And What's Nice
#3889 posted by bambuz on 2007/10/05 09:57:45
(that probably most here know) at sunset is that the stuff in the sun is orange (direct sunlight) while stuff in the shade is blue (scattered sunlight from the blue sky). You can notice this in the real world if you play close attention.
Necros
#3890 posted by RickyT33 on 2007/10/05 16:06:19
How much minlight did you used to use?
Who Wants To Test It?
#3891 posted by RickyT33 on 2007/10/05 16:19:14
Its by no means finished, but I want some feedback.
Finished version will incude:
Some sort of perimeter for the complex
Music!
Extended start
Start map
Anyone wanna test it and make me aware of any other issues than those above?
BTW, The lighting prob needs some adjustments too!!
Ask me to mail a copy.
RickyT
#3892 posted by JPL on 2007/10/05 16:37:29
How much minlight did you used to use?
Personnally in a range of 25 up to 35, depending of the ambiance I want to have... And also with sunlight set into the 100-150 range..
And I don't forget to add -nominlimit/-nominlight in light tool command line ;)
Well, you have to experiment to find your way: it is just a question of taste...
Necros
#3893 posted by Lunaran on 2007/10/05 16:41:26
would ambient occlusion be possible in a quake1 light compiler?
I don't see why not. I wanted something like that in q3map2, which would basically do an occlusion test against skybrushes to get exactly the effect I described, but q3map2 is nearly impossible to compile since ttimo decided to add nearly functionless dependencies on very specific releases of all kinds of random source libraries (like PNGLIB ...)
#3894 posted by necros on 2007/10/05 17:48:00
i don't have my really old maps, but my first ones had pretty high minlights... probably around 40-50 or something.
i think i lowered it more and more every time until i got to nesp09, which has 35.
marb and deadcity had 0 though.
as for ambient occlusion, would it be easier just to test how close a face is to other faces and just give a light value based on that alone? might not work well with huge faces vs small ones though.
i don't really know the first thing about light programs though, just tossing it out there. :P
Minlight
#3895 posted by inertia on 2007/10/05 20:17:34
I still don't understand why anyone uses it. As Lunaran pointed out, it makes shadows less shadowy, and washes out the whole visual experience of playing the level.
It sucks.
#3883
#3896 posted by HeadThump on 2007/10/05 20:49:30
just realized I never posted the second shot intended for #3883
http://mortisville.quakedev.com/fitz0000.jpg
same scene (using minlight at 250 and anti-light entities as subtractive value) but done with -extra4 -soft and the addition of two lights in the fore using FitzQuake instead of WinQuake. What is interesting here (at least to me) is the softening effect where the vertical line blends and where the faces receive multiple lighting/darkening sources. It's worth exploring as a potential lighting paradigm.
Q3map2 Already Has An Ambient Occlusion Hack
#3897 posted by BlackDog on 2007/10/05 20:57:23
It doesn't trace against skybrushes though, simply nearby geometry. Look at -dirty, -dirtscale, etc. It also have skylight, which is very similar to what Lun describes.
So I dunno what he is bitching about. Unless it's the q3map2 source, which seems all kinds of fucked up.
Oh,
#3898 posted by HeadThump on 2007/10/05 21:00:32
thanks Nitin, and Metlslime, I recall that error as I managed to generate it one time when screwing up a tutorial posted on Quakesrc.
Blackdog
#3899 posted by Lunaran on 2007/10/06 03:35:13
Neither of those are quite what I wanted. I don't think skylight gives you attenuation control, or something. I know I panned it, I just forgot why. :)
Because I Can...
#3900 posted by Fern on 2007/10/08 02:22:10
Fern
#3901 posted by nitin on 2007/10/08 11:14:13
lighting still looks flat, dont know if its lit properly yet but that's one area in most your maps that seems to be consistent.
otherwise, nice texture choices.
Fern
#3902 posted by starbuck on 2007/10/08 13:06:36
really interesting texture combination, I like! I agree with what nitin said about the lighting, but presumably it's just not done yet.
Architecture looks good and the overall look is very neat, but maybe a bit boxy in the first shot, there's a lot of right angles. Good work so far though.
Yeah....
#3903 posted by Fern on 2007/10/08 13:26:54
the lighting is bad because there is none :P
Thanks tho :)
#3904 posted by rudl on 2007/10/08 21:08:07
That blue door looks cool
#3905 posted by rudl on 2007/10/12 10:44:17
OOOooooohhhh
#3906 posted by JPL on 2007/10/12 12:05:32
Looks cool !
Looks Pretty Awesome...
#3907 posted by Fern on 2007/10/12 12:50:44
...at first glance and after a few seconds it looks a bit of a hodgepodge... still love to play it though. :)
#3908 posted by Trinca on 2007/10/12 14:28:21
looks great man, god job!!!
Seems That
#3909 posted by bambuz on 2007/10/12 15:02:22
it's technieval. I wonder if the tin panels rattle if you shoot at them. :)
#3910 posted by rudl on 2007/10/12 15:17:48
That's true it itended to be a conservative medival map but, now there are not really medival elements
But don't worry the final version won't have any medival elements or textures. ;)
#3911 posted by Orl on 2007/10/12 15:48:27
But don't worry the final version won't have any medival elements or textures. ;)<\q>
Aww, why not? I'm getting tired of all the base maps (trinca). I want to see some medieval stuff!
Whoops
#3912 posted by Orl on 2007/10/12 15:51:28
forgot its a / not a \
That Looks Mad!
#3913 posted by RickyT33 on 2007/10/12 16:19:24
Hell, I say go for it! Enforcers v Ogres, Grunts v Knights! Quake was always a fusion of eras anyway.
|