#76 posted by echos on 2018/09/09 17:11:04
@khreathor: that was my original plan, but i thought those were the engines everyone was already using. so it didn't make me feel too bad about forcing an engine choice on them.
quaddicted tells you qs is a recommended engine, but look at how bright that screenshot is... jeez. that's not how quake was suppose to look. i'm not taking their advice after seeing that! :)
https://www.quaddicted.com/quake/recommended_engines
Folio
#77 posted by echos on 2018/09/09 17:19:07
i'm not here to show off, the peanut gallery will probably pick apart my stuff and say it's no good just to troll me at this point! i'm the black sheep quake p1mper now.
i have made a lot of modern looking counter-strikey stuff lately. my quakey stuff is much older and looks similar to id or zerstorer or beyondbelief.
#74
#78 posted by Kinn on 2018/09/09 17:20:54
nobody really expects me to create and release monsters that don't work in any engine
So are you saying you're trying to do something that requires features that aren't even in FTE and/or Darkplaces?
Posted #78 I Meant
#81 posted by Kinn on 2018/09/09 17:30:24
Kinn You Might Be Rright.
#83 posted by Shambler on 2018/09/09 18:04:51
But even if so, I don't think untraceable anons should be making the similarly toned accusations. At least if there is disagreement you can be identified to answer to.
#84 posted by F.U. on 2018/09/09 18:05:33
exactly why i didn't post my folio, thanks for proving me right dipshits. typical forum troll bs.
And The Same Applies To You Echoes.
#85 posted by Shambler on 2018/09/09 18:06:49
#86 posted by khreathor on 2018/09/09 18:19:59
Yeah, further discussion is counterproductive.
Just make your models for FTE with md3 or iqm.
Also Chillo already remade all Quake monsters, we have few shamblers and grunts from other artists too.
exactly why i didn't post my folio
Well if you have top notch portfolio, it will defend itself.
If you can't pull off better models than what we have (from Chillo etc.) then it's a waste of time imo.
Kinn's Post Deleted At His Own Request.
#87 posted by Shambler on 2018/09/09 18:57:39
Woo, Late To The Party
So quakespasm has had a slow gradual creep toward more detail, thankfully it's been handled fairly well so far.
My concern regarding adding x new model format to QS would be modellers bringing models that are way over-the-top in level of detail.
The concern is that this would make the pixel density of the map textures look stupid.
For maps to be consistent with the models, we would need to use high def textures and would need to start including environmental assets in our maps. It could quite easily get out of hand.
Some kind of poly-count restriction is still needed IMO. Alternatively a workflow / tools that can be leveraged better to bring modellers in.
Quake Engines
When I first came back to Quake around the time I released Q-Deck I was still using DirectQ. I loved that engine. I moved over to Fitz and Mark_V sometime after when I started getting errors loading my maps, I started seeing engine limitations.
Now I pretty much have transitioned to Quakespasm. It's feature set has matched many of the things I enjoyed in Mark_V (the weapon view model being large like winquake, engine speed, extra menu features etc)
QS has surpassed it though as it has added a cool low res pixel looking mode with r_scale, decent controller support and Mark_V seems to take about 30 seconds to boot up whereas QS is instant.
I'm still waiting on good splitscreen support though, that's definitely the holy grail for engines. I know FTE has it but that engine doesn't have the ease of use of MarkV OR QS.
@echos
#90 posted by R00k on 2018/09/14 07:16:14
Your fiend is top quality! That video just freaked me out!!
Ok, but honestly, there is no quake 1 engine that can handle or do it justice; I mean in a real in-game scenario. Multiple enemies, rockets, particles, physics etc...
Seriously, if iD Software wants to make a singleplayer campaign for QuakeChampions, they should def give you a call. Or better yet, call them.
It's not that your work isnt great, it's just that,
it doesnt fit quake1. Thats like trying to remake minecraft with 24bit textures and curved surfaces.
I hope you find someone to help you remake quake in the unreal engine or qchamp's (where it belongs) I'd love to see that fiend in a dark alleyway :)
Edit:
#91 posted by R00k on 2018/09/14 07:36:05
Well, that wasnt your model i assume. oh well.
@R00k
#92 posted by Spike on 2018/09/15 04:10:41
He got ip-banned from posting after getting lynched by the terrafusion crowd, so don't expect a response from him here.
You can find him on irc if you need him.
If You Mean Echoes.
#93 posted by Shambler on 2018/09/15 10:53:11
He hasn't been ip-banned from here at all.
I edited two anon posts that were abusing him, edited Kinn's post on request as it was quite inflammatory, and also edited another abusive post from echoes under another name. This is just to 1. stop anon trolling, and 2. keep the discussion civilised.
I haven't been following the discussion itself.
Okay Apparently Marking As Spam Blocks IP.
#94 posted by Shambler on 2018/09/15 11:03:07
So unmarking echoes inflammatory response under "FU" alias, so hopefully the ban is reversed??
#95 posted by metlslime on 2018/09/15 17:29:04
Oh yeah, IPs are blocked if you flag spam unless the post is by a registered user. This is for the days when we only used it for true spam by spammers and not questionable posts from community people. I guess I need to separate that out at some point. In the short term you could register an account to get around it.
#96 posted by metlslime on 2018/09/15 17:29:47
And unflagging the post would clear the IP block , correct.
Not Getting Banned If You Spam Shite.
#97 posted by Kinn on 2018/09/15 22:04:20
Sounds pretty reasonable to require someone to have an account for that little perk. Currently I don’t think there’s any advantage in having an account beyond looking more legit.
...
#98 posted by echos on 2018/09/16 10:06:17
the 2 posting crap at me were clearly Kinn and/or khreathor, if you want to find out just check ip logs. was it an honest mistake i got banned? shambler was siding with kinn that i'm some kind of liar or don't know anything. why were the other posts edited and only mine was marked as spam? why not edit all posts, or mark all as spam? the one specific way that results in me banned and not the others was taken, and it took more effort to do it that way.
@rook, it's not my model but i like it too. i was just trying to show what's possible and that there are others like me who want to ruin quake by putting nice looking things in it. i have already put my models into fte, dp, and ue4, they look very similar in all three. ue4 is better in some ways, but it's mostly due to how much easier it is to make things for that engine. it's pretty much bare-metal here, coding GLSL shaders by hand for example instead of a node based shader editor w/ drag/drop UI. things could be better and there's lots of room for improvements. Shader editors, PBR materials, blendshapes, lots of things that would make life easier or improve the looks.
for the little babies who got mad at me for saying i didn't like that bright picture of quake: i think you're a llama if you play quake on fullbright mode with no shadows in it, we would consider that cheating back in the day.
it's right up there with wearing all-black skins to hide in the shadows so nobody sees you in MP. also it looks like crap with no shadows, the shadows are meant to be seen.
i prefer to expand limits to make quake better but if your idea is to reduce limits, i don't think you should do that at the engine level, why not just make a reduced limit mod and ask mappers to target it.
one of you suggested a poly-count restriction on the engine to prevent new things. great idea if you apply it to the mappers too and not just the modellers.
it would mean saying goodbye to things like "Arcane Dimensions" !!!
Echoes
#99 posted by Shambler on 2018/09/16 10:21:32
Sorry for the confusion. I'll try to be clearer: There is currently no edit option for moderation, only "Mark as spam". I have used the terms interchangeably, but it's only one action - "Marking as spam" is the only censorship option we have.
In this event:
Two anon posts abusing you were marked as spam.
Kinn's post was marked as spam on his request.
Your anon (i.e. posting as a different unregistered name "FU") was marked as spam as it's too close to anon abuse.
I had completely forgotten that this also results in an ip ban which was not the intention at all. As per discord:
[10:00] onetruepurple: so by marking an echos post as spam, you did in fact IP ban him
[10:02] Shambler: does it?
[10:02] Shambler: oh
[10:02] Shambler: well
[10:02] Shambler: ffs
[10:02] Shambler: that needs fixed
[10:23] onetruepurple: ggwp not figuring it out after years
Hope that's clearer. The standard I'm trying to stick to is that anons do not get to post abusive / provocative / trolling message because they are not accountable and cannot be consistently answered to (unlike registered users, e.g. if you took offence to Kinn's post you can answer directly to Kinn). Unregistered users sticking with a consistent username have more leeway of course.
|