The new reflective textures in 0.62 looks nice and all but they would look even better on units with higher polycounts. So in a future spring version we would like to include two version of XTA, one standard with the same models as today and one high polycount version. To do this we would need someone to coordinate an effort to collect existing high polycount units and create new ones as necessary. He/she would also need to make sure that they are scaled as in XTA (large BB, small MT etc) and have correct firepoints,anims and so on. Prefereably it would be someone that is experienced with with TA unit modelling and has a lot of time to spend on it.
If you are interested please make a reply to this post.
On a related note there is still a lot of textures that has no alpha (reflective) channel defined for them yet although FireCrack has made a good start at it. So if you are a texturing wizard you might want to look into this thread.
Help wanted
Ideally we should wait until the new format is ready yes, but it seems like it will be some time more until that happens. And since we will make sure that old type units works alongside the new ones the only difference should be that it will be easier in the new format and that there will be some new features you can make use of there.
Well I would help with the re texturing (want to try my hand at some art), but as my graphics card does not (yet) support reflections, I cant help. I would also like to help modelling, but as there is no obvious, up-to-date tutorial that actually is in one peice and WORKS, I cant really help there either.
Ill see what I can do with the textures later in the week, when I get my new graphic card. (nVidia 6600GT). But I dont promise anything, as I might have drowned in my own drool by then
Ill see what I can do with the textures later in the week, when I get my new graphic card. (nVidia 6600GT). But I dont promise anything, as I might have drowned in my own drool by then
-
GrOuNd_ZeRo
- Posts: 1370
- Joined: 30 Apr 2005, 01:10
No I dont really have much experience from 3do builder I just know that people has been able to produce nice units in it before, like the ones on the screenshot page. And yes you wouldnt have to redo everything use Evolva and some others as a base and start improving units that seems to need it or that you feel the most like doing.
Idea
At present everybody has to use the same models right? This is not good if one player has a hexium 5 processor and 1THz graphics card with 9GB of RAM on it and his opponent only has a 386. How much work would it be to separate the 3D models from the unit stats/behaviour, so that two different players could use different models on their different machines?
Taking a slightly less general approach, would it be possible to have both "high quality" and "low quality" renderings of the units within the same mod? That way you could even switch between them in game if the frame rate drops down. But again it would be a client side thing, so if you have a fast machine then you wouldn't have to switch to the low poly count version.
Just a thought
Munch
Taking a slightly less general approach, would it be possible to have both "high quality" and "low quality" renderings of the units within the same mod? That way you could even switch between them in game if the frame rate drops down. But again it would be a client side thing, so if you have a fast machine then you wouldn't have to switch to the low poly count version.
Just a thought
Munch
Re: Idea
thats the use Unit LOD has, it changes between less/more detailed unit models depending on your settings and and distance to the model and such.munch wrote:At present everybody has to use the same models right? This is not good if one player has a hexium 5 processor and 1THz graphics card with 9GB of RAM on it and his opponent only has a 386. How much work would it be to separate the 3D models from the unit stats/behaviour, so that two different players could use different models on their different machines?
Taking a slightly less general approach, would it be possible to have both "high quality" and "low quality" renderings of the units within the same mod? That way you could even switch between them in game if the frame rate drops down. But again it would be a client side thing, so if you have a fast machine then you wouldn't have to switch to the low poly count version.
Just a thought
Munch
textures detail, grass lod, trees in 3d, etc... does the job of alivianating the load on lower end PCs, its not in game.. but its there for playing with.
Back ontopic, great to hear of you (Spring team), relying on the comunity to get this working.
( a little sidenote... not ALL textures must be so shinny... i guess there is still opaque ones to choose.)
Well the 6600GT is already on its way. And my computer isnt good enough to make propper use of all the cool features on the 6800 anyway. There sould be no point in spending the extra money, as I would only get a TINY benefit from it.
Back on topic AGAIN, why not do what has been suggested in other threads around the place. Use the high-poly Evolva for close ups, and low poly current models for distant shots. And for REALLY distant shots (like right up way in the sky looking to the other side of the map), have icons representing the different units. And the draw distance for the different stages could be set client side, so a crappy computer would set close ups when REALLY close, with low poly for the rest, and a good computer could keep the high poly on for all the units. But this would require alot of extra scripting, and isnt really what we are looking for I think.
Back on topic AGAIN, why not do what has been suggested in other threads around the place. Use the high-poly Evolva for close ups, and low poly current models for distant shots. And for REALLY distant shots (like right up way in the sky looking to the other side of the map), have icons representing the different units. And the draw distance for the different stages could be set client side, so a crappy computer would set close ups when REALLY close, with low poly for the rest, and a good computer could keep the high poly on for all the units. But this would require alot of extra scripting, and isnt really what we are looking for I think.
-
Warlord Zsinj
- Imperial Winter Developer
- Posts: 3742
- Joined: 24 Aug 2004, 08:59
T'was mine; although I never mentioned the idea in relation to zooming out, only on the minimap. It would be a useful thing, but I wonder whether it is necessary on the game map, because you can't really zoom out that far. If you were allowed to zoom out further, than that would definitely be a solution.
------------------
I too would like to help making models more detailed; I am profficient in modelling with Rhino. That being said, I wouldn't go near texturing with a 60 foot pole. :)
-----------------
I would like to make my own request, although I might make a new topic on it later:
Perhaps we could implement minispring through the model re-dos, pleasing all involved parties, and avoiding complex coding issues, simply by reducing model sizes through 3do's (seeing as we are redoing the models anyway), and then halving all the values in tdf files?
------------------
I too would like to help making models more detailed; I am profficient in modelling with Rhino. That being said, I wouldn't go near texturing with a 60 foot pole. :)
-----------------
I would like to make my own request, although I might make a new topic on it later:
Perhaps we could implement minispring through the model re-dos, pleasing all involved parties, and avoiding complex coding issues, simply by reducing model sizes through 3do's (seeing as we are redoing the models anyway), and then halving all the values in tdf files?
-
Guessmyname
- Posts: 3301
- Joined: 28 Apr 2005, 21:07
