Create an account

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
why cod4 looks so good

edit ::bluh! I worded this thread terribly... I fixed it up a bunch now ... here is a summery
about 80% of the prettiness in cod4 can be achieved in xonotic easily ...

I have been doing some mapping for COD4 recently ... yes, I know its old ... but it still looks very nice...

Anyways It uses the IW engine which is based off of the q3 engine ...
darkplaces is based off q1 ... so they are similar


While mapping and playing I have noticed that

1-- The brush work is simple ... most of the complex structure and details are achieved through models ... their library of models and props is HUGE! ...

also they use these things called prefabs ... they are little .map pieces that have interactivity prebuilt into them ... need a sparking broken tv? ... well just plop one in Big Grin

2-- Decals Decals Decals ... The amount of textures used in cod4 is surprisingly small ... instead most of the variation is added it using large decals of dirtyness, waterstains, bullet holes, blast marks, ect... I have noticed xonotic uses some ... but COD uses them in almost EVERY CORNER ...

3-- cubemaps ... almost everything in cod has a cubemap ... EVERYTHING ... to do this instead of having a set cube map ... they have and entity called "reflection probe" This entity compiles a cubemap at it's location ... then all cube mapped surfaces (including rifle scopes) just grab the cubemap from the nearest probe....

4-- dust .. there is always dust or other atmospheric effects ... I believe that a shader could be made for xonotic's system that simulated floating dust/smoke.

Some things are major engine differences (a 3d light grid, godrays, ect), but the majority of the stuff can be accomplished by having. More props, some bigger decal textures, and some tricky shader work.

In the end, I know people don't want to make xonotic into another dustly middleeast grime fight. However I believe that if used right some of these effects would look nice in the scify techpanel scene.

thier model library (image gallery)

declas tutorial

Basically that is the same for source engined games, simple brushwork, mask it w/alot of models, another nice feature of source is the blending textures right in the editor, and the scripting.
[Image: foxtrotcproggry.jpg]

hutty ... please ... you need to reduce the ... in your text ...

Quote:Anyways It uses the IW engine which is based off of the q3 engine ...
darkplaces is based off q1 ... so they are similar
i dont think so. darkplaces is not really similar anymore to id tech 1, id tech 1 is not similar to id tech 3 at all, since id tech 3 was remade from scratch, and i dont think IW 3.0 is similar to id tech 3, since they were modifying id tech 3 for over 4 years then...

and sure, all of that is possible in darkplaces, and decals and props add detail and atmosphere. but... who's gonna make them?

God, please... not props. I hate props.
[Image: optsig.png]

... the dotdotdots is because I like to type in scatter thoughts ... as opposed to complete sentences ...

and they are similar because I am mapping for both of them ...

whose going to make them? ... idk ... anybody who wants to

as for props ... what do you have against them?

I always figured it was a "fill in the blanks" game for punctuation Smile
(no offense)

Always wanted to dump the message database and count your dots, too.

EDIT: ugh, sorry. Back on topic.

Decals and particles would be great, props probably not, they would obstruct paths.

Most games make the small props not clip the player character.
My contributions to Xonotic: talking in the forum, talking some more, talking a bit in the irc, talking in the forum again, XSkie

xonotic actually already has some props (crates, computers, fans, ect)
... ... ... ... ... ... .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . ... guess that punctuation Tongue

… … …
"Yes, there was a spambot some time ago on these forums." - aa

Props would obstruct paths? Regardless of what props, placed where, and regardless if they are solid or not? that's a.. special conclusion Tongue Props are as un/obstructive as brushes.

If the mapper can handle it or not is another matter. A library of good props could likely shave days if not weeks of the mapping time for a average map, and help give maps a sense of common theme/style. The problem (as mentioned) is that someone needs to make all that stuff. We do have a bit but nowhere near enough to skip brush detailing all together.

Quote: The problem (as mentioned) is that someone needs to make all that stuff. We do have a bit but nowhere near enough to skip brush detailing all together.

^^ This. Hutty, I think you've made some really good points, but I think that optimisations, bug fixes and good map designs should come first in Xonotic. Maybe once things are solid by v1.0, the community could start improving the graphics and making props (which are already pretty good, although there are some very dated looking textures and effects here and there). That said, can't people import props from that open art website thingy?

The best way, what tZork said, is that we can actually build whole maps from only models btw, and only use brushwork where it is really necessary. That's why Xoylent looks so gorgeous, because half of that map is actually made up from models, and not brushwork (that kind of LARGE details would be actually impossible in radiant brushwork).
[Image: 561.png]
"One should strive to achieve; not sit in bitter regret."

Careful though ... managing a textured brush is far easier that trying to get textures to look right on large modeled surfaces... In-case you hadn't noticed... most all the models in xoylent are made up of many small complicated pieces.... not walls...

COD also follows this principle ... if any of you have played the game ... remember the Ferris wheel? ... thats just a big prop...

Of note hutty, most textures in Darkplaces have deluxemapping add gloss to the surface based upon the lightmap. This is one alternative to extensive Cubemapping.
Cubemaps can easily damage the realism of a scene if used too aggressively, but we should make better use of them for sure. I think it would be neat to generate a very low resolution cubemap(32x32p per side) at the players viewpoint, and use that as an environmental modifier...

no gloss is not a replacement for cubemapping ... but You are right ... they can damage the realism of a scene if used wrong ... but They aren't used that much at all in xonotic atm. The only places I can think of is redplanet's glass and one of the texture packs metal panes.

the low res cubemap generation sounds interesting ... It would only work on small surfaces though (like shiny gun parts)

on the subject of cube-maps, yu can render those with Xonotic. Just maneuver to the location you wish to make a cube-map from and use:
envmap <basename> <size>: save out 6 cubic environment map images, usable with loadsky, note that size must one of 128, 256, 512, or 1024 and can't be bigger than your current resolution

The resulting images ends up in
"Documents\My Games\xonotic\data\env\" on winblows
"~/xonotic/data/env/" on lunix (and crapple)

Yes I know that ... and it is a very helpful feature ... however ... that means I have to create many many shaders for all those maps (more of a hassle than an issue)

If things like cubemaps and certain atmospheric particle effects were generated automatically by the engine, then the quality of all maps would improve, regardless of the skill of the mapper. As it is, making a cubemap is far more complicated than it could be, and as a result, only the best, most experienced mappers use them.
Master of mysterious geometries

Imgur Gallery

Actually ... for the most part it is the texture makers that need cube maps ... mappers only need knowledge if they want very reflective and accurate surfaces ... in which case they will need texturing and shader knowledge too ... which took me an entire school semester to figure out Tongue

(06-07-2012, 07:18 PM)theShadow Wrote: only the best, most experienced mappers use them.

[Image: oh-stop-it-you.png]

But I still stand at my opinion: our maps would benefit a lot, if the higher details would be totally made from models, and only the walls, the hull would be made from brushwork. This needs a lot and cooperative work, but it'll pay off in the end visually.
Note, that with proper caulking and hinting (=optimising vis) this doesn't necessarily have a toll on performance.
[Image: 561.png]
"One should strive to achieve; not sit in bitter regret."


Here are some cool GPL compatible (CC-by 3.0) models to make map details of Wink

(Edit: Well compatible in the sense that it is considered ok to be used with GPL code, you can't relicense it though).


This might be useful too (also CC-by).

Nice findings. However, these are only models, they still needed to UV unwrapped, and textured.
[Image: 561.png]
"One should strive to achieve; not sit in bitter regret."

Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  is there a good how to for skyboxes ? Kamakazi 4 5,955 04-13-2016, 09:23 AM
Last Post: Kamakazi
  Blender - Any GOOD md3 exporters for 2.55? Minkovsky 3 6,012 02-11-2011, 04:26 PM
Last Post: nowego4
  Collecting opinions about good competetive Duel-Map WTFProoF 33 30,354 01-07-2011, 07:48 AM
Last Post: Strahlemann
Photo DM Layout - is it good? Minkovsky 11 10,322 10-16-2010, 01:01 PM
Last Post: Minkovsky
  Are you good wit da photoshops? MintOX 15 13,476 06-30-2010, 08:51 AM
Last Post: MintOX

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)

Forum software by © MyBB original theme © iAndrew 2016, remixed by -z-