Відео

@@wsmeans Yeah, I have a maybe-cringe philosophy of me-from-the-future being a different collegue with independent understanding of code and project status from today's me. Sounds strange, but hey, anyone who understands what they wrote a year ago without extensive comments may throw a rock at me).

@@Talktodiv Well, I thought the vibe is suited, because with the technology disscussed in the video, out torso becomes independent from our legs and vice versa. Leading to a situation when potentially many behaviours from top part of the body can be combined with many behaviours from lower part of the body, and our controller getting an unparalleled freedom. What is sort of presented by the picture of indian gods, or at least that's my assotiation.

@@davitdon2963 I never had such a problem, so I can't help you). Anyways, there is a discord channel of mine, with a better chat and ability to send picrures, I believe we can help you troubleshoot that. Another resource is my video about combos I believe, it's in the failed mechanics museum series, there I describe and show my pipeline for working with animations. Another thing that can help you is the recent video about splitting torso animations from legs animations, there I discuss methods to procedurally modify .res animations and doing it with import scripts. But still, that's all on the godot side, if you did something in 3d software that made your file "indigestible" by godot, I wouldn't be able to help. Only one extra advice with "power down and power up" vibes - try to use glb instead of fbx and see what will happen, maybe it's the godot's screwed up fbx importer.

@@ElGabroVero One day but not too soon. It's definitely on the list, but in a "when I run out of ideas" cathegory.

@@PointDown You are so kind man! Thx for the answer!

Well, I'm learning to youtube in the process :D. Maybe one day I'll get a chance to remaster them when Godot 5 hits several years later).

I have trouble understanding the term. Quick google session showed some batman games, but I haven't played any. Do you have some concrete attributes to list? This way I'll be able to tell.

@@PointDown the main attribute of it is that player's melee attacks have light aim assist, as if they were pulled by a magnetic invisible force towards the enemy. Like you know how locking mechanism works on many melee combat systems? In that systems all attacks are directed towards a target enemy and you circle around that target. But in freeflow combat system you can move around, rotate, run, jump in any direction, but when attacking an enemy, the system will use a raycast to check if there's a target in the direction you are pointing and direct the attack towards that target. If you are surrounded by 4 targets, if you direct your attack towards one of them, the raycast will detect it and play the attack animation towards that specific target. Other games that use it are Assassins creed series. Here's a link to a video that explains it with more technicality ua-cam.com/video/Y63C3wxnFwo/v-deo.html

@@edzu2771 Aah, I see. Witchers have a similar system also. Neat idea, one video, eazy mechanic to implement, nice title to release, I am definitely writing it down. I'm now busy with enemies series for at least a month and several videos more, but after it ends I plan to release some singles, inverse kinematics, maybe camera, maybe your idea. I believe the transition to be smooth, as in latter videos of enemies series there will be an episode dedicated to crowd combat and the whole mechanic of "standing around dangerously but not killing the player".

@@PointDown Yeah, Witcher as well as Shadow of Mordor have the same combat system. Honestly, I do like it, it feels more modern than the locking system. If you decide to eventually tackle it, I found a free resource that implements it in Unity; might be useful. ua-cam.com/video/p7uqAH6PrW0/v-deo.html

@@SvenHeidemann-uo2yl Yup, of course, the next video will be about practical implementation of described concepts a I'll share the code.

Warms my heart, stranger, one day, one day).

@@AgnisNeZvers Hoi, Nezvers! Haven't seen you in a while, hi). Idk, I just brew abstractions untill I don't have "this is meh" feeling when I look at how my control flow cycles are looking. Also now I have a small community and a brewery channel in there, helps immensely, it saved me countless nerv cells during the torso dividing epos). Considering grasping the concepts, idk, I predict this video will gain little traction, and deservedly, because it's a fucking static tedtalk again showing nothing... But it's kinda here to not have the next vid a monstrocity, and there, with many examples, I think the concept will be illustrated quite nicely, mark my words).

@@PointDown I watch every your video, not always from the same account ;)

Souls have that strafing behaviour when camera is locked, so, supports, just isn't implemented by me :D. Your problem is in fact two problems in a trenchcoat: how to get to having 8 animations for movement and how to have a state with dynamic animation parameter. Aaaand... Let me be clear, the first problem I personally would solve with having 8 animations done for you. No matter what I tried, every time I experimented with blendspace2D to mix W and A movement animation into a WA strafing, I got a gibberish poopwalk of some sort. It seems theoretically it can work, but only if your animations aren't anim-stock-stolen, as mine, but carefully crafted together, synchronized and thought out for blending in advance. Which, if you can afford, I don't see why can't you afford another 4 animations for authentic diagonals to eliminate a need for blending altogether. If you, however, insist on using blendspace to synthesize your diagonal movements, the latter evolutionary stages of this controller have access to animation_tree technologies. We quickly dip a fingertip in there in a video about animation pipelines. I grew to hate this technology, but hey, it's blendspace compatible, so you might find it useful. Vid : ua-cam.com/video/Fsa2wxyQvzM/v-deo.html. Now with that out of the way, I assume we have an access to 8 animations. The second problem is actually easy AF, just refactor your animator calls a bit. Instead of direct call of animation_player.play("smth"), create a dedicated call in the animator - something like react_on_changes(). This method will be called when some piece of logic understands that the animation needs to be changed, but doesn't want to take the responsibility to change it (and that's right because it's the animator system's responsibility). Then just just call this method from your run state whenever input vector "changes type". One thing I'd also advise you to do in that case is to divide the input vector into two per-axis inputs, one for A-D and one for W-S. This will make your strafe type defining routine cleaner and you'll get an access to ellipse-type strafing family some rare games use, where your diagonal strafes don't have exact 45` angles between them, can be usefull for some mecha games etc. Then if you'll choose blenspace - think of something yourself, if you'll choose having 8 animations, I'd have a Dictionary of string:string pairs and entries like "W : run_forward", "WA : run_wa_strafe" - ie translated diagonal codes into animations names. Hope that helps ^_^.

I do, but not in the nearest future, more like an idea to create a vid when there is nothing else to create. We got a huge update on IK part with 4.3 btw, skeleton position overwriting become eazier.

One day, but not too soon.

🎉thank you​@@PointDown

Vector (0,0,0) has no length and can't be used as an axis to drscribe rotation.

In my own game - sure!) I first started to question roll playing Witcher III, Geralt's sidestep was so smooth... But nice sidesteps need at least 3, but better 4 animations, and Mixamo doesn't have even one... Plus, you know, "sidestep" isn't so searched on youtube as a "soulslike" as a keyword. But I too love sidesteps more than rolls.

Rolling is the ways of the gods

Damn... I didn't know I had a Cheese Throw here, but now I do, thank you, stranger. *unironically commits cheese_throw renaming*

Свеженько с рендера, ток описание дописал, без запланированного релиза). Ну, отчасти, потому что релиз был запланирован, на 12.08 (-_ - ;)

For u're goal i would suggest another EXPERIMENTAL approach derived from: "Active Ragdoll / Physics Animations in Godot 4.0": ua-cam.com/video/0MHY2TDeMLM/v-deo.html In short for your case: 1 AnimationLibrary You have 3 rigs. - 1 rig doing the lower body-animation - 1 rig doing the upper body-animation - last rig with the character-mesh copying both rigs

The animations are unique two, they were manually clicked all before the library, and then the library itself was "for some reason". Idk actually if making library unique achieves something, isn't that just a dictionary? Anyways, I already achieved the split&save workflow you suggest via a tool script and already am editing the video on new controller evolution ^_^. I love the ragdoll video too, actually and often advise to watch it :D, but for now I think that's an overkill. For now I have a single skeleton, animations are split by bones, and we can finely adjust some bones positions with Skeleton3D methods for overriding the pose.

It's a known issue, description contains the link. Sadly, as always, I found out after the time was lost).

@@PointDown I just submitted two PRs for an issue several people spent several days to solve without success. I feel your pain.

The libraries are unique in the project. It isn't named, but it was imported as a library, and named library is broken also.

​​@@PointDownSorry, I somehow missed the part where you showed the library was unique. My animations were part of the dummy I had imported, so I just saved it as a file from the animation player that was automatically made. I should probably have mentioned that I loaded the resources and made both libraries unique, after that I made the running animation unique and then the changes I made didn't affect the other, you probably have to make both running animations unique if you don't want either to affect the base animations from the library. This probably shouldn't work like this, this is just what I found in the 10 min of testing I did.

The system evolves in the 3d episode of the series, in which I talk more broadly about actions and interpretation layers, but short answer - if your crouch is toggleable, that means enter_crouch and exit_crouch are two different actions. Similar to the weapon action mapping (one button - attack, roll attack, plunge attack and several weapons), there can be a locomotion mapping, that maps crouch_toggle action into two different commands depending on the model state. This code is in model. Input just gets the toggle_crouch command and forwards it, model thinks. Thanks for the kind words ^_^.

I mean, I just imagine the ideal way to do something in my opinion and look for ways to replicate.

Русский акцент. Thanks!) :D

Yup, I'm currently working on it. There's a pit also, as animation and library is a resources, we cant enable and disable them in-resource, our changes are changing it. To make what you and I talk about, we need some sort of tool script, that will put an animation library into a player, but also will make it local before it applies track disabling changes. There is also a bug-based problem on this path: github.com/godotengine/godot/issues/82421

@@PointDown Oh wow I was unaware of the limitations. I've not yet reached this point in my own project, but now I feel motivated, Ill start looking into this problem too. Im rooting for you success.

@@PointDown Just a thought I had reading your reply, but one way that could potentially solve it both ways would be to have an animation library be stored in a variable on the leg anim player (which would be the resource taken from the torso anim player) and the script would create a copy of the animation data into the leg anim player before applying the mask. That way you can still benefit from only having to change animations on one animation player (and not having to recopy it to the second one every time), but still have that mask be applied automatically. I'm not sure if this would be affected by that issue you mentioned, but since the second anim player would just be copying the data it got from another resource, maybe that could work (?). Still not an ideal pipeline, obviously, but might save some hassle even if it's pretty dirty, idk.

@@matheuslima4093 Yeah, basically it. I already solved that, first half of the solution is a custom PostImport script for saving torso and legs into different animations. And the second part is a one-time-run tool script for dividing an existing library into two libraries of split animations. My discord channel already has some code and I can't share pictures here, so you can check it out there. Or wait till the next video and I'll share it anyway with conventional methods of explain+github ^_^.

I actually secretly in love with it and it was my original idea when I saw the lengths I need to go to make blend tree work. I might go with it later, especially for face animations, if any, I just don't see how the standard blend tree can even withstand advanced facial animation. The way it needs to be done is yes, a custom import script, maybe something like a custom bone map that automatically skips, or better even, routes the bones to different animators depending on the bone name. And the pipeline then becomes the first pipeline with existing investments and best returns, making it a "plausible" in my book :D.

@@Andserk Idk about Godot's built-in multiplayer exactly and I kinda hate it. But in a vacuum, I don't see why the method you use for animations even plays any role in multiplayer. I am still biased towards the technologies I use, so I'll throw an argument for inplace animation: separated movement data. On a server things are often skipped, and your player very well can be just a sphere. That sphere "doesn't have a pose", it only has its movement data, which if stored separately, is already easily incorporated into algorithms.

It works perfectly fine with the enemy and the code is almost the same with just the class_name changed from EnemyResources to PlayerResources

Probably some strict typing. I tend to name my classes and type the field, and I also debated between several namings during the series. There are also some funny moments with Move class where I refactored it from player to humanoid and then changed my mind and refactored back :D.

You totally can and that was the goal of the video!)