Page 5 of 6
Re: OTA-Based Mod Collaboration thread
Posted: 06 May 2009, 20:19
by Peet
zwzsg wrote:smoth wrote:Believe me I am still on the fence if I think starwars/s44 looks better
Starwars doesn't count because it's vaporware.
I think 'vaporware' is too strong a term to apply to swiw; it refers to software that is hyped but does not actually exist. I assure you that the concept of sw:iw's existence is entirely a solid matter.
Re: OTA-Based Mod Collaboration thread
Posted: 07 May 2009, 15:32
by Saktoth
Its just in closed beta, its as playable as any of the popular mods in spring. Its just a different development style, more conventional, rather than this open-beta-from-day-1 whackiness that the spring community tends to do.
Argh wrote:Ok, I've finished working on conversion of CA stuff.
Thats great, thanks! We did plan on converting everything to .dds but it was just busywork and we are severly lacking texture artist manhours.
How did you fix the normals? I didnt know there was a way to do it without breaking smoothing groups.
Re: OTA-Based Mod Collaboration thread
Posted: 07 May 2009, 19:43
by Neddie
I would hardly say IW has a more conventional development model, except in that the testing of and contribution to the game is controlled by an explicit governing group of lead developers, which is not terribly different from the model employed by Spring: 1944, Gundam RTS or Kernel Panic - simply on a different scale with a more obvious structure. It isn't like this structure doesn't exist, if implicit or intentionally hidden, de facto in most of the other game and mod development projects. Often open and egalitarian development practices are, shall we say, less than true to their spirit.
Re: OTA-Based Mod Collaboration thread
Posted: 07 May 2009, 19:49
by Argh
We did plan on converting everything to .dds but it was just busywork and we are severly lacking texture artist manhours.
Happy to do it, it was the least I could do, considering that I'm nicking the GPL'd buildings for my own purposes.
How did you fix the normals? I didnt know there was a way to do it without breaking smoothing groups.
Used UpSpring. Took less than an hour.
Wrote a whole tutorial thread on how to do it, it's in Art and Modeling. Ignore the usual garbage from the usual suspects, it really is the fast way.
Re: OTA-Based Mod Collaboration thread
Posted: 08 May 2009, 02:04
by Peet
How did you fix the normals? I didnt know there was a way to do it without breaking smoothing groups.
Argh wrote:Used UpSpring. Took less than an hour.
Wrote a whole tutorial thread on how to do it, it's in Art and Modeling. Ignore the usual garbage from the usual suspects, it really is the fast way.
How did you fix the normals? I didnt know there was a way to do it without breaking smoothing groups.
...
Ignore the usual garbage from the usual suspects
Re: OTA-Based Mod Collaboration thread
Posted: 08 May 2009, 03:00
by Argh
You can always load up the models and see for yourself, smart guy.
Re: OTA-Based Mod Collaboration thread
Posted: 08 May 2009, 03:13
by Warlord Zsinj
Why is everyone picking on IW these days
Production has just slowed because I'm in the business-end of my master's degree, and am having some other RL issues at the same time. That being said, I'm not the only member of the team, and work is still on-going. I suspect in a few weeks once semester is over things will pick up again.
And, we're aware of the slowness of our dev cycle, which is why we've avoided endlessly hyping IW where possible, just delivering snippets to let you guys know we're still alive.
Finally, if anyone wants to see IW arrive sooner, come help out

Re: OTA-Based Mod Collaboration thread
Posted: 09 May 2009, 18:08
by Licho
Created site to share models - you can easilly cooperate through it now.
http://springrts.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=18762
Re: OTA-Based Mod Collaboration thread
Posted: 10 May 2009, 09:29
by Argh
Um, I've been doing various things, some of which would be considered improvements (reskins and touchups, removal of Arm / Core logos from stuff that isn't tied to OTA's IP, etc.).
I don't have time to even upload it right now, but I'll try to post that stuff later if I can. Please remind me via PM in a week, if I haven't found time before that. I think CA will want most of it, and I'll be happy to post it here, instead of making you guys dig through World Builder.
Just as a taste, this was the Arm Floating Shield Generator (IIRC, this stuff's all getting renamed), reworked a bit for better preshading, lights and other stuff:

Just touchups, here and there, basically. Don't have time to totally reskin them. If you don't like 'em that's entirely OK, just thought I'd make sure you folks knew that this was getting done.
Re: OTA-Based Mod Collaboration thread
Posted: 10 May 2009, 14:01
by Warlord Zsinj
Making the reflectivity map really grainy would add to the grimey feel of that texture
Re: OTA-Based Mod Collaboration thread
Posted: 10 May 2009, 19:50
by Regret
Otherside wrote:NOTE: its only BA fanboi's who take deep offense to CA advertising + most of the iffy adlines were removed by me and regret.
http://trac.caspring.org/wiki/AdLines?action=history
You're full of shit.
Last time you removed something was year and a half and that was a single adline.
Re: OTA-Based Mod Collaboration thread
Posted: 11 May 2009, 08:47
by Pressure Line
3 models uploaded to modelbase.
(thumbnails are links)
Should be fine as replacement *A models.
Mech Commander 2 Uller:

Scripted and scaled to work as an AK.
Mech Commander 2 Aerospotter

Scripted and scaled to work as a radar vehicle.
A tank that I have released as PD:

Scripted and scaled to work as an Instigator.
Re: OTA-Based Mod Collaboration thread
Posted: 11 May 2009, 17:40
by KDR_11k
Is Battletech really completely in the public domain?
Re: OTA-Based Mod Collaboration thread
Posted: 11 May 2009, 17:50
by Pxtl
KDR_11k wrote:Is Battletech really completely in the public domain?
Well, technically it's not public domain, but Microsoft's opensource license, which, iirc, is a noncommercial-attribution type license. I assume Microsoft would not have opened that content if they didn't have the right to do so.
Re: OTA-Based Mod Collaboration thread
Posted: 11 May 2009, 20:03
by Argh
Er... Battletech's IP is owned by Wizkids. The EULA on the MCII source forbids redistribution of that content, because Microsoft doesn't own the IP. It's why none of the buildings made it into World Builder- I figured that, being Microsoft, if they ever found out, they'd kill my project.
Don't poison the well from the start, people. And Mr. D's stuff- the stuff that copies the OTA movies- needs to go, too.
However, I didn't see a single mesh from NanoBlobs, World Builder, KDR's stuff, Smoth's stuff, Lathan Stanley's work, etc., etc., etc., which we've all said, many times, that people can use.
Re: OTA-Based Mod Collaboration thread
Posted: 11 May 2009, 21:19
by smoth
IIRC they do use my morty.
Re: OTA-Based Mod Collaboration thread
Posted: 11 May 2009, 22:01
by Pxtl
smoth wrote:IIRC they do use my morty.
I think he's not talking about stuff directly designed for CA, but open-sourced materials that could trivially be worked into the place of a CA unit (my typical example is that the SpireRook would make a fine Sumo).
Re: OTA-Based Mod Collaboration thread
Posted: 11 May 2009, 22:54
by Argh
Mainly, I'm just saying, "get it all in one place, so that people know what's available, and make sure that the license is attributable". I'm sticking everything in that category into World Builder
Eventually, people will be able to make games with Spring that are just some code, no modeling / animation required, using World Builder to provide the content. That's the real goal here. But I cannot and will not be taking anything that's even vaguely suspect, legally speaking, for obvious reasons.
Re: OTA-Based Mod Collaboration thread
Posted: 11 May 2009, 23:11
by Pxtl
Argh wrote:Mainly, I'm just saying, "get it all in one place, so that people know what's available, and make sure that the license is attributable". I'm sticking everything in that category into World Builder
Eventually, people will be able to make games with Spring that are just some code, no modeling / animation required, using World Builder to provide the content. That's the real goal here. But I cannot and will not be taking anything that's even vaguely suspect, legally speaking, for obvious reasons.
You're making an RTS construction kit?
Awesome. I still have fond memories of my teenaged days porting Bitmap Bros' Z to StarCraft using StarCraft triggers.
Re: OTA-Based Mod Collaboration thread
Posted: 11 May 2009, 23:12
by smoth
he is but it only supports "pure's scale" which he has decreed as superior.