Frooxius
commented
3 years ago This isn't something we can just "expose" because it doesn't actually exist in the IK. Pretty much everything that is adjustable is already exposed. A few things don't have editors (like stretch curves), but other than that there's nothing that'd be hidden.
I'm not sure if we'd implement angle clamps like that, since it tends to go a bit against the design of the IK that we're using, where you should instead tweak it so it matches your body well and the limits then come from the limits of your actual body - if your body can't move certain way, then your avatar can't either as a result. Adding clamps would cause things to likely misbehave more than not.
Is your tweak request related to a problem? Please describe.
This is mostly related to a combination of IK issues and stuff that I want to change but can't currently (but can adjust on finalIK in unity)... such as adusting the maximum angle my spine can bend, changing priorities on certain bones, and several other options that are absent in NeosVR's VRIK component.
Describe what would you like tweaked
The ability to adjust maximum angles for each spine segment, define my own target priority list (such as prioritizing the head above the hips or even prioritizing hands above anything else), weights on different trackers (those are currently driven with no way to override), the ability to force certain points to rotate 1:1 with their target (both enable and disable), and generally just more control over the VRIK component in general that I'm almost certain is available internally but just disabled in-game. (also adjusting how much things twist more than just the forearms, I want to adjust my legs twisting too!)
Describe alternatives you've considered
1677 would somewhat mitigate the need for some of this, but not entirely, though those would definitely compliment this issue.
Additional context
I believe in the process of this, #1120 should also be fixed along with this since some of the settings that would be exposed would be settings that would fix said issue anyways, #1120 however is NOT the only motivation, I also could be dead wrong about Neos's IK being a port of finalIK to the frooxengine and that could leave this issue dead in the water.