#28107 posted by Kinn on 2016/09/22 14:31:33
A particle-based waterfall effect will be very good for quake.
Waterfalls in quake have so far looked shite.
I Don't Want To Look A Gift Horse In The Mouth, But:
is there any possibility that these can retain the original particle aesthetic?
each individual pixel bigger with less of them?
#28109 posted by dwere on 2016/09/22 14:43:54
The problem with many advanced features is them being used by people with insufficient experience. Default particle effects in advanced ports is a good example - they look weak at best. I think Nehahra (of all engines) got the least offensive bullet puff particles.
DMC's weapons ported to Quake when?
I'm surprised I haven't seen this being done yet. Maybe it's the style differences.
Just The Documentation, Sir!
#28110 posted by Baker on 2016/09/22 14:50:00
The particles sizes and quantities can be set, everything needed for fine-tuning is available.
I'm just documenting, not attempting to do fine-tuning --- that's on mappers. I'm not an artist.
I hope at some point, someone with a more artist eye makes some higher quality examples.
#28111 posted by PRITCHARD on 2016/09/22 14:51:50
To me, the best way to use this sort of system would definitely cut down on the bloomy effect a lot of those particles have. Have each emission be a single pixel, or maybe two or three. Things like embers from fire, streaks of blood from gunshots, that sort of pixel-y, stylized look would fit well I think, especially considering QS's reputation as "a modern engine for pure quake" rather than being associated with pretty shinies.
Just... keep the aesthetic and you'll probably be popular in this community :p
Dwere
#28112 posted by aDaya on 2016/09/22 14:53:31
If the style's different, then a little recoloring of the textures shouldn't be hard. And if you want to keep the same aesthetics, you can always use DMC's textures (which I adapted for Quake for my mod, and you can download the .wad file from here: http://www.mediafire.com/download/jv7i5kj9a96ap96/dmc.wad )
Guys
#28113 posted by Kinn on 2016/09/22 15:14:25
You can't have a robust particle system without also allowing the possibility that someone will use it in a way that's about as tasteful as a zoophile felching party.
#28114 posted by dwere on 2016/09/22 15:19:02
Touching up the skins - maybe, but I was talking about the more elaborate designs in general.
Regardless of whether it was forced by the tools or hardware available at the time, Quake weapons look very crude, like they were hacked together in a society that possessed only basic technology and/or didn't care about aesthetics. Primitive and deadly.
Felching
#28115 posted by dwere on 2016/09/22 15:20:16
Learn a new word every week with Kinn!
Baker
will the effects be available via quakec?
#28117 posted by Baker on 2016/09/22 21:11:41
AFAIK they are, but I'm not Mr. QuakeC and know little about it.
Just Played...
#28118 posted by Mike Woodham on 2016/09/22 21:17:54
Egypt by Drew and Hrimfaxi, from February 2006.
Great architecture and real sense of scale. Quoth not overused at all. Nice map.
#28119 posted by PRITCHARD on 2016/09/22 23:44:17
Thanks, Kinn. Now I'm counting the days until someone makes a goatse particle...
#28120 posted by Kinn on 2016/09/22 23:50:50
I believe the Large Hardon Collider is currently trying to create the Goatse Particle.
#28121 posted by Mugwump on 2016/09/23 02:19:40
I didn't know the LHC people were stretching their anus. Where are they on the prolapse front?
For Science
#28122 posted by PRITCHARD on 2016/09/23 02:58:01
Still waiting for the perfect "black" hole to come along, I think.
Oh My...
#28123 posted by Mugwump on 2016/09/23 03:09:19
Have we stumbled into Clerks 3?
"Google"
#28125 posted by PRITCHARD on 2016/09/23 07:08:24
Man, I just know when I see that post that func_msgboard is really shooting up the PageRanks...
#28126 posted by PRITCHARD on 2016/09/23 14:00:58
Has anyone else tried loading saves on maps that have changed? Mine produced some fun results.
In other, off topic (well, it ought to be in mapping help at least) news... I have no idea what to do with the area the video is in. I can't figure out how to build anything fun there. I ALSO can't figure out how i'd want to get rid of it, though. Maybe i'll have to bite the bullet and nuke all that brushwork, we'll see...
Lol
#28127 posted by DaZ on 2016/09/23 14:03:14
#28128 posted by Mugwump on 2016/09/23 14:10:27
Why get rid of it? It looks cool. Do you mean fun gameplay-wise or detail-wise?
#28129 posted by PRITCHARD on 2016/09/23 14:19:35
Gameplay. It looks great, I could keep it with just a few monsters... That might be what I do, I guess. It'd be a lot of work if I kept it though, you can see in the video how unfinished it is. Straight edges everywhere!
#28130 posted by Mugwump on 2016/09/23 14:52:12
If you're building this for AD, you could set up an ambush with some monsters behind breakables. Or perhaps a little nasty trap involving lava below?
As for straight edges, a little vertex editing in TB could fix that, or adding some cavern entrances in the stone walls to break the lines.
#28131 posted by Mugwump on 2016/09/23 15:01:43
Another means to both add some gameplay and break the lines of the stone walls could be to set up some platforming along them with ledges and pillars.
|