Page 1 of 2
replacing ota material
Posted: 07 Dec 2007, 16:14
by bobthedinosaur
how is the community progress on this? i see alot of new modles with uv's out there but there is still sound, and ota 3do textures left?
because many mods still use 3do and it may alot of time replacing all the old 3do models with uv ones, so i was thinking of a side project of just going thru and redoing all the ta textures so they are a fitting replacment, prettier, and scott free of legalities.
any one else up for the job?
Posted: 07 Dec 2007, 17:05
by Wolf-In-Exile
I thought there was already some mod doing that?
Posted: 07 Dec 2007, 17:10
by rattle
Not really...
Posted: 07 Dec 2007, 17:15
by quantum
CA is slowly trying to do this. jK has remade most of the 3do textures.. We replaced several models wit community made ones. We're looking for artists and trying to pick up the skills ourselves. Our long term goal is to be free of TA IP.
Posted: 07 Dec 2007, 17:21
by bobthedinosaur
sounds good to me, who should i talk to about the 3do's that still need redoing?
Posted: 07 Dec 2007, 17:30
by quantum
You can find a ca dev in #ca in the lobby, most of the time.
I'm not sure that re-doing all the 3do textures would be useful from the IP point of view though, we'd need new 3do models as well, and I doubt modelers will want to use that obsolete format.
Posted: 08 Dec 2007, 03:59
by Saktoth
Though an obsolete format, 3do is hundreds of times easier to texture and to get a decent model in game quickly. We also already have dozens of 3do's that are free of cavedog IP. While eventually we will probably want to replace all the 3do's, this will take ages so replacing the 3do textures isnt a waste of time.
If you'd like to make textures though, spring as a whole really needs people who are capable of skinning models. We have a lot of 3d modellers but not nearly enough texture artists.
Posted: 08 Dec 2007, 04:53
by Forboding Angel
actually imo s3o is much easier to texture...
Posted: 08 Dec 2007, 22:06
by Wolf-In-Exile
I'm not sure about the 'easier' part, but UV texturing is better in every way.
Posted: 09 Dec 2007, 13:09
by azaremoth
Forboding Angel wrote:actually imo s3o is much easier to texture...
It is much easier to make
good looking uvw-based textures. But per face texturing is done much faster and easier to learn I guess - but this is no excuse for using this obsolete technique.
Posted: 09 Dec 2007, 13:33
by MR.D
I have to agree, speaking from 4 years modeling experience, using UVw_texture maps gives you a heck of alot more quality and control VS using a tileset system.
Problem is, when you use UVW based textures, you're going to be spending alot more time to do those quality textures, and about 95% of the time you can't reuse those textures on other models.
Maybe a few snipits here and there can be cloned from 1 model to the other, but the majority is going to be all done from scratch, which does in fact take alot of time and patience.
Posted: 09 Dec 2007, 16:32
by smoth
s3o is more timeconsuming. There is no way in my mind to argue against this point. 3do is faster and more efficient because I can draw one texture and just apply it to every face I want to. It also requires more talent or skill to texture an s3o.
S3o also because each model has it's own texture is very wasteful.
Posted: 09 Dec 2007, 16:43
by MightySheep
wolf-in-exile and azarmoth have cool pictures. i want!
Posted: 09 Dec 2007, 22:04
by azaremoth
MightySheep wrote:wolf-in-exile and azarmoth have cool pictures. i want!
Focus on the subject!

Posted: 11 Dec 2007, 18:12
by kiki
s30>3do. Period.
If I am ever able to acquire the necessary materials to make a mod (e.g. a computer), and I find time to work on a mod other than my own detailed somewhat in another thread, I would love to do this. But that does not mean much...

Posted: 11 Dec 2007, 20:49
by Saktoth
I honestly dont get the fuss about s3o. In my mind, the quality of most s3o's is terrible- i havent seen a single s3o texture which looks good in standard play. They are almost universally muddy, lack contrast, have difficulties with unit differentiation, and the teamcolour is almost always impossible to make out at the sort of distances one generally plays at.
They are sex in a can at close range but at a distance they are a muddy grey lump. Just totally inappropriate for an RTS.
Not to pick on MR.D's models as they are beautiful up close and are high quality stuff, but as a player who plays with them i have trouble telling them from corpses, i have trouble seeing them on some maps, i have trouble telling the gator from the raider and i have an awful amount of trouble telling my units from my enemies or allies. That is prettymuch everything that can be wrong with a unit, from a practicality and gameplay standpoint.
3do models, even bad ones, are always cirsp, bright, dont get muddy or blurred at a distance, are distinct, and have easy to spot teamcolour. They have a semi-cartoonish nature to them which gives them an iconic look that allows you to see the models features and animation much more easily and take only a couple of minutes to texture.
Posted: 11 Dec 2007, 21:03
by rattle
Agreed to all points, except that there are some mods which textures have good contrast and clear non-wishy-washy team colors.
Just wait until SWS gets something playable out.
Posted: 11 Dec 2007, 21:19
by Treeform
Saktoth, what about MrD's models? They look great.
Posted: 11 Dec 2007, 21:30
by tombom
Treeform wrote:Saktoth, what about MrD's models? They look great.
You read the post?
Saktoth wrote:Not to pick on MR.D's models as they are beautiful up close and are high quality stuff, but as a player who plays with them i have trouble telling them from corpses, i have trouble seeing them on some maps, i have trouble telling the gator from the raider and i have an awful amount of trouble telling my units from my enemies or allies. That is prettymuch everything that can be wrong with a unit, from a practicality and gameplay standpoint.
Posted: 11 Dec 2007, 21:35
by Treeform
You read the post?
ofcorse not!