Fix new vehicle upgrades #3261
Fix new vehicle upgrades #3261
Conversation
| unsigned short usModel = m_pVehicle->GetModel(); | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| unsigned short usModel = m_pVehicle->GetModel(); | |
| unsigned short usModel = m_pVehicle->GetModel(); | |
| usModel = g_pGame->GetModelInfo(usModel)->GetParentID() || usModel; |
This do same thing, but less code.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This do same thing, but less code.
Your expression will produce 1 all the time.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
if (auto* pModelInfo = g_pGame->GetModelInfo(usModel); pModelInfo && pModelInfo->GetParentID() != 0)
usModel = static_cast<uint16_t>(pModelInfo->GetParentID());
Would be better I guess.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Lol. I forgot about this in c++. Ty @tederis
| @@ -1435,7 +1435,7 @@ void CVehicleModelInterface_SetClump() | |||
| { | |||
| // Loop through all vehicles and find the vehicle id that this interface belongs to | |||
| CModelInfo* pModelInfo = NULL; | |||
| for (int i = 400; i < 612; i++) | |||
| for (int i = 400; i < 80000000; i++) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It adds more than one parts. Here you specified only the GTA vehicle ids for (int i = 400; i < 612; i++), but it was not checking when there were more ids, so I increased the number. This is a temporary solution. I could not connect the deatmach file to the multiplayer:sa file to capture the parent id. I did something like this for him and it worked.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It is extremely inefficient and can lead to freezes when spawning vehicles.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How else can I prevent it? I already thought of this I put it as a temporary solution and it worked
There was a problem hiding this comment.
From what I can see, there is two possible solutions. The first one is to use one of the associative containers to link model ptr to a model ID at the game's start. And the second one is to store model ID in CBaseModelInfo class(but it will require reverse engineering skills). Maybe there is something else, it requires additional study.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@tederis
I updated it again, can you check it? I tested it and it worksworks
| // We add both left and right for some reason seems to be SA doing it | ||
| bReturn &= supportedUpgrades.m_bBonnet_Left; | ||
| bReturn &= supportedUpgrades.m_bBonnet_Left_dam; | ||
| int modelRequestIDParent = g_pGame->GetModelInfo(usModel)->GetParentID(); |
|
|
||
| // No nitro or other upgrades for planes | ||
| if (vehicleType == CLIENTVEHICLE_PLANE) | ||
| return false; | ||
|
|
||
| if (us == VEHICLEUPGRADE_NITRO_5X || us == VEHICLEUPGRADE_NITRO_2X || us == VEHICLEUPGRADE_NITRO_10X || us == VEHICLEUPGRADE_HYDRAULICS) | ||
| return true; | ||
|
|
||
| bool bReturn = false; |
| if (auto* pModelInfo = g_pGame->GetModelInfo(usModel); pModelInfo && pModelInfo->GetParentID() != 0) | ||
| usModel = static_cast<uint16_t>(pModelInfo->GetParentID()); |
| size_t vehicleIndex = (usModel - 400); | ||
| size_t upgradeIndex = (usUpgrade - 1000); | ||
|
|
||
| const VehicleUpgradeSlots& slots = vehicleUpgradeSlots[vehicleIndex]; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is unsafe since potentially usModel(and usUpgrade) can be extented in future and you will get out of the range access problem. Maybe you should use at method instead of [] to properly handle with the help of exceptions? Or at least add assert for the early diagnosis.
|
|
||
| const VehicleUpgradeSlots& slots = vehicleUpgradeSlots[vehicleIndex]; | ||
| size_t slotIndex = upgradeIndex / 32; | ||
| uint32_t slot = slots[slotIndex]; |
This PR resolves issue #2198 by fixing vehicle upgrades on the client for added vehicles (engineRequestModel).
Video:
https://streamable.com/zngjok