# Objective
Yet another PR for migrating stuff to required components. This time,
cameras!
## Solution
As per the [selected
proposal](https://hackmd.io/tsYID4CGRiWxzsgawzxG_g#Combined-Proposal-1-Selected),
deprecate `Camera2dBundle` and `Camera3dBundle` in favor of `Camera2d`
and `Camera3d`.
Adding a `Camera` without `Camera2d` or `Camera3d` now logs a warning,
as suggested by Cart [on
Discord](https://discord.com/channels/691052431525675048/1264881140007702558/1291506402832945273).
I would personally like cameras to work a bit differently and be split
into a few more components, to avoid some footguns and confusing
semantics, but that is more controversial, and shouldn't block this core
migration.
## Testing
I ran a few 2D and 3D examples, and tried cameras with and without
render graphs.
---
## Migration Guide
`Camera2dBundle` and `Camera3dBundle` have been deprecated in favor of
`Camera2d` and `Camera3d`. Inserting them will now also insert the other
components required by them automatically.
# Objective
A big step in the migration to required components: meshes and
materials!
## Solution
As per the [selected
proposal](https://hackmd.io/@bevy/required_components/%2Fj9-PnF-2QKK0on1KQ29UWQ):
- Deprecate `MaterialMesh2dBundle`, `MaterialMeshBundle`, and
`PbrBundle`.
- Add `Mesh2d` and `Mesh3d` components, which wrap a `Handle<Mesh>`.
- Add `MeshMaterial2d<M: Material2d>` and `MeshMaterial3d<M: Material>`,
which wrap a `Handle<M>`.
- Meshes *without* a mesh material should be rendered with a default
material. The existence of a material is determined by
`HasMaterial2d`/`HasMaterial3d`, which is required by
`MeshMaterial2d`/`MeshMaterial3d`. This gets around problems with the
generics.
Previously:
```rust
commands.spawn(MaterialMesh2dBundle {
mesh: meshes.add(Circle::new(100.0)).into(),
material: materials.add(Color::srgb(7.5, 0.0, 7.5)),
transform: Transform::from_translation(Vec3::new(-200., 0., 0.)),
..default()
});
```
Now:
```rust
commands.spawn((
Mesh2d(meshes.add(Circle::new(100.0))),
MeshMaterial2d(materials.add(Color::srgb(7.5, 0.0, 7.5))),
Transform::from_translation(Vec3::new(-200., 0., 0.)),
));
```
If the mesh material is missing, previously nothing was rendered. Now,
it renders a white default `ColorMaterial` in 2D and a
`StandardMaterial` in 3D (this can be overridden). Below, only every
other entity has a material:
Why white? This is still open for discussion, but I think white makes
sense for a *default* material, while *invalid* asset handles pointing
to nothing should have something like a pink material to indicate that
something is broken (I don't handle that in this PR yet). This is kind
of a mix of Godot and Unity: Godot just renders a white material for
non-existent materials, while Unity renders nothing when no materials
exist, but renders pink for invalid materials. I can also change the
default material to pink if that is preferable though.
## Testing
I ran some 2D and 3D examples to test if anything changed visually. I
have not tested all examples or features yet however. If anyone wants to
test more extensively, it would be appreciated!
## Implementation Notes
- The relationship between `bevy_render` and `bevy_pbr` is weird here.
`bevy_render` needs `Mesh3d` for its own systems, but `bevy_pbr` has all
of the material logic, and `bevy_render` doesn't depend on it. I feel
like the two crates should be refactored in some way, but I think that's
out of scope for this PR.
- I didn't migrate meshlets to required components yet. That can
probably be done in a follow-up, as this is already a huge PR.
- It is becoming increasingly clear to me that we really, *really* want
to disallow raw asset handles as components. They caused me a *ton* of
headache here already, and it took me a long time to find every place
that queried for them or inserted them directly on entities, since there
were no compiler errors for it. If we don't remove the `Component`
derive, I expect raw asset handles to be a *huge* footgun for users as
we transition to wrapper components, especially as handles as components
have been the norm so far. I personally consider this to be a blocker
for 0.15: we need to migrate to wrapper components for asset handles
everywhere, and remove the `Component` derive. Also see
https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/issues/14124.
---
## Migration Guide
Asset handles for meshes and mesh materials must now be wrapped in the
`Mesh2d` and `MeshMaterial2d` or `Mesh3d` and `MeshMaterial3d`
components for 2D and 3D respectively. Raw handles as components no
longer render meshes.
Additionally, `MaterialMesh2dBundle`, `MaterialMeshBundle`, and
`PbrBundle` have been deprecated. Instead, use the mesh and material
components directly.
Previously:
```rust
commands.spawn(MaterialMesh2dBundle {
mesh: meshes.add(Circle::new(100.0)).into(),
material: materials.add(Color::srgb(7.5, 0.0, 7.5)),
transform: Transform::from_translation(Vec3::new(-200., 0., 0.)),
..default()
});
```
Now:
```rust
commands.spawn((
Mesh2d(meshes.add(Circle::new(100.0))),
MeshMaterial2d(materials.add(Color::srgb(7.5, 0.0, 7.5))),
Transform::from_translation(Vec3::new(-200., 0., 0.)),
));
```
If the mesh material is missing, a white default material is now used.
Previously, nothing was rendered if the material was missing.
The `WithMesh2d` and `WithMesh3d` query filter type aliases have also
been removed. Simply use `With<Mesh2d>` or `With<Mesh3d>`.
---------
Co-authored-by: Tim Blackbird <justthecooldude@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
# Objective
Another step in the migration to required components: lights!
Note that this does not include `EnvironmentMapLight` or reflection
probes yet, because their API hasn't been fully chosen yet.
## Solution
As per the [selected
proposals](https://hackmd.io/@bevy/required_components/%2FLLnzwz9XTxiD7i2jiUXkJg):
- Deprecate `PointLightBundle` in favor of the `PointLight` component
- Deprecate `SpotLightBundle` in favor of the `PointLight` component
- Deprecate `DirectionalLightBundle` in favor of the `DirectionalLight`
component
## Testing
I ran some examples with lights.
---
## Migration Guide
`PointLightBundle`, `SpotLightBundle`, and `DirectionalLightBundle` have
been deprecated. Use the `PointLight`, `SpotLight`, and
`DirectionalLight` components instead. Adding them will now insert the
other components required by them automatically.
# Objective
- I've seen quite a few people on discord copy-paste the camera code of
the first-person example and then run into problems with the pitch.
- ~~Additionally, the code is framerate-dependent.~~ it's not, see
comment in PR
## Solution
- Make the code good enough to be copy-pasteable
- ~~Use `dt` to make the code framerate-independent~~ Add comment
explaining why we don't use `dt`
- Clamp the pitch
- Move the camera sensitivity into a component for better
configurability
## Testing
Didn't run the example again, but the code is straight from another
project I have open, so I'm not worried.
---------
Co-authored-by: Antony <antony.m.3012@gmail.com>
# Objective
Use the new `AccumulatedMouseMotion` and `AccumulatedMouseScroll`
resources in place of mouse event handling.
I left the `mouse_input_events` example alone, since by its nature it
demonstrates event detection.
Fixes#14066
## Testing
Ran each example locally before and after changes.
# Objective
A very common way to organize a first-person view is to split it into
two kinds of models:
- The *view model* is the model that represents the player's body.
- The *world model* is everything else.
The reason for this distinction is that these two models should be
rendered with different FOVs.
The view model is typically designed and animated with a very specific
FOV in mind, so it is
generally *fixed* and cannot be changed by a player. The world model, on
the other hand, should
be able to change its FOV to accommodate the player's preferences for
the following reasons:
- *Accessibility*: How prone is the player to motion sickness? A wider
FOV can help.
- *Tactical preference*: Does the player want to see more of the
battlefield?
Or have a more zoomed-in view for precision aiming?
- *Physical considerations*: How well does the in-game FOV match the
player's real-world FOV?
Are they sitting in front of a monitor or playing on a TV in the living
room? How big is the screen?
## Solution
I've added an example implementing the described setup as follows.
The `Player` is an entity holding two cameras, one for each model. The
view model camera has a fixed
FOV of 70 degrees, while the world model camera has a variable FOV that
can be changed by the player.
I use different `RenderLayers` to select what to render.
- The world model camera has no explicit `RenderLayers` component, so it
uses the layer 0.
All static objects in the scene are also on layer 0 for the same reason.
- The view model camera has a `RenderLayers` component with layer 1, so
it only renders objects
explicitly assigned to layer 1. The arm of the player is one such
object.
The order of the view model camera is additionally bumped to 1 to ensure
it renders on top of the world model.
- The light source in the scene must illuminate both the view model and
the world model, so it is
assigned to both layers 0 and 1.
To better see the effect, the player can move the camera by dragging
their mouse and change the world model's FOV with the arrow keys. The
arrow up key maps to "decrease FOV" and the arrow down key maps to
"increase FOV". This sounds backwards on paper, but is more intuitive
when actually changing the FOV in-game since a decrease in FOV looks
like a zoom-in.
I intentionally do not allow changing the view model's FOV even though
it would be illustrative because that would be an anti-pattern and bloat
the code a bit.
The example is called `first_person_view_model` and not just
`first_person` because I want to highlight that this is not a simple
flycam, but actually renders the player.
## Testing
Default FOV:
<img width="1392" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/assets/9047632/8c2e804f-fac2-48c7-8a22-d85af999dfb2">
Decreased FOV:
<img width="1392" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/assets/9047632/1733b3e5-f583-4214-a454-3554e3cbd066">
Increased FOV:
<img width="1392" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/assets/9047632/0b0640e6-5743-46f6-a79a-7181ba9678e8">
Note that the white bar on the right represents the player's arm, which
is more obvious in-game because you can move the camera around.
The box on top is there to make sure that the view model is receiving
shadows.
I tested only on macOS.
---
## Changelog
I don't think new examples go in here, do they?
## Caveat
The solution used here was implemented with help by @robtfm on
[Discord](https://discord.com/channels/691052431525675048/866787577687310356/1241019224491561000):
> shadow maps are specific to lights, not to layers
> if you want shadows from some meshes that are not visible, you could
have light on layer 1+2, meshes on layer 2, camera on layer 1 (for
example)
> but this might change in future, it's not exactly an intended feature
In other words, the example code as-is is not guaranteed to work in the
future. I want to bring this up because the use-case presented here is
extremely common in first-person games and important for accessibility.
It would be good to have a blessed and easy way of how to achieve it.
I'm also not happy about how I get the `perspective` variable in
`change_fov`. Very open to suggestions :)
## Related issues
- Addresses parts of #12658
- Addresses parts of #12588
---------
Co-authored-by: Pascal Hertleif <killercup@gmail.com>
