The International Simutrans Forum

 

Author Topic: Timeline for sidewalk object?  (Read 4330 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Vladki cz

  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 2715
    • My addons, mostly roadsigns
  • Languages: EN, CS
Timeline for sidewalk object?
« on: January 09, 2016, 10:46:09 PM »
Is there a possibility to have different images for sidewalk (Obj=misc, Name=Sidewalk) in different eras? Similar to different city road?

Offline prissi

  • Developer
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 9565
  • Languages: De,EN,JP
Re: Timeline for sidewalk object?
« Reply #1 on: January 10, 2016, 10:14:30 PM »
No, in the todo list is rather the plan to convert the sidwalk object into a proper wayobj, which would allow for different sidewalks (like alley in residecial areas >level 10), transmission lines in idustrial areas, etc. Timeline would be possible too (although with the many building using the sidewalk texture themselves, I woudl be careful.

Offline Vladki cz

  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 2715
    • My addons, mostly roadsigns
  • Languages: EN, CS
Re: Timeline for sidewalk object?
« Reply #2 on: January 10, 2016, 10:23:38 PM »
Sounds interesting, but a sidewalk as wayobj would interfere with trolleybus electrification. Or is there a plan to allow more than one wayobj? (electrification + eyecandy)

Offline prissi

  • Developer
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 9565
  • Languages: De,EN,JP
Re: Timeline for sidewalk object?
« Reply #3 on: January 10, 2016, 10:27:58 PM »
Obviously that would be needed.

Offline Leartin at

  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 1269
  • PAK-DEV P192C
  • Languages: DE, EN
Re: Timeline for sidewalk object?
« Reply #4 on: August 16, 2019, 03:03:54 PM »
*push*

Just wanted to mention that I'd very much like to see this, and I'm wondering if it's still on the to-do-list? (I already do buildings with different sidewalks for different climates and types in mind)
Though I'd like to add something: Do sidewalks have to be the same for the full tile? It would make much more sense if each side of the road gets it's own sidewalk, depending on which type of building is right next to it.

Offline prissi

  • Developer
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 9565
  • Languages: De,EN,JP
Re: Timeline for sidewalk object?
« Reply #5 on: August 17, 2019, 02:39:56 AM »
If there were directional wayobj (which I could enable relaxed overtaking, electricfication only on the outer track side etc.) then different sidewalks on different sides would be possible.

Offline Ters

  • Coder/patcher
  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 5543
  • Languages: EN, NO
Re: Timeline for sidewalk object?
« Reply #6 on: August 17, 2019, 07:24:52 AM »
It would make much more sense if each side of the road gets it's own sidewalk, depending on which type of building is right next to it.
I don't think I've ever seen building type influence sidewalks, unless we are talking about adding sidewalk cafes, which probably would be better as some form of overspilling front image on the building itself. Building density appears to have much more to say. As does traffic density, but that tends to push the sidewalk away from the road, which is difficult to do on a fixed grid like Simutrans has.

Offline Leartin at

  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 1269
  • PAK-DEV P192C
  • Languages: DE, EN
Re: Timeline for sidewalk object?
« Reply #7 on: August 17, 2019, 10:56:25 AM »
I don't think I've ever seen building type influence sidewalks, unless we are talking about adding sidewalk cafes, which probably would be better as some form of overspilling front image on the building itself.

It's more complex than that, though. In reality, you usually get a sidewalk as part of the road, and the building is immediately next to it - in Simutrans-terms, it would be at the edge of the tile. But since pretty much forever it is preached that buildings shall not fill up the entirety of the tile, because it does not look good in the game. Therefore, the basis for a building is usually a sidewalk tile, and you see the sidewalk under the building.
Because there is sidewalk on the building tile, it only makes sense that it would be the same sidewalk as there is on the road tile, since it's supposed to be one entity.

If you think about it this way, can you recall seeing a building next to a road with two different types of sidewalks inbetween? (not seperated by bushes or something)


In P192C, the main seperation would be between industrial buildings and the rest, since industrial buildings have a dark, rough asphalt floor, wheras everything else is climate dependent.





Offline Ters

  • Coder/patcher
  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 5543
  • Languages: EN, NO
Re: Timeline for sidewalk object?
« Reply #8 on: August 17, 2019, 07:23:51 PM »
It almost seems like you rather want the foundation of the buildings to be a continuation of the sidewalk, rather than the other way around.

industrial buildings have a dark, rough asphalt floor
Having a sidewalk with rough asphalt kind of defeats the purpose of a sidewalk. (Although over here, "rough asphalt" is exactly what most sidewalks have, due to frost heaves and low maintenance.)

The building on the far left looks like the one that would most have influence on sidewalks, the middle right would probably just get the sidewalk, while the other two would be disjoint from the sidewalk somehow. The middle left probably wouldn't really require a sidewalk at all.

Offline ACarlotti

  • *
  • Posts: 483
Re: Timeline for sidewalk object?
« Reply #9 on: August 17, 2019, 10:36:29 PM »
If you think about it this way, can you recall seeing a building next to a road with two different types of sidewalks inbetween? (not seperated by bushes or something)
Like this?

I this will be quite common where there a publicly accessible buildings that don't reach the edge of the property boundary (and where the space in between isn't a car park). The property boundary seems like the best analogy for the boundary between tiles in Simutrans.

Offline Leartin at

  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 1269
  • PAK-DEV P192C
  • Languages: DE, EN
Re: Timeline for sidewalk object?
« Reply #10 on: August 18, 2019, 10:14:20 AM »
Like this?
While in streetview there is only one car there, if you zoom out you realize that this strip is used for parking. But yes, like this.

See, sidewalks themself are somewhat inconsistent and a patchwork, but not in Simutrans. So whenever we consider the sidewalk-patchwork the same even though you can see a difference, the same should apply to other grounds. Go down the street to The Grapes and look at that. Strictly speaking, you can see the property line because of how the stones are laid. But it's minimal - it's the same type, same color, and it's about as similar as the mess to the left. Go further down the road to Arbury Fast Fit. Same Idea: Yes, there is a difference, but it's still of the same type. If you squint enough for the sidewalk to be one entity despite the obvious patchwork, the building ground is not destinguishable anymore.
Most of the houses in that street would be residential, The Grapes would be commercial, and they all have paved stone sidewalks. Arbury Fast Fit, which I would consider industrial, does not. A perfect example of what I'm trying to achieve, in a place that you chose. :)

Nearby, you have Castle Park, with it's special sidewalk that continues from the doorstep to the road. But I guess that's an exception, so I won't dwell on it.

The property boundary seems like the best analogy for the boundary between tiles in Simutrans.
Yes, and the building in a city environment would fill it's full tile to the edge, and even go over on the sidewalk with weeds, rain drains and their gutters etc. - That is no good in Simutrans. If you would create graphics like that, it would inevitably lead to buildings where the face is right to the wall of the next building.
Artists know that the actual building cannot be at the very edge of the tile, and for years this was solved by putting the one sidewalk of the pakset on the edge of tiles - not any old random ground. So while you are right about the property boundery, we cannot apply it to the game without solving other problems first. Eg. filling the whole tile with building would not be an issue if there was, for sure, always a road next to it that it can face, and all non-road faces would be an 'inside wall' covered by the next building. This would complicate the building placing- and rotation algorithm a whole lot, and you'd have to throw out all the existing buildings since they would not fit that mentality. A bit radical just to achieve something nobody asked for in the first place.

Oh yeah, and counterpicture here.
I can't say if that was done in one go, but there is no noticable difference between the ground at this hallway and the surrounding sidewalk. Furthermore, you have the tables of the "Naturbackstube", which no, you cannot just have on the actual sidewalk, since people would run into them, and the rotation can't be trusted not to put them in neighbours garden. To the left you will notice that gutters are generally in front of doors. I don't need to say that it would be a bad idea to just have them randomly on the sidewalk, so they need to be on the building tile - surrounded by sidewalk. You will also notice that the building border is not a straight line, since there are expanding elements. You want those to be on the tile, so to get the straight edge, there needs to be some sidewalk. That road is also a main shopping road, it's mostly closed for cars and the sidewalk is much broader than usual, which can only be done if the buildings add extra.

It almost seems like you rather want the foundation of the buildings to be a continuation of the sidewalk, rather than the other way around.
Actually, no. If we talk about wild, unrealistic ideas that are too much work for both artists and programmers to actually do, my pick would be to half the grid. By using p192c-graphics on a 96-grid, the roads would fill the tiles with their lanes, there would not be any sidewalk, and so there would not be any discussion about it.
Which is rather pointless, why should I try to convince you? Even if I was wrong about it being a realistic interpretation of the world, it would still be my artistic interpretation in a comic pakset. If you don't like it, continue to not play it, I guess?

Offline Ters

  • Coder/patcher
  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 5543
  • Languages: EN, NO
Re: Timeline for sidewalk object?
« Reply #11 on: August 19, 2019, 07:35:34 AM »
While in streetview there is only one car there, if you zoom out you realize that this strip is used for parking.
It may be used for parking by at least that one driver, but is it really meant for it? (The bicycles further back counts as something else.) It doesn't seem like a good idea to have to drive up those curbs. The lowered curbs near the camera are clearly for the pedestrian crossings.

Here is a somewhat similar situation clearly labeled as illegal. If you look closely, there is also here a difference between the sidewalk and the ground in front of the building. It is too narrows to park fully inside, which might be what makes this example illegal, but so is much of the area ACarlotti found as well.

Artists know that the actual building cannot be at the very edge of the tile
pak64 does this for urban center buildings (except modern ones, which follow the real-life trend of more open spaces), and it looks fine to mine.

Oh yeah, and counterpicture here.
Excellent example for what I wrote about sidewalks extending up to buildings, and not the other way around, since multiple, seemingly independent, buildings in vastly different styles share the same pavement. Nothing about the building themselves dictate this kind of pavement. It would look just as natural with asphalt. However, it would look ridiculous if the pavement switched between asphalt and this for every other building. Since artists do not control which buildings form next to each other, the choice of pavement should not be under their control at a per-building level. One would need something like pavement zones.

Offline Leartin at

  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 1269
  • PAK-DEV P192C
  • Languages: DE, EN
Re: Timeline for sidewalk object?
« Reply #12 on: August 19, 2019, 12:40:44 PM »
It may be used for parking by at least that one driver, but is it really meant for it?
Exit streetview and look from above, you'll see four cars on the area marked with that style. But I already said that this is an example of different sidewalk in building and road. Which, in case you don't realize, is always possible to do.

Here is a somewhat similar situation clearly labeled as illegal. If you look closely, there is also here a difference between the sidewalk and the ground in front of the building.

Yes, there is a difference. And yet, it looks both like reddish paved stone. Must be a coincidence. Not sure what parkinglaws have to do with anything, Simutrans does not allow parking anyways.
EDIT: Looked at it on streetview. They are quite different, but no more than the two different sidewalks you also see in the picture, the photographer stands on another different type of sidewalk next to a very dark patch. The white building after the brick building has only one sidewalk from building to road. To be honest, I'm not used to sidewalk being that much patchwork, is that England specific?

Quote
Excellent example for what I wrote about sidewalks extending up to buildings, and not the other way around.
Sure, and did I ever claim differently?
Still means the sidewalk is one unit, though. So unless you plan on changing the sidewalks in the building graphics depending on the sidewalk those buildings are next to, or want to restrict buildings with a wrong sidewalk from spawning for "realism", I really don't get your point.

Quote
it would look ridiculous if the pavement switched between asphalt and this for every other building. Since artists do not control which buildings form next to each other, the choice of pavement should not be under their control at a per-building level. One would need something like pavement zones.
There are some false assumptions here.
First, where do you get the notion that each building could have it's own sidewalk? So far, talk was about timeline, climate, building type and building level, nothing about individual buildings.
Second, the building types form zones with the same building type next to itself, so if sidewalks are the same for a type, those zones double as 'pavement zones'. Climates are zones as well, and while someone could abuse level differentiation (by making each level different), if used properly it's just a destinction between inner city and outskirts, definitelly zones too.
Third, there is a cluster factor, so artists can indeed choose which buildings are next to each other, and different sidewalks for different clusters would make sense to me (though are clusters even used in most paksets?)

The only thing where constant switches between pavement and asphalt are really likely are differntiation by timeline, we already know from changing cityroads how that will look. Yet we have changing cityroads, and it's not a bad thing.
« Last Edit: August 19, 2019, 12:51:46 PM by Leartin »

Offline Ters

  • Coder/patcher
  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 5543
  • Languages: EN, NO
Re: Timeline for sidewalk object?
« Reply #13 on: August 22, 2019, 12:08:39 PM »
So unless you plan on changing the sidewalks in the building graphics depending on the sidewalk those buildings are next to
Yes.

First, where do you get the notion that each building could have it's own sidewalk?
Two buildings next to each other may be from different phases in the timeline. Although this mess applies to the timeline of the city road as well, it is a mess I'd like to see less of, rather than more of.