It's feasible for field models, I think, or maybe not, I have some difficulties with textures.
Differences between PSX and PC field model:
Skeleton: on PS we need to translate to bone size before the animation rotation. On PC we need to translate after the animation rotation. In fact the bone structure is just shifted, a tiny example:
PS:
root
|
- 0 (size = 0, parent = root)
| |
| - 3 (size = 0, parent = 0)
| |
| - 4 (size = -9.19355, parent = 3)
|
- 1 (size = 0 parent = 0)
|
- 2 (size = -6.45161, parent = 1)
PC:
root
| |
| - 2 (size = -9.35878, parent = root)
| |
| - 3 (size = -8.8098, parent = 2)
|
- 0 (size = -6.5589, parent = root)
|
- 1 (size = -10.3193, parent = 0)
The size values are not exactly the same, but in fact
PC_bone_size = PS_bone_size / 31.0f approximately.
Parts: On PC version there are only triangles, on PS version there are quads too, but it's possible to convert with some algo I think. Like skeleton data, the position values are different between PC and PS, but you can found equivalent values with the same formula as above:
PC_pos = PS_pos / 31.0f.
For the texture coords, you need to divide them by the texture width and height to obtain the same values as in PC version.
Animations: On PC there are a root translation and a list of rotations, on PS this is approximately the same mechanism.
Textures: This is different here, the textures are loaded into the vram in the PS version, I have not yet fully understand the system, so I can not talk too much.
Light values and scale: The colors for light are in the
model loader in the PC version, and in the
BSX file for the PS version.
If I'm not clear, tell me.