Expansion of available Enum.PartTypes

Feature Requests Engine Features
, , ,
#1

In light of the greatest update of 2023 so far (Improvements to Part Shape & Size), it would be great if the ball kept rolling in this direction to expand upon the currently available Enum.PartTypes –

This would work positively for Roblox, its developers, and the users that it houses:

  • centralized/normalized part variants, adding consistency across different physical spaces on the platform
  • less rbxassetid:// bloat from developers uploading trivial meshes that should come included in vanilla Roblox
  • better-optimized experiences, in that clients won’t have to load the aforementioned^ assetId’s when loading into an experience
  • streamlined building experience, regardless of level-of-detail of building style
  • ease-of-access for developers who don’t have access to modeling software like blender, maya, etc
  • improved geometry against union-made meshes
  • improved security against union-made meshes (as unions are prone to corruption)

I personally suggest 4 new Enum.PartTypes:

image
image791×178 24.1 KB

  • Enum.PartType.Hemisphere: rbxassetid://13920561606
  • Enum.PartType.Cone: rbxassetid://13920359000
  • Enum.PartType.Pyramid: rbxassetid://13674573736
    – This suggested Enum is the focal point of this feature request, as it’s very, very impractical to create this in vanilla Roblox by combining four CornerWedgeParts to either:
    — create a (corruption-prone) union with poorly-optimized geometry
    — create a model with scaling issues
  • Enum.PartType.CornerCylinder: rbxassetid://13920406420
    — makes rounding off corners easier

These PartTypes all complement what currently exists in the Enum.PartType library, and does not conflict with any of them – they simply add more versatility without the hassle of the workarounds done to achieve them.

18 Likes
#2

Another strong argument for adding extra variants is more precise collision. Triangular meshes can’t always replicate their geometrical physics accurately, especially if they are rounded like a sphere or cone, because they have finite sides.

Here is a clear demonstration of the problem using OP’s cone mesh. Notice how the cone spins around and then abruptly stops near the end. This is not accurate!

Albeit unrelated, another thing I would love to see would be extra variants for CollisionFidelity, as sometimes people may want to make their own modelled sphere with more vertices (Bigger size) that acts physically the same as any other ball part.

5 Likes
#3

Please! I and my friends mostly use my own meshpack which contains low poly cylinders and spheres as well and most shapes we use in productive work.
I don’t know why roblox won’t add gamechanging features, why not increase light range? why not allow emission maps? why no light attenuation?

6 Likes