15 replies to this topic

[DPRoberts]

They (whoever they may be) say necessity is the mother of invention. I thought to myself -- What better way to prove some worth around here than build something that appears to be a bit of a challenge? What could make the forums quit griping to poor Mike? - "Your program could be wonderful and you've probably worked your ass off for this but dude what about potbunkers? I recently saw it's now $35 for this game. Well, I don't know who would pay that for a game without potbunkers."

I am trying to quiet annoying potbunker forum guy. Now, my potbunker picture is simply showing proof of concept. There are several small issues with the photo that I believe can be rectified with Course Forge. However, I will need one (or several) that possess Course Forge to clarify for me. It is possible that I am over reaching on my discovery but it appears that I have built something that may be of value to the community. I am willing to share what I have created in a pictorial explanation as well as a video. As I do have some small life outside of my office/computer, I will utilize the favorite stock answer of when I will put those together as "soon". I obviously could be persuaded to expedite the process and forge on with this explanation should it have some value to others around here. It is also possible that a CF guru will tell me why my idea won't actually work and spoil all my fun.

Problems with photo:

1. Texture of bunker rim does not blend with surrounding fairway - it is possible that the designer would not want it to do so but if he/she did, I am assuming that course forge fairways are actually meshes wonderfully plopped on top of the terrain heightmap. In that manner, they actually take a material map versus a texture paint. The colors I have chosen for the fairway and bunker rim are actually the same file but appear differently because one is texture painted (splat map?) and the other is a material. I don't know why that occurs. (resolution differences? - at the moment, with only a few weeks of 3D under my belt, I am sorely deficient in material knowledge, in due time...) Therefore, I believe those could be blended better. Same for the tiling inset in the bunker. Remember just the prototype here.
2. The bunker base appears odd - once again, Course Forge to the rescue? I believe when construction of a bunker occurs, you obtain finer triangle control and can contour the bunker to appear normal at the base. What we are after in the design of the potbunker is a sharp edged rim, right?
3. Fairway terrain meeting bunker looks a little odd. Does fairway obtain increased contour control as well? If not, if problem #1 color discrepancy can be improved, it won't be too bad.
4. This is on a flat surface and is only round. I am building a contoured one as well that is lower at one end. In the end, I can show you what I did and you can make it look however you like. My thought is building 2-3 versions that are easily scaled, distorted, and rotated to fit 95% of most people's needs. Others who like to get their hands dirty, will have no issue customizing it.
5. I'm assuming my base will actually be a bunker spline. Can the bunker lip be designated as "0" in CF? Thereby not creating a lip at the base? I think you could still hide it if there was not a way to eliminate the bunker lip.

And without further ado...Potbunker goodness, with and without Rickie, bird's eye, in the trench and with steps so annoying potbunker forum guy doesn't ask how you would get in and out of it. Enjoy!

[tlvx]

That fanciful font is painful to try to read. Granted, I am using my mobile.

Edit: All good now. Nice post.

[Kablammo11]

Mpags, you really are willing to walk the extra mile - and I unreservedly salute your commitment in this matter.

Creating a pot bunker 3D object and implanting it into the terrain, however, is not the way to go, imo. Suffice to say that CF meshes are exactly the same as your pot bunker: 3D objects in their own right (made to espouse the elevation of the terrain), and teaching these meshes to adopt a specific shape (and the lip texture to map properly) is a much more efficient and quicker way to create pot bunkers. 

 

2 days ago, in the private forums, Mike posted an image of the latest pot bunker development being pursued for CF. I must not post the link to this confidential information here in the public forums (I believe however that Mike himself should do that). But it is looking very promising, that much I can say, and is a lot more elegantly integrated into the surrounding environment than your experimental pot bunker.

So, I can assure you that 1) the Devs are on it and 2) it's going to look great.

 

18 carat Gold Star for your valiant efforts, nevertheless. 

[wim1234]

hoo, great news k11, so we are going to get potties at troon, yay.

[Ian]

I'm not certain wim, but I believe Troon has had proper toilets for quite a considerable length of time

[Dazmaniac]

hoo, great news k11, so we are going to get potties at troon, yay.

 

Seeing as PP will be creating a virtual representation of the course for Sky Sports and their coverage of the Open Championship, it would look a bit odd if pot bunkers weren't part of the design. I can only re-iterate what K11 stated previously

 

So, I can only assure you that 1) the devs are on it and 2) it's going to look great.

[DPRoberts]

Sorry about the font tlvx. Hopefully, that is fixed. I figured there was a plan. I was just spitballing here. Not unlike some "shimonkorrugation" I've seen around here. As a wise man once told me, unfortunately, if you can think of it, it has probably already been invented. He was a real motivator, obviously. Or maybe he just thought I was an idiot. I think the mesh object was the easiest to make something uniform and quick. Another idea that I did not post that is likely more seamless is "terrain within a terrain." I have no clue on performance impact and wanted to know if you can outline shapes on a second terrain with CF. I'm attaching that image as well. It is elevated and textured slightly differently just for demonstration purposes.

Interestingly, from a more practical perspective, I would say beyond just creating something that appears to be a potbunker, do we actually want to play from these? I believe my Foresight GC2 cannot read greater than 60 degree launch. Will I even be able to get out of one of these. Once the potbunker becomes available, I am assuming Mike is also building the "elective drop." Then, we get something like the 1300yd error. One solution leads to another problem to be solved...In real life, most people try their best 2-3 times to hack out of these and then just chuck the ball out and to the side. Unfortunately, the secondary problem of the potbunker is the reality of putting a bunch of unrecoverable trenches in the terrain. I much prefer a potbunker with a bailout but not all designers agree.

[Acrilix]

PP will certainly need to take another long look at the AI once pot bunkers are in the game!

[garynorman]

Mpags, you really are willing to walk the extra mile - and I unreservedly salute your commitment in this matter.

Creating a pot bunker 3D object and implanting it into the terrain, however, is not the way to go, imo. Suffice to say that CF meshes are exactly the same as your pot bunker: 3D objects in their own right (made to espouse the elevation of the terrain), and teaching these meshes to adopt a specific shape (and the lip texture to map properly) is a much more efficient and quicker way to create pot bunkers. 

 

2 days ago, in the private forums, Mike posted an image of the latest pot bunker development being pursued for CF. I must not post the link to this confidential information here in the public forums (I believe however that Mike himself should do that). But it is looking very promising, that much I can say, and is a lot more elegantly integrated into the surrounding environment than your experimental pot bunker.

So, I can assure you that 1) the Devs are on it and 2) it's going to look great.

 

18 carat Gold Star for your valiant efforts, nevertheless. 

 

PP have posted a pic of said bunker on their facebook page... 

 

https://www.facebook...?type=3

[Kablammo11]

That so, eh? Facebook is public domain, right? Did I mention I thoroughly loathe social media? Or would never go anywhere near them? Or would nuke them and everybody inside them if I were a nuclear power? Which, to my dismay, I'm not.

Ah well, let's publish this image properly, the way it's meant to be done right. There you go:

 

 

Fairway lip needs to be less steep and more shallow, I'd say, and the pot bunker spline could do with one or two more edges between vertex points.

[Jperkules]

Thought I would chime in here and say 2 things"

1)  Pot Bunker looking good

2)  Social media sucks

[Dazmaniac]

The PP Facebook posting strikes again, lol.

 

Mike posted that pic in the private testing forum for a reason I guess in relation to CF. Not sure why he bothered seeing as it is now out in the public domain via Facebook.

 

Might as well have just created a thread in the public forums here. Unless the phantom PP Facebook updater has posted something to Facebook he shouldn't have, lol.

[M Rose]

I'm curious if this is done via an extrusion method or some other process.

 

Either way this should help me in getting the Royal Melbourne bunkering to look more authentic.... while those aren't pot bunkers per se, they have vertical lips and sharp edges which may benefit from this method.

[DPRoberts]

Well, I am glad I spurred a little discussion. Boy, it sure would be fun if I could experiment a little. Oh, well, until I know somebody, who knows somebody...Rickie and I will continue just continue on re-inventing things. Oh, wait, what?? What's going on here? Tara? Someone likes orange so I hear...

[DPRoberts]

What was I thinking? I do know someone. Just going to have to go above Mike on this...now where is his number?...Mpags at 17 with much more potential and hair getting an award from a friend I call "Jack." Others may know him as Mr. Nicklaus or "The Golden Bear."

[M Rose]

So after listening to the twitch podcast, it sounds like the process will be mostly automatic. I guess Course Forge will have its own specialized tool for this. I wonder how much adjustment will be allowed to be made to the lips / walls etc..