Godot: 3D Editor - Zoom and Orbit.

[rredesigns]

Operating system or device - Godot version:

OS: Manjaro 17.0.1 Gellivara
Kernel: x86_64 Linux 4.9.24-1-MANJARO
CPU: Intel Celeron G1840 @ 2x 2.8GHz
GPU: Mesa DRI Intel(R) Haswell Desktop

Godot 2.1.3.stable.official

Issue description:
Using the 3D editor proves to be incredibly obnoxious when a huge mesh (or even something just big) is present in the scene.

The zooms become useless for placing small objecs, because the closer you get, the less the view zooms. That makes, for instance, placing vegetation on a large terrain almos imposible.

Orbiting also has a similar issue. The radius the view uses to orbit around is way too broad, so orbiting around a patch of grass is again almost imposible.

Considering the new gles3 release will receive a lot of attention on the 3D engine it has to be fixed ASAP, or it might dissapoint pretty much anyone trying for anything but a very minimal FPS.

I'm not sure if report this as a bug, because I'm not sure it is a bug either. Is this the intended behavior?

Also, I suggest implementing something similar to Blender navigation. Use the selected object or the object under the mouse pointer as pivot point and zoom/orbit target.

Steps to reproduce:

• Load a big terrain mesh (scale x50 in Blender).
• Load a small plant mesh or other prop, then try to operate on it (scale 1 in Blender).

Link to minimal example project:
I can provide one if needed.

[ghost]

See #8616

[Zylann]

Orbit is not well adapted for huge scenes, but you can get used to it somehow (I had to work on huge terrains too). Before freelook gets merged, you should be able to select an object small enough above the terrain, zoom on it, then continue by panning with Shift+MMB, and zoom back a bit to get faster.

[rredesigns]

Nice contribution there @Zylann.

I was very happy with Godot's Blender-like navigation but this is such a messed up way to edit a level. I see the FPS navigation has been marked for v3, so may I assume this won't make it to v2?

[HummusSamurai]

@rredesigns Don't quote me on this as I'm not aware of all 2 -> 3 changes, but I did a quick look at the PR and I don't think there'd be a problem backporting it if approved.

I'm not aware of any specific discussion about this being (or _not_ being) in 2.x, so that is yet to be seen.

[Zylann]

The feature doesn't rely on 3.0 stuff, so it can certainly be backported (I never did a backport yet though)

[akien-mga]

Fixed with #8616 I suppose.