rj: Not yet. Right now it is all hardcoded but it is definitely on my TODO list. My plan was/is to implement text file usage as apposed to relying on the registry for saved settings and in turn have customizable keys. Mouse commands will remain hardcoded.

RickyT23: Yes, but I don't know what you mean by good. What editor has "bad" texture lock capabilities to compare with? Right now, it is either on or off for both Move & Rotation and behaves like Radiant as the code (the rotation part, I believe) was taken from it.

necros: It will happen, eventually. Even though you are a seasoned mapper and a damn good one at that, I highly recommend using just the one XY view with Z & Cam. I used to love the 4-view because of starting with WC until I learned Radiant and came to realize how much screen space is wasted on redundancy. And really hitting Tab to cycle views is not that much of a slow down as you might think.

eerie: I sent you an email some months ago (two emails, actually, because of a bug that was in the first one) and was wondering if you received them? If not, I had asked for your permission to release what I had been doing. I never heard back so I assumed you didn't care.

I hope it doesn't bother you at all and your name will be first in the Credits (well, second, id deserves first, really) when I write a proper readme.

Trinca: That's something I wanted to do from the beginning but unfortunately would require a good understanding of OGL which I don't have. You'd have to wait for either me to do a lot of reading or for someone with the knowledge to lend a hand. There is a rudimentary light radius view, though, with CamWindow support on the way. 

has shitty texture lock features 

sikkpin dont ask me :)

i just map and not very good...

average!!! 

sikkpin, last two or three months, my mailbox on anarxi was pointed to /dev/null because chinese spam-attack ;)
now it's work

I started this project for my own use and it's pleasure for me, that you continue development

(my english so bad, sorry ;) 

i use 4 window setups on all the 3d applications i use.

the thing i dislike about 1 window editing is it is disorienting when you switch from one view to the next. also, having 2 views showing the side helps me to make sure of what i'm building. i can't stand that stupid z cam thing, i'd have to actually check #s on the grid that i'm on since it doesn't show any other brushes in relation to the current selection.

anyway... just saying this is what i like. :)
if i'm the only one here, then don't make it a priority since i'm not mapping much these days and i can always make do with gtkr 1.4 if need be 

I myself need 4 windows, aerial view, 2 side views, and the 3d window. 

 

I was taught first-angle projection. You probably don't even know what first-angle projection is. Which is perhaps the point.
I was also brilliant at it, and it's certainly contributed to the quality of my mapping.

You don't have to use a four window set-up if you don't want to. But I do want to. And it'd be me making my maps with your editor, not you making them.

This is not an ultimatum or a threat or anything, it's just a statement of fact. If you don't design your editor in a way that suits users, they won't use it.

http://www.technologystudent.com/designpro/ortho1.htm 

...top, left, right, bottom, front, north, 3D, and one window that shows the future. I use the last window to figure out what year my map will be released. 

.. is winning ! 

I use the last window to figure out what year my map will be released.

I guess that window must be blank then. 

i use 3 views also!

http://trinca.quaddicted.com/1.jpg 

first-angle projection! I know that too. Even that standard is different in USA, where technical drawings have the rotations exactly reverse. :(

Theoretically, mapping with mostly only top view would direct to more 2D maps, ala Duke...

I realize when mapping with four views that one view is usually unused (usually either of the side views) when placing a brush but then needed so soon when putting the next one anyway. With the big screens nowadays it shouldn't be that much of a problem.

For example building stairs is so easy with the side views when you can see the relations at a glance. 

The best way though is probably to let the user arrange views anyway they want(blender is a good example)... 

It's really a matter of taste and editor being used. When I use GTKRadiant, I only ever use the 2-window setup (3d view and the other one I ctrl-Tab through). However when I use UnrealED, I always use the fullblown 4-viewport setup. 

But it's a question of screen size/rez, Try to map with 800x600 and 4 windows. Have fun.

@Kell
I was taught first-angle projection. You probably don't even know what first-angle projection is. Which is perhaps the point.
I was also brilliant at it, and it's certainly contributed to the quality of my mapping.

show-off, but your maps are undoubtely of great quality.

A real pro needs only the coordinates everything else is in the mind. And with two views you have all coordinates

Hey I can do real time raytracing on a piece of paper^^ 

is when a frame takes less than, say, a second. You can do that? 

But I got a new Samsung 22" at work, never get to use that for mapping. Only GIMP. Shame really cause I'd be able to map in 1650x1050 or whatever it was... :(

Who maps with dual displays? 

...but I only use one 2-D view and the cam window . No Z. 

It seems you should just be able to spawn whatever views you want. If you want a top and a side and two camera views, you can have it.

that seems like a good improvement. 

Multiple orthographic views is a definite but I'm not sure which route I'm going to take. Either one window of each view can be opened/closed by user choice (Q3Radiant) or any number of windows can be opened/closed and changed to any view (UnrealEd). Splitter window will NOT be implemented, they snap so that's good enough :)

And, Kell, you came across as a total ass. Maybe you should read through this thread before contributing, specifically post #58 & #66, which makes your post pointless. 

But

If you don't design your editor in a way that suits users, they won't use it

I couldn't continue to hate GTKRadiant if I didn't agree with this. However, you shouldn't turn your software into a carnival of preferences and options so everyone can retain their own little interface comfort bubble. There comes a point where every user just has to learn a new way of working. 

And, Kell, you came across as a total ass.


What the fuck? Get over yourself.

Asking for feedback about your program, then saying "oh I'll just add what I think is good, really you should try it my way" makes you sound like a total ass.

My post was meant to point out that, sure, it's your editor and you can do what you like with it. If you're open to adding features that accommodate other peoples' preferences, then they will be interested. If you don't, you can't really be surprised if they show no interest. The number/type of views is a major difference in preferences. Perfectly valid point.

And if you choose not to accommodate other preferences, yet continue to solicit interest in a dedicated thread, it's really just attention seeking. 

I have know idea where all this is coming from.

Please, show me where I said (not word for word, of course)"oh I'll just add what I think is good, really you should try it my way". Show me where I said that I'm not going to implement features that don't comply to my preference. Tell me, how do I need to "get over myself", how am I seeking attention? Please, show me anything that makes your posts valid.

Anyways, back on topic...

Lunaran: No, I won't let that happen. I want to keep it clean and efficient, to be able to do anything that other editors can do but keep that QuakeEd/Radiant style. If it doesn't make editing easier, than it won't be added, at least not by me. 

in gtkr and doomedit, i can use the mouse wheel to zoom in and out on the map view but i have to use insert/delete here... is that a problem on my end? if not, could you add that in? :)