That does sound like great fun.

I like to daydream about one day just taking quake and gutting it and building something similar that's barely compatible but much more friendly and so on. Really just daydreams though, I don't know C. And I don't want to really deal with fun 

I've been wondering if I could use this feature to get smooth blends of textures for my map, i.e. a gravel path that fades smoothly into grass, but unfortunately all that _project_texture seems to do is basically tint the colour of the light a bit, with some textures that have significant colour differences producing multi-coloured lights

Part of me thinks that this is something that just can't be overcome; an issue with lightmap resolution, or something like that. But I feel like I should still ask; is it possible to get more fidelity out of this? If it's already possible, how do I do it?

It's hardly dealbreaking if it's infeasible, but it'd be nice to have... 

texture projections are still just a lightmap trick, so there's a resolution of 1/16th of your normal res. think of it as just a filter over the light, projected by a single side of a small cube around the light (you can distort the cube a bit by using the fov, the other 5 faces of the cube are black).
so yes, all it does is basically tint the colour of the light.

which means that if you make some white image and scale that up 16-fold, then you'll get the same lightmap res as the nearby textures without depending on engine extensions (lit2 would allow you to scale the lightmap per-func_detail without needing new textures).
But... you'll probably end up shining light on the neighbouring surfaces too, so it'll be a bit too hard to control.

it'd be nice to do some sort of alpha blending from one side of a face to another, for a nice blend, but politics and compat issues would make that an absolute nightmare.
If you really want that, q3bsp+terrain shaders is the only proper answer right now. 

The only portable (across engines) way to increase the lightmap resolution is kind of a hack, scale up a texture by 2x in the wad file (e.g. 64x64 to 128x128), and then use a texture scale of 0.5 in the map editor.

_project_texture only really works for stained-glass windows like spike's screenshot in post #558. Another point: the projected texture will look less like mush if it's projected over a larger area / further from the light source.

For texture blends the best bet is just make custom textures or use a wad with them. Even ignoring the resolution issue, the lightmaps are multiplied by the texture colors, so it would look like grass projected on top of rocks etc. 

I figured there would be issues like that. My gravel path shall continue to fail the existence test. Thanks for the explanation though, good to have my suspicions confirmed. 

I remember some fantastic-looking hi-res textures of earthy/rocky paths blending into the grass on the sides, made for Oblivion. They might not be exactly what you're looking for but they could be worth checking out for inspiration. 

It would be nice, and maybe i'll take a look in that direction, but i'm not too invested in this idea and frankly finding an appropriate wad or making one myself would take far too much effort for the results i'm looking to get.

You can see where the path would go here, on the grass with the two dogs. It's a pretty small area and so i'm just going to drop the issue now. 

Called quake texture tool.

Allows you to blend two textures together. I've tried it and it gives mixed results. Give it a whirl, you could probably get better results using other methods, but the tool is pretty quick.

https://www.quaddicted.com/files/tools/quake_texture_tool_v0_1_0.zip 

There's a nice one in : <a href="https://www.quaddicted.com/files/wads/ik2k.zip_ik2k.wad.jpg">9th row, on the right.. it looks better than that preview, i think it's 128x128 

preview image 

someone needs to come up with something cool with fence textures acting as decals. especially if they move... 

that does look nice (judging by the preview) but I'm not seeing any corner pieces; that's what's stopped me from using the hexen 2 textures too, since that's where my grass is from right now; it has a dirt path, but there's no texture for the inner corner so it's pretty useless. 

Can't you find a way to make a corner yourself with two 45-degree-cut brushes and play with texture alignment so the seam isn't too noticeable? 

Perhaps, but historically it hasn't worked very well. The hexen textures have a very nice blend into the dirt texture, with defined blades of grass that'd make it difficult to capture the same effect with brushwork (i'd say impossible).

Trying to make up for texture deficiencies with brushwork is normally a losing battle. Quake's gridsize only goes so small, after all. 

Just fire up Zendar and look at the ground in the opening valley. That sort of thing is the best way of doing it I think.

Quake's all a bit "squint your eyes and it kinda works". There's no point getting too perfectionist about this. 

Changelog & downloads
website 

My name, preserved in a changelog for all eternity! I'm gonna be so famous! 

Thanks for the update, Eric - and Pritchard :) 

There are 3 .dll's in this release(V0.15.8) that I just downloaded, is that a thing now?

I only ask cause I've never seen anything but .exe's for the build programs until now.

"embree.dll, tbb.dll and tbbmalloc.dll" 

I'm using an external raytracer (embree) in light now, mostly for performance. It's open source (Apache v2) and developed by Intel so it shouldn't be sketchy. The dll's are downloaded from: https://github.com/embree/embree/releases 

Okay, thanks. 

Bounce lighting is a crutch

i blame you for my lazy light work ericw >:( 

I would say exoskeleton rather than crutch. Nice lazy light work, Pritch, I love the chiaroscuro effect. 

Thanks, it's always nice to get compliments with fancy words I have to Google. I'm not really ashamed of how much I'm abusing the feature, it's a wonderful way to get smooth, soft lighting (those jagged edges are with soft and extra4!). I try to rely on visible sources where possible so having them reach as far as possible is a great help in a lot of ways.

I will say though that it's a shame it doesn't work for switchable lights! That's how I ended up with that before and after pic, adding a targetname to the light... Ruined my idea of an ambush in the dark... 

"I try to rely on visible sources where possible so having them reach as far as possible is a great help in a lot of ways."
I haven't reached the point where I try this feature yet, but I bet it indeed saves a lot of time by making the placement of additional ambient lights unnecessary.

"I will say though that it's a shame it doesn't work for switchable lights!"
Hmmm... Eric? Would that be within the realm of possibilities for a future update?