I am making a railroading game, and it would be very helpful if I could have a collision model slightly different than the visual mesh.
Consider this old railroad track:
[image]
It’s 3 blocks, with 1x1 rails set 4 studs apart and a mesh to make the rail look 0.7 studs wide.
[image]
Here is the same track, but using meshes. Instead of a 1 stud tall railbed, its now 1.5 studs, and instead of a 1 stud tall rail, I’ve used meshes to scale the rail down to 0.5 studs high. Overall, the same trac…
When set to a mesh ID, that mesh is used as the collision mesh.
If the collision mesh is complex, a pop-up appears warning the user that it might cause performance issues.
So I was looking at how roblox does calculation for collisions and I managed to find an old thread on why exact decompositions aren’t likely to happen.
Thinking about ways to improve it got the gears turning in my head, and it hit me pretty quick: What if there was a new asset type called “CollisionMesh” (or something similar) where the user could upload a mesh that has under or equal to say, 650 triangles. The mesh would be limited to low triangle count, but would always have an exact decompos…
In the end, do we really need a new property or object to achieve separate visual and physical mesh components? Seems pretty simple to me to - as we’ve seen - create two separate meshes that each either specialize in visuals or physics. The improvements to memory with this feature would be relatively insignificant.
4 Likes