Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Figure out what to do with non-working GeometryInstance LOD properties #40784

Closed
alexwbc opened this issue Jul 28, 2020 · 9 comments
Closed

Figure out what to do with non-working GeometryInstance LOD properties #40784

alexwbc opened this issue Jul 28, 2020 · 9 comments

Comments

@alexwbc
Copy link

alexwbc commented Jul 28, 2020

Godot version:
from 3.0 and beyond

Issue description:
Godot don't support LoD, Godot knows it while still show the vestigial menu in [GeometryInstance > Lod]: the option is there just for troll early adopters (who are mostly backfire in bad press on how "not ready" Godot is it)

Steps to reproduce:
Shock violently the lod_min_distance and lod_max_distance: watch Godot's icon laugh at you as nothing happen.

Minimal reproduction project:
create a new MeshInstance > Mesh > New Cube Mesh > GeometryInstance > Lod

@Calinou
Copy link
Member

Calinou commented Jul 28, 2020

Note: LOD will be implemented in Godot 4.0, see godotengine/godot-proposals#692.

I thought about hiding the LOD properties from the editor, but I'm not completely sure if it's a good idea. Third-party LOD assets are already able to make use of those properties to better integrate LOD systems with the rest of Godot.

the option is there just for troll early adopters (who are mostly backfire in bad press on how "not ready" Godot is it)

We don't implement features to troll people in Godot. 😉

@Calinou Calinou changed the title Lod feature missing Figure out what to do with non-working GeometryInstance LOD properties Jul 28, 2020
@alexwbc
Copy link
Author

alexwbc commented Jul 28, 2020

I thought about hiding the LOD properties from the editor, but I'm not completely sure if it's a good idea.

A not working option, it's definitely not a good idea; to have the feature is more important, it's a critical one in term of performance; and performance is tightly tied with engine adoption.

Third-party LOD assets are already able to make use of those properties to better integrate LOD systems with the rest of Godot.

Which will return lot of frustration from unwary/early adopters before realizing that either the feature is broken somewhere or not actually implemented (their asset? their pipeline, the engine itself?)

We don't implement features to troll people in Godot. 😉

Not implementing features is to be expected, but leave the vestigial option there is to troll 😭

@fire
Copy link
Member

fire commented Dec 23, 2020

There are still non-working LOD properties, but auto lod is implemented.

@vlad0337187
Copy link

it's told in tutorial:

GeometryInstance based objects have a visibility range that can be defined

I use Godot 3.2, but can't figure out, is it related for this issue or not.

Can currently GeometryInstance objects be hidden or not ?

@fire
Copy link
Member

fire commented Mar 4, 2021

I recommend we remove the old properties. Since the old lods never worked. I don't know how to design a place holder for a feature that doesn't work.

@Calinou
Copy link
Member

Calinou commented Mar 4, 2021

I recommend we remove the old properties. Since the old lods never worked. I don't know how to design a place holder for a feature that doesn't work.

Removing properties is considered a breaking change as add-ons may be relying on them, and scripts setting those properties will also break. We can however print a warning and emit a node configuration warning when the value is modified from its default setting. For example, this is done for GIProbe's compress property here: #41471

@fire
Copy link
Member

fire commented Mar 4, 2021

Oh, I was more thinking about 4.0. If we don't remove it from 4.0 it'll be unchangeable until 4.1 / 4.2 etc.

@Calinou
Copy link
Member

Calinou commented Mar 4, 2021

Oh, I was more thinking about 4.0. If we don't remove it from 4.0 it'll be unchangeable until 4.1 / 4.2 etc.

We'll have to see how visibility dependencies will be implemented in 4.0, but it's likely they'll be using different properties (or at least different property names).

@akien-mga
Copy link
Member

Fixed by #85437.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants