Post your screenshots! WIP thread Created 11 years ago2007-12-16 00:58:58 UTC by doodle doodle

Created 11 years ago2007-12-16 00:58:58 UTC by doodle doodle

Posted 2 years ago2017-03-22 19:51:01 UTC Post #334091
@Crollo
It always annoys me to hear people saying: you should move to another engine. Being told "you should accept that obsolescence" makes me feel like I'm consulting a psychologist. I don't need one (at least when it comes to my modding preferences, I guess I could use one for my odd exhibitionist disorder).
We know the age of the Goldsource engine and we're not sticking with it just because we're deliberately ignoring the reality unlike what you're saying. There are good reasons to stick with it, a good part has to do with personal preferences and also passion for the original game. But the Goldsource engine still remains relevant today for other reasons. It's got a distinct gameplay and graphical atmosphere, there is very extensive knowledge of the engine which has been accumulated and documented over the past 20 years, its modding experience is time-tested, and last and far from the least: it's got a huge legacy of content that would be unusable from another engine.
I'm not a Goldsource die-hard fan, but I don't think you should see people who stick and want to do more with the engine as closed-minded people who refuse to accept the reality.

@abbadon
I don't think laziness is a word that describes more than 10% of the Goldsource modders (<- percentage that is completely arbitrary, trust me!)

@Archie
Unity is closed-source, I believe.
Posted 2 years ago2017-03-22 20:21:41 UTC Post #334092
We are not against GS we are referring to the clone engines, they add very little benefit but segregate the already shrinking community.
As a mapper i can't justify the use any of these "3rd" party engines because they are not as widely adopted as the version currently on Steam. The look and feel of the engine is there, was there and will be there in the form of the original engine.
GS was not meant for elaborate entity setups or huge open worlds, why do you need to change that ?

Ive looked at Xash or was it SOHL or whichever with all these graphical improvements and a map on them looked horribly lacking polish (props, lighting etc...). The thing with GS is that you can get away with using just CSG for your map keeping the look and feel authentic. That's why many never moved to Source because the level of detail needed to make a decent level is way higher.

The only thing that keeps this engine from going under is nostalgia. Valve pulled the other reason when they released csgo.
rufee rufeeSledge fanboy
Posted 2 years ago2017-03-22 21:03:36 UTC Post #334093
I don't think laziness is a word that describes more than 10% of the Goldsource modders
Haha, no, i was only describing myself!! ;)
Posted 2 years ago2017-03-22 21:16:57 UTC Post #334094
If you don't want to make maps that use newer features, you don't have to. If you want to play only mods that use the original engine that's your choice.
Why restrict people from doing what they want just because you don't feel like doing it yourself?
Posted 2 years ago2017-03-22 21:59:11 UTC Post #334095
I agree with that. I don't understand what's up with that willingness in imposing a lethargy to others.
GS was not meant for elaborate entity setups or huge open worlds, why do you need to change that ?
We don't stick with GS for its lack of elaborate entity setups and huge open worlds, so why would we prevent it from getting these new features? (although, those two, especially open world, is far from being the reasons why we want to open-source the engine).

Also, I like the visual aspect of improved GS/Xash games like Paranoia 2 and Cof. Guess it depends on everyone's taste.
The only thing that keeps this engine from going under is nostalgia. Valve pulled the other reason when they released csgo.
For the nostalgia part, I explained in my previous part why I think it's wrong. Also, I would argue there is currently more CS1.6 / CZ mappers than other GS mappers.
Posted 2 years ago2017-03-22 21:59:35 UTC Post #334096
I agree with that. I don't understand what's up with that willingness in imposing a lethargy to others.
GS was not meant for elaborate entity setups or huge open worlds, why do you need to change that ?
We don't stick with GS for its lack of elaborate entity setups and huge open worlds, so why would we prevent it from getting these new features? (although, those two, especially open world, is far from being the reasons why we want to open-source the engine).

Also, I like the visual aspect of improved GS/Xash games like Paranoia 2 and Cof. Guess it depends on everyone's taste.
The only thing that keeps this engine from going under is nostalgia. Valve pulled the other reason when they released csgo.
For the nostalgia part, I explained in my previous post why I think it's wrong. Also, I would argue there is currently more CS1.6 / CZ mappers than other GS mappers.
Posted 2 years ago2017-03-22 22:09:00 UTC Post #334097
Plus, you have a problem moding for GS?, you have a zillion tutorials and threads on forums after 20 years of testing and fixing problems for modders. :P I am sure there are plenty less of that support for HL2 and Source modding. Maybe that's why there are so few total conversions for HL2, apart from map packs in the shape of a mod :/
Posted 2 years ago2017-03-23 01:33:46 UTC Post #334098
I think I mentioned this already but I'll mention it again : some people prefer old engines (not specifically GS) because less technology means that there is less time to learn and master it. While modern engines open to the public try to be as friendly as possible (mentioning Unity and Unreal Engine 4), you still need a lot of time to learn them and master them. In other words, creating a level in DOOM 1 is much easier and faster than doing the same in Unreal Engine 4.

I would also like to make a note that is very dear to me when it comes "to fancy graphics inside Gold Source mods": please, don't mistake mods that features enhancements (ARRANGEMENT, Cry of Fear, PARANOIA, Trinity to quote the most populars) as engines (Gold Source, Xash) because they aren't. To clarify, these kind of stuff are built in the client binary (client.dll) by "querying and extending the existing", if it was done inside the engine, others binaries would have been touched ("hw.dll" for Steam, "xash.dll" for Xash) and it would have impacted all games running on that engine.

Switch to Source ? It seems that Valve also abandoned it as well. Just look at the Source SDK 2013 GitHub repository, same hell as the Half-Life 1 one.

I'm not a "pro-Gold Source" kind of person, I did mess around with Unity, Unreal Engine 3/4 and a little bit of Source too. But I refuse to throw away 10 (almost 15 for some people) years of hard work (ARRANGEMENT) just to migrate everything to Unreal Engine 4 and repeat the same history as Duke Nukem: Forever which is the "let's switch to this modern engine because it's so cool".

@Loulimi : Unity is closed source unless you buy the "Pro" or "Enterprise" license IIRC.
Shepard62700FR Shepard62700FRHalf-Cat is watching...
Posted 2 years ago2017-03-23 04:49:27 UTC Post #334099
Amen.
Posted 2 years ago2017-03-23 10:22:39 UTC Post #334100
the Goldsource engine still remains relevant today for other reasons. It's got a distinct gameplay and graphical atmosphere
Which these mods remove. Nobody here is anti-goldsource, nor are we blind purists trying to ruin other people's fun. Just simply part of Goldsource's charm and its continued appeal is its simplicity and style.
Once you add refractive water and normal maps, etc, all of a sudden you've just got a horrible mismatch of style and it looks awful.

The argument is not against Goldsource.
Archie ArchieGoodbye Moonmen
Posted 2 years ago2017-03-23 11:27:21 UTC Post #334102
That's your opinion. Yet again, the Goldsource engine has got a very pleasant visual feel. That doesn't mean everything is perfect with it. The flashlight is horrible, so is the water and the low-quality textures. Yet I still like its simple visual layout. Blocks' edges are neatly, precisely, roughly (by that I'm trying to say that the scale is big) and brutally cut. There is no, or very few, smoothing effect. I cannot express all the reasons why I still like its visual appearance, that's just personal preferences and that's very hard to describe comprehensively.
You find it awful, I love the visual appearance of graphically-improved Goldsource mods such as Cof or PS2 (or Arrangment winks at Shepard), more so than Goldsource's original visual aspect. I still find Source graphics absolutely awful though.
The whole debate is about whether it is worth it to open-source the Goldsource engine in order to improve it (and also apparently whether people should tell other people what engine they think they should mod for). I take it you think it's not worth it. I'm convinced it is for a load of reasons, some I've already mentioned (bug fixing, optimisation, better modding experience), some I've not mentioned yet (custom menu, updated dependencies), and also for the reason of improving its visual appearance: making it look better while only sticking with what makes it look good, even compared to more modern engines. It would be easy to make new visual features only come as an option I believe.
I don't see the point of engines such as Xash which are buggy and illegal though.
Posted 2 years ago2017-03-23 13:36:47 UTC Post #334104
I'm all for people doing interesting things with the GoldSource engine, but I'm a sucker for the classic style and even the original Low-Def models.

I tend to follow most that have that classic look. I don't mean set in black mesa specifically. Original mods that favour brushwork prefabs over models. A prime example would be They Hunger

Somewhat ironic considering The Core uses a lot of prop models... :P
UrbaNebula UrbaNebulaGoldSourcerer
Posted 2 years ago2017-03-23 14:39:05 UTC Post #334107
Once you add refractive water and normal maps, etc, all of a sudden you've just got a horrible mismatch of style and it looks awful.
Nobody's saying we should do that. For some reason, every time i talk about dealing with OpenGL performance issues people think i'm talking about refractions, reflections, bump mapping, HDR, etc, when all i mean is to eliminate the performance issues caused by immediate mode and poorly written graphics code.

Take a look at this:
User posted image
This is rendering a map using shaders, yet it looks the same as in-game. That's because the shaders are identical to the immediate mode version.

A well designed implementation will have the capacity to have those fancy effects, but that is not what i intend, and i doubt anyone else would force it on others.
Posted 2 years ago2017-03-23 14:56:19 UTC Post #334108
I don't know about you, but if i uncap the framerate i get ~1,5-2k fps running trempler's or bruce's huge experimental maps. Where are these performance issues you speak of? :D
Everything runs fine for me on w10. Granted not everyone has a top of the line i7 or a gtx1080, but i guarantee any 10 year old system can push a decent 400fps and if you are running that maybe its time for an upgrade? I get that there are some outdated methods used in the rendering pipeline, but it still works fine on most stuff. Unless its remade for convenience sake, but then we are back into the whole modifying thing...
rufee rufeeSledge fanboy
Posted 2 years ago2017-03-23 17:17:14 UTC Post #334109
"but i guarantee any 10 year old system can push a decent 400fps"
My laptop is almost 10 years old, and I am confident that your statement does not apply on my end. :P
Even in 640x480!
Admer456 Admer456Lean, mean, mapping machine :3
Posted 2 years ago2017-03-23 18:42:06 UTC Post #334112
AMD users beg to differ. It's a driver issue, not an implementation issue, but you have to switch to shaders to bypass the problems.
Posted 2 years ago2017-03-23 19:36:24 UTC Post #334113
Never owned an AMD/ATI card so can't comment there. I have one at work though so i might test and see what i get compared to Nvidia.
rufee rufeeSledge fanboy
Posted 2 years ago2017-03-23 21:18:46 UTC Post #334114
Don't forget to turn on the flashlight, that's a major cause of FPS drops.
Posted 2 years ago2017-03-23 21:53:22 UTC Post #334115
I am sure that what many modders are asking for is to increase engine limits, just that, nothing about fancy graphics.

In my personal case I am just more than happy if the game don't crash because of the max edicts issue, or the max entities in visible packet list. Probably Xash has its issues, but with it my mod did never crash because of those problems.

I am ager to see what Solokiller will do now that, as I think I read, he will start to study how to improve the engine (if not, it will be like a bucket of ice thrown on we all modder's back!, hahaha :crowbar: ).
Posted 2 years ago2017-03-25 08:43:26 UTC Post #334120
Posted 2 years ago2017-03-28 10:55:00 UTC Post #334132
@Trempler keeps nagging me to make a Xen map. I hate Xen textures and architecture though so you're gonna get this instead and you're gonna like it.
User posted image
Posted 2 years ago2017-03-28 16:21:02 UTC Post #334133
Love the waterfall :)
Posted 2 years ago2017-04-02 09:42:50 UTC Post #334202
Wow, gibs hit the func_rotating. Didn't think people care SO much about engine.
As far as I know, some parts of Xash3D are taken from HL2 SDK, and some really deep creepy shitty parts were probably reverse-engineered from [dis]assembly code. And for the stability part, well...
In my opinion, as a professional programmer, who also worked on a HL mod for more than 10 years, the real lego-work is GoldSource. But you cannot notice it unless you try doing something with it. And if you do, "PREPARE FOR UNFORESEEN CONSEQUENCES". One example: once in a while HL kept crashing after level change for no apparent reason. It took a year to find out (and not without help of Xash3D and rehlds because retards at VALVe even encrypt HL DLLs) that HL engine crumbles when singleplayer maps have upper/mixed case names. My maps are named like CO_MapName01, 02, etc. And there are LOTS of things like this. While I, as a modmaker, was spending 90% of my time dealing with things like that, imagine what Xash3D devs had to go through!
And yes, there's a lot of Quake code in both HL and Xash3D. MDL loading code is available in studiomdl sources, same with BSP and SPR. I don't see much reason for VALVe to be so butthurt about their 19 years old stuff.

And HL limits are killing me. I have a big (but still inside 8192 block) and vey nice unfinished map which even does compile, but crashes HL client just because there's no enough memory.

Victor-933 +1 about xen stuff :)
Map looks nice but could benefit from increasing BSP polycout a little IMHO.
I tend to follow most that have that classic look. I don't mean set in black mesa specifically. Original mods that favour brushwork prefabs over models.
again, +1
Posted 2 years ago2017-04-02 12:09:47 UTC Post #334203
i heard that linux hl binaries have a lot of debug information in them making it almost possible to decompile, didnt xash make use of it?
Posted 2 years ago2017-04-02 12:37:05 UTC Post #334204
Xash has been in development since before the 2013 SteamPipe update, which introduced that information. It also doesn't include comments, which are also identical to leaked code.
Posted 2 years ago2017-04-02 13:48:22 UTC Post #334205
Haven't had time to make anything competition related, so once I've got an occasion I decided to continue working on one of my projects. Using Darkplaces engine (Quake engine deriative), it was time to decide which map format I'll use (it supports a few).

Made a simple area in Trenchbroom and saved it as .map, which opened flawlessly in Sledge (made a new wad for GS to use the same textures).

Quake bsp compiled with Tyrutils:
User posted image
HL bsp compiled with VHLT (running under Darkplaces):
User posted image
Same in Half-Life:
User posted image
There's also Quake 3 bsp (probably most advanced of supported by the engine) to test, though I'm not familiar with mapping tools for it.
Posted 2 years ago2017-04-02 13:56:39 UTC Post #334206
Darn, that inspires me to make a Quake map in J.A.C.K. :D
Admer456 Admer456Lean, mean, mapping machine :3
Posted 2 years ago2017-04-02 15:45:04 UTC Post #334207
With stock Quake it'll look worse than on my screenshots, a lot has been modified in Darkplaces. And then, I haven't used any of it's advanced features there. I just made a map with basic Quake entities, textured it and compiled.

What I'm doing is starting with a Quake mod, then making it work as standalone pack working with engine. Once I reach that point, I can compile the engine and get my project with it's own executable.
Posted 2 years ago2017-04-02 17:47:20 UTC Post #334208
I think people should make new "separate games" built on Xash3d instead of making goldsource mods. Because there are a lot of limitations in goldsource and you can not make a modern and optimized game with it. But with Xash3d you can even modify the engine or make your game playable on phone.

But the thing is I do not know if it is legal to use HL1 sdk as a base to use with Xash3d.

Steam does not allow xash3d but what about itch.io for example ? Would gaben sue us even if it would be free :D ?
Posted 2 years ago2017-04-02 18:36:14 UTC Post #334209
For GoldSrc "games", yes. But for usual mods, it's 50/50. If your GoldSrc mod is just a simple level pack with 2 new weapons, then it doesn't need Xash3D. Though, you're right about the limitations. :)

I mean, I was barely able to fit my school map into a 4096^3 space. All entities were inside the space, while some brushwork did slip off into the outer space. ts_untergrund is enormous, and suffers from its size on some locations, too.
Admer456 Admer456Lean, mean, mapping machine :3
Posted 2 years ago2017-04-02 18:42:29 UTC Post #334210
Working on a reimagining of the first DM map I released.
User posted image
Compare to:
User posted image
Posted 2 years ago2017-04-02 19:58:24 UTC Post #334211
Victor-933 BM sublevels? I've played it a few days ago :)
New version looks less like BM here.

fuzun
I think people should make new "separate games" built on Xash3d instead of making goldsource mods. Because there are a lot of limitations in goldsource and
That's a point, yes. But I think Xash3D API is not yet estabilished outside of GS API to be used widely. That's if you want your game to be portable between different engine versions. But if you're doing a complete stand-alone with lots of engine modifications, you pretty much stick to one version.
I personally chose the hardest way of making a mod that is compatible with everything from WON HL 1110 to Steam HL 1122 and Xash3D. Just to let players run it on whatever they like most.

Admer456
Yeah, map size limitation is a very silly one. HL could technically handle double XYZ even back then.
But much worse is texture memory limit. And HL also does not clean texture memory on level change, so when you play lots of different DM maps with custom textures, HL WILL crash. Or maybe it will crash becasue of AllocString before that :D
Posted 2 years ago2017-04-02 20:22:48 UTC Post #334212
@xawari yeah, which is why I called it a "reimagining". Doesn't even follow the same layout (which is great IMO because the original layout was just a bunch of open hallways)... Looks a bit like DM_Crystalline, although to be fair they all share the same inspiration -- Caverns 1 from Doom 3:
User posted image
Posted 2 years ago2017-04-04 22:10:01 UTC Post #334226
Hey, what about a DM-Fractal port for Half-Life?
User posted image
Posted 2 years ago2017-04-05 01:55:42 UTC Post #334230
User posted image
More fun with entity setups. Proof of concept was proven tonight.
Tetsu0 Tetsu0Original Cowboy
Posted 2 years ago2017-04-05 05:27:43 UTC Post #334231
Care to elaborate?
Jessie JessieLadytype
Posted 2 years ago2017-04-05 10:20:27 UTC Post #334232
Working on laying the groundwork for an idea i had.
Without giving too much away, the silvery shape to the right is a 'ship' and the gray boxes are phys_thrusters to allow the ship to steer, and env_smokestacks simulate the fuel leaving the ship thrusters.

Simple steering was accomplished using the 4 black buttons that are arranged as a D-pad.

So even though there's gravity in that box, the ship acts as though there is none, and floats around 'weightlessly'.
Tetsu0 Tetsu0Original Cowboy
Posted 2 years ago2017-04-05 21:06:18 UTC Post #334236
I started some Quake mapping:
User posted image
The 2nd floor hallway...
User posted image
...after getting swept through.
User posted image
This is where the teleport leads to.
User posted image
So, I've realised that mapping for Quake = GoldSrc × 0.5. So yeah, that means that half of the features are gone etc. but that's why it's simpler.

Big thanks to Snehk for inspiring me to actually start Quaking. :)
Admer456 Admer456Lean, mean, mapping machine :3
Posted 2 years ago2017-04-05 23:54:42 UTC Post #334237
I really need to get Quake. But the mapping looks really good. I especially enjoy those hallways.
Posted 2 years ago2017-04-06 04:02:09 UTC Post #334239
Here's some DM-Fractal progress:
User posted image
Posted 2 years ago2017-04-06 10:34:38 UTC Post #334240
Great work Admer! That outdoor map looks especially good. You could also add some high wall to make it look more like Quake-styled keep. If you know QuakeC enough (or know where to look, Quake community most probably published code on one of their forums long ago), you can bring entities from Half-Life to Quake with recompiling svqc.

Been working with Quake 3 .bsp, but compiler crashed every time I tried to compile a map, so I'm going to stick with Quake 1 .bsp (or bsp2). Today I've been testing how height maps and high res skies work in Darkplaces engine. Made some wacky, placeholder, test height maps and got high res pack from QuakeOne forum.
User posted image
User posted image
User posted image
(I know that this groundcover looks horrible...)
Posted 2 years ago2017-04-06 10:48:36 UTC Post #334241
But adding new entites would basically be a new mod, right?
Hmm, that could actually be interesting. Imagine a Quake mod which brings HL:DM into Quake. xD

Anyway, I heard of QuakeC but I have no experience in it, nor in C, only typing code from a tutorial into a .cpp file. :)

And Quake seriously lacks func_breakable, or I'm blind...
Admer456 Admer456Lean, mean, mapping machine :3
Posted 2 years ago2017-04-06 10:58:56 UTC Post #334242
And Quake seriously lacks func_breakable, or I'm blind...
It's been a few years since I played it, but I don't believe Quake did breakable objects.
UrbaNebula UrbaNebulaGoldSourcerer
Posted 2 years ago2017-04-06 11:23:25 UTC Post #334243
That's right, no func_breakable, func_door_rotating or even transparent surfaces without additions to progs.dat

Getting stuff from tutorials working in QC is not harder than following C++ tuts. Might be easier in some cases. Copy-pasting still largely works, and there's more QC reference and scripts on the web than Half-Life coding tutorials.
Posted 2 years ago2017-04-06 11:53:15 UTC Post #334244
That's right, no func_breakable
Wrong. There are breakable boxes that also explode. I can´t remember where exactly they are. but I think It´s the second or first level of the second episode. I am sure that there´s one in the first level of the first episode, and also scattered around in other levels.

There are rotating stuff, but I´m not sure that they are useable doors. :/

BTW: nice level Admer!!, I am now playing Quake Scourge of Armagon and I love to see that Quake´s still alive.(I play Quake1, Quake2, and their expansions once every springtime along with the first Unreal :) )
Posted 2 years ago2017-04-06 12:02:43 UTC Post #334245
Replayed base Quake 1 recently and didn't noticed any exploding boxes or rotating stuff. Weren't they added in Scourge of Armagon?
Posted 2 years ago2017-04-06 13:14:24 UTC Post #334246
No, I am surenow that there's one of those boxes in the first level of the first episode.As you enter the level follow the hall, take the lift on the left, enter the yard, cross the bridge and when you open the door you can dee and destroy the first exploding crate. The rotating stuff is on scourge of armagon, yes, you're right, but I have the impression of having seen some of that in Quake 1... will take a looksy. ;)
Posted 2 years ago2017-04-06 13:47:58 UTC Post #334247
You're right, totally forgot about these! misc_explobox and misc_explobox2 entities. They're not the HL-alike brush based func_breakable though. They are modelled and scripted to explode. What I meant by no breakables in Quake is that you can't make a wall that can be destroyed, in base game, I think that in Scourge they had better breakables, but can't be sure. Haven't played expansion pack in a while.
Posted 2 years ago2017-04-06 14:11:01 UTC Post #334248
Either in the articulator, or the tutorials, I found something related to humour in mapping. It contained stuff about flight companies across Doom, Quake and Half-Life 1. That gave me an idea about what to do next with my Quake map:

First I make the map in Quake, then port it to Quake 2, then to Half-Life 1 and then to Half-Life 2.

It shouldn't take more than a year, no?
Admer456 Admer456Lean, mean, mapping machine :3
Posted 2 years ago2017-04-06 14:45:24 UTC Post #334249
IMHO Quake -> Quake 2 -> Half-Life 1 port won't take much time to make if you're using jackhammer.
You must be logged in to post a response.