#141 posted by JneeraZ on 2015/11/03 11:08:27
The idea behind this app is that you're modeling with Quake in mind. :)
#142 posted by czg on 2015/11/03 11:20:54
I loaded it into MODO and I had to flip it upside down to make it look right. Then 90% of the tris are triplicated, so ran a poly.unify on those.
Even then it's still a mess of weird orphan objects floating in the middle of nowhere, partial houses, and broken terrain.
-
#143 posted by Jon on 2015/11/03 11:37:58
Yep, I totally agree with all of you. It's a bloody mess. Just needed more opinions before I threw it in the "too bloody hard" basket.
Anyway..Treyarch just announced mapping tools for Black Ops 3, so making new Prefabs is the next project instead. Thanks for all your questions\answers on this problem.
#144 posted by JneeraZ on 2015/11/07 16:20:13
Eric, can you add your source code into the main repository? If it's there, I apologize, I'm not too familiar with this stuff ... but I don't see it.
Anyway, bug report ... you can't leave the MAP filename blank anymore. That was useful for people who only wanted to copy the results to the clipboard. If you leave the MAP filename blank, it crashes.
#145 posted by JneeraZ on 2015/11/07 18:23:52
Err ... I think I see it now, you DO have code in there. Stupid SourceTree...
#146 posted by ericw on 2015/11/07 19:26:09
Yeah- all my code is up on bitbucket, I was working on my own fork here: https://bitbucket.org/ericwa/obj-2-map/commits/all , but khreathor pulled all of my texturing stuff into the "wip" branch of the main repo.
#147 posted by Lunaran on 2015/11/07 23:45:08
someone has a favorite head shape
#148 posted by khreathor on 2015/11/09 02:02:58
yeah I merged it into wip branch, because I wanted to keep old stable source. It will be good to make some radio button where you can choose between old and new method, classic MAP and Valve 220 MAP. What do you think?
#149 posted by Skiffy on 2016/01/03 01:34:02
Latest compiled version of this treasure anywhere? Not sure how best to go about compiling the one from the repo...
#150 posted by ericw on 2016/01/03 01:45:25
afaik, the latest builds are post #47 for the regular version or #66 for UV+texturing import.
Compiling it is pretty easy, install VS Community 2015 (large download), double click the .sln file, and click the Start button.
Anyone Use It Yet On A Full Map?
#151 posted by Skiffy on 2016/01/03 21:11:43
Ah cool thanks. Just wondering but did anyone use this in Arcane Dimension or any other recent maps yet?
Skiffy
#152 posted by Kinn on 2016/01/03 21:26:01
see necros' fire and brimstone jam map
#153 posted by JneeraZ on 2016/01/03 22:27:31
I've used it for pieces in maps ... "The Hell That's Coming" had a skull face cave entrance and there was something else too.
I haven't done a full map tho, no. That would be ... interesting. And I imagine leaky.
#154 posted by necros on 2016/01/04 12:44:00
Full map... Make it func_detail and box it in. Basically do like you'd do in Doom3 with meshes.
#155 posted by JneeraZ on 2016/01/04 13:05:25
Aren't there still collision horrors everywhere?
Necros
How long does vis take with such a map?
I imagine this style of design wouldn't lend to big maps with lots of monsters because there would effectively be no visblocking (or am I wrong?).
#157 posted by JneeraZ on 2016/01/04 13:36:22
Well, if it's a giant func_detail inside of a box ... VIS should be almost instantaneous.
#158 posted by Kinn on 2016/01/04 13:37:55
I imagine you're not literally suggesting surrounding it with a big box, but rather having a boxy structural hull that still essentially follows the layout of the map?
Otherwise:
(reaction.gif)
Interesting Discussion
What would be the drawback of building your map out of simple brushes, and then when you need detail that requires using techniques that often cause invalid brushes / microleaks (such as vertex editing), just adding such things as detail brushes inside the already built and sealed structure?
As an example, let's say I'm doing a section where I have rocks on one wall of a room. I'd build that wall using a simple cuboid brush that seals the room, and then add the rocks as detail brushes. Is that feasible, or do detail brushes cause other headaches?
SleepwalkR
#160 posted by Kinn on 2016/01/04 14:30:55
I'm pretty sure that's more or less how everyone has mapped since detail brushes became available. I may be wrong.
Although
#161 posted by Kinn on 2016/01/04 14:37:36
I've heard (but not looked into it myself) that detail brushes that stick through the structural hull and into the void are problematic - does anyone know anything about this / elaborate?
Thanks
I would advise against that anyway. Build the detail brushes flush against the sealing structure.
I'm trying to put together some best practices for the TrenchBroom 2 manual.
#163 posted by JneeraZ on 2016/01/04 16:45:18
"I would advise against that anyway. Build the detail brushes flush against the sealing structure."
Why is that?
SleepwalkR
#164 posted by adib on 2016/01/04 17:08:20
Like UE, where BSP is just for blocking and the rest is meshes.
Yeah...
#165 posted by ijed on 2016/01/04 18:20:30
Afaik detail brushes don't care where they are. func_ objects that are in more than one leaf, or that stick out of the world, can have the entity flicker problem though.
Details are part of the bsp though, so if you can see em, there they are.
The bug they can cause is when a mapper either on purpose or mistakenly uses them to seal a leak, inadvertently creating one.
The bad practice is making everything in the world detail, apart from your outer hulls, effectively trading off vis time for performance. This is usually unnecessary, but also kind of subjective over 'when' it becomes bad practice, depending on your geometry.
|