>>38640855Not even an issue of effort, dude. It is impractical. You are suggesting adding new features, which would need to be modeled separately.
There are ways to implement it rather easily. Something similar to the Source engine’s bodygroups. Making separate shiny models. Having models of the new details glued to the originals
All of these have issues.
>Option 1Employing bodygroups means that all the models will need to be broken up. Replaceable parts, and parts that are the same in both versions. Then, two versions of the replaceable parts will need to be made, one of which will be the modified shiny version. Lastly, everything will need to be set up so they’ll merge flawlessly.
Depending on complexity, this MIGHT be a major space saver compared to option two, but it could also be an unnecessarily complex version of it.
>Option 2Separate models would just be a waste of space.
>Option 3More models on the screen = more models that need to be rendered = more lag.
Even if the details AREN’T modeled, this just means new texture data for all the modified parts. The added complexity will mean the compression algorithm won’t be able to make the new shiny textures as data-dense as the original textures.
