Page 1 of 4
UPDATE... Map Completed ... call 2B4-Core-Proto-Planet ...
Posted: 22 Jan 2006, 23:20
by genblood
I'm trying to improve my mapping skills ... An during that
process I'm also, learning How-to make models and texture
them in my spare time.
So, here is a possible new map I'm planning on releasing
when it's done ... Here are some screenies .....
UPDATE 2-6-06 MAP RELEASED ....
link for down
I'll post more new screenies new weekend ... I've got to make
a cool skybox ... new texture map and a few more features...
http://www.fileuniverse.com/?p=showitem&ID=2349
Posted: 22 Jan 2006, 23:48
by Chocapic
is this a city or something like that ?
it looks really great, nice features
Posted: 23 Jan 2006, 00:02
by FLOZi
Obscene polycount features.
Posted: 23 Jan 2006, 00:51
by Argh
Great idea, but the features aren't even in the ballpark... the round shapes, for example, must have 400+ tris, let alone the cones and things.
Would look very cool though, if the polycount was optimized and good use was made of things like glowmaps.
Posted: 23 Jan 2006, 00:59
by SwiftSpear
Are those 3do features? The texturing looks really weird... If you make simple s3o features like that and can work me up a decent UV then I'd be willing to texture them for you.
Posted: 23 Jan 2006, 01:35
by Zoombie
Looks somewhat drab, but im sure that was the inteded effect.
Add more buildings, to liven it up and it will be a great city scape.
Also is it a metal map?
Posted: 23 Jan 2006, 01:44
by Forboding Angel
gen I really like it but a few things...
The ground texture is ub3r low resolution. What program did you use to make it? I'm sure that it would be easy enough to fix that (unless it was unintended).
If you want/need any help just let me know.
I'm digging it dude
Posted: 23 Jan 2006, 02:14
by genblood
The ground texture was something I through together ...
It will get redone before I release it ... I'm working on adding
more models and stuff ... I'm trying to have this map look like
a high tech alien planet that got left behind ....
Here is another screenie of the map ....
I figure in 2 or 3 weeks .... I'll have it complete .........
Posted: 23 Jan 2006, 02:23
by Forboding Angel
thats really nice dude. Can't wait to see it.
Posted: 23 Jan 2006, 03:02
by mother
Looking cool gen.
BTW People, big curves look like butt because the engine is mipmapping... Don't blame the model[er]..
Posted: 23 Jan 2006, 03:21
by FLOZi
No matter what anyone says... there are far too many polies being used on those features.
Posted: 23 Jan 2006, 03:33
by mother
FLOZi wrote:No matter what anyone says... there are far too many polies being used on those features.
That's the second time you've ass-erted that in this thread...
The number of needed polys is dictated by keeping angles obtuse enough that the engine interperates them as curves. I cannot visually tell where an object wildly exceeds that threshold.
FWIW The 'really big' features will never have many poly's on screen because of the previously mentioned mipmapping.
When I was first testing features I got SJ to compile me an exe that didn't mipmap features. I noticed absolutely no performance penalty w/ my ATI 9800 based card.
.
While I wouldn't recommend people making 20k-poly ak's or brawlers, I don't think it's particularly relevant for map features.
Posted: 23 Jan 2006, 03:39
by forbidin
Those structures look interesting.
We won't know how the polies will effect gameplay till we can actually test it.
Looks good. Keep up the good work. We DO need some urban(ish) type of maps, since we don't have any atm. At first glance, it reminded me of the ota urban style maps :)
Posted: 23 Jan 2006, 04:42
by Isaactoo
Those features look great!...and if you want to see an example of smoothing in Spring, just look at the lvl. 1 sonar in spring, then in upspring. Also, you shouldn't need to worry as much about pollycount of features, since it will never increase because the players can't build them.
I really like the feature in the last screen-shot, but I hope it's actually composed of 2 features...since Spring uses box collision (using yardmap) it may not look right if a missle hits toward the top. Perhaps you could split it into two features, one for the tower, and one for the ring around it
.
Posted: 23 Jan 2006, 07:43
by SwiftSpear
mother wrote:FLOZi wrote:No matter what anyone says... there are far too many polies being used on those features.
That's the second time you've ass-erted that in this thread...
The number of needed polys is dictated by keeping angles obtuse enough that the engine interperates them as curves. I cannot visually tell where an object wildly exceeds that threshold.
FWIW The 'really big' features will never have many poly's on screen because of the previously mentioned mipmapping.
When I was first testing features I got SJ to compile me an exe that didn't mipmap features. I noticed absolutely no performance penalty w/ my ATI 9800 based card.
.
While I wouldn't recommend people making 20k-poly ak's or brawlers, I don't think it's particularly relevant for map features.
To me they look like 2-3 thousand poly 3do objects mass textured on certain faces. Each texture face is a seperate poly. If they ARE acctually reasonable poly count s3o that are being mip mapped then they are poorly textured, in which case my offer to retexture stands if gen can get me a decent UV map to work with.
mip mapping doesn't bother preformace too much, but massive poly counts can't be supressed by mip map techniques. Poly count does matter with reflection and shadows enabled.
Posted: 23 Jan 2006, 14:08
by FLOZi
SwiftSpear wrote:mother wrote:FLOZi wrote:No matter what anyone says... there are far too many polies being used on those features.
That's the second time you've ass-erted that in this thread...
The number of needed polys is dictated by keeping angles obtuse enough that the engine interperates them as curves. I cannot visually tell where an object wildly exceeds that threshold.
FWIW The 'really big' features will never have many poly's on screen because of the previously mentioned mipmapping.
When I was first testing features I got SJ to compile me an exe that didn't mipmap features. I noticed absolutely no performance penalty w/ my ATI 9800 based card.
.
While I wouldn't recommend people making 20k-poly ak's or brawlers, I don't think it's particularly relevant for map features.
To me they look like 2-3 thousand poly 3do objects mass textured on certain faces. Each texture face is a seperate poly. If they ARE acctually reasonable poly count s3o that are being mip mapped then they are poorly textured, in which case my offer to retexture stands if gen can get me a decent UV map to work with.
mip mapping doesn't bother preformace too much, but massive poly counts can't be supressed by mip map techniques. Poly count does matter with reflection and shadows enabled.
This was also my 'ass-ertion' They are almost certainly 3do with per-face textures, and, being familiar with the TA textures one can tell that the number of faces there is obscene.
Posted: 23 Jan 2006, 20:57
by Chocapic
oh well i think its getting really really cool, with quite some more features and work around itll get a really lovely map!
im looking forward to it
I really like tech features btw
Posted: 23 Jan 2006, 21:27
by AF
Just promise me this map isnt another symetry convention
Posted: 23 Jan 2006, 22:28
by IMSabbel
mother wrote:FLOZi wrote:No matter what anyone says... there are far too many polies being used on those features.
That's the second time you've ass-erted that in this thread...
The number of needed polys is dictated by keeping angles obtuse enough that the engine interperates them as curves. I cannot visually tell where an object wildly exceeds that threshold.
FWIW The 'really big' features will never have many poly's on screen because of the previously mentioned mipmapping.
When I was first testing features I got SJ to compile me an exe that didn't mipmap features. I noticed absolutely no performance penalty w/ my ATI 9800 based card.
.
While I wouldn't recommend people making 20k-poly ak's or brawlers, I don't think it's particularly relevant for map features.
I for sure hope you know the difference between mip-mapping and LOD, and n-patches.
Because if "mip-mapping" were the "big new feature", than i would just feel sorry for you.
Posted: 23 Jan 2006, 22:39
by mother
IMSbabbel wrote:
I for sure hope you know the difference between mip-mapping and LOD, and n-patches.
Because if "mip-mapping" were the "big new feature", than i would just feel sorry for you.
