.

Quote from amerem»

Yeah I meant something more along industry standard though not .obj lol Edit: I fixed all my java related issues after a good break and some food lol

Well you also have to remember nothing about minecraft is 'industry standard' I mean the game's engine is designed specifically for .java (.json in 1.8+), unless you're throwing in a massive amount of rendering methods and basically making your own model rendering system that can interact with the game's render system, other formats just aren't compatible with the engine.
B3D I have heard is another supported format, but I've never actually seen it used....

Long run though, with any API or IDE, without significant modification (and sometimes even with it), the further away from the native format you go, the more it will degrade performance, and given how sloppy TC's code is, that's an important aspect.

That all being said, the project is open source, so if someone does want to submit support for this sort of thing, then it's an option, but it's not important enough, or useful enough for that matter, for it to really be a priority even after release.

I myself happened to figure out how to compile it and yes there are some bugs, one in particular I noticed with switch tracks and passenger cars, the cars (Even though connected in a train) would rotate towards the side of the switch track and then once past would straighten up, this was while having a train stay on the straight part of the switch track.

So seeing that it DOES work on 1.7.10 (although the bugs that are being ironed out) it is by FAR not dead.

Quote from InuYasha86000»

I myself happened to figure out how to compile it and yes there are some bugs, one in particular I noticed with switch tracks and passenger cars, the cars (Even though connected in a train) would rotate towards the side of the switch track and then once past would straighten up, this was while having a train stay on the straight part of the switch track.

So seeing that it DOES work on 1.7.10 (although the bugs that are being ironed out) it is by FAR not dead.

There is another issue related to this, which is the current one we are trying to iron out. Oddly enough they are both carried over from 1.6.4, it's just a lot more prone to actually happening in 1.7.10. But thankfully the error list is a lot shorter than even what it was on 1.6.4.
Actually every known error right now was carried over from 1.6.4, they are just a lot worse in 1.7.10.

Quote from amerem»

lol thanks but thats not what I meant I meant actuallt importing traincrafts source into a workstation (without crazy errors)

This is mostly to the fault of forge, for whatever reason they don't setup the importing correctly for eclipse anymore, I mean the default build path is the friggin eclipse folder for pitty sake (this should be fixed in TC at least...), almost like they are trying to force everyone into intelij.
I personally was using intelij before I even came to minecraft modding (I started java in Android Studio), but we've had a number of devs that use eclipse that likely had the same issues, Nitroxide as a good example.

You will likely need JDK 8 (JDK, not java, they are different and it does matter), I think there are some parts of TC that were built for newer versions of JDK, for whatever dumb reason (it should be JDK 6 because MC didn't move to JDK7 until 1.8, but it works so whatever).

Another thing to keep in mind is that there are project imports and gradle imports, both are an option, and for whatever weird reason sometimes people have an easier option with one over the other, so you may need to try both.

Any help beyond that you will have to ask Nitro, because this isn't really my area.

Quote from EternalBlueFlame»

I just tried out your TC-5 branch . looks great ! .

Quote from soccerguy3»

I just tried out your TC-5 branch . looks great ! .

This is for version 1.7 ?

Quote from Kreatifchk»

This is for version 1.7 ?

It's the 1.7.10 source EternalBlueFlame is working on . I just compiled it to check his progress and I must say , it looks awesome !

so im guessing there are no official releases for 1.7.10 for this mod? (betas and full releases)

Quote from amerem»

HAHA I managed to get it into eclipse importing from github is so much easier lol so what all needs looked at or fixed? Also when should I try to add a new train?

Edit: also are there any plans to setup the system so traincraft can have 3-d replacers for railcraft track? just wondering cause that might be simple enough for me to do lol

Most of what needs to be fixed is cosmetics, like issue #95, right now we're in the closed beta stage once more because we ran out of game breaking errors that we know of, we're trying to be sure we got all of them so we can have a clean release with no problems for the community, and @Nitroxyde seems to be fixing them as fast as he finds them, so most of the errors from this are only in the discord for a short period.
So aside from keeping up with that rapidfire error cannon in discord, your main error list is still the github: https://github.com/EternalBlueFlame/Traincraft-5/issues

You can try to add new content whenever you like, assuming you want to do it yourself, but a large portion of the code is going to get reorganized and reworked after release, so after RC2(Release Candidate 2) would be the best time to add new content since we'll have opportunity to assist and the code should be easier to modify, and read for that matter.

As far as 3D replacements for railcraft, its not really so much of a 3D replacement as a version of the railcraft track that works with, and looks like, our own rails. There are already a number of these in place, although nowhere near enough to replicate all the functionality of railcraft.
Seeing as most of the work from that is just simply imported from railcraft awkwardly, and then an .obj model thrown into TESR, at the moment I wouldn't say it's any more or less difficult than adding a new train.