EDuke32 2.0 and Polymer! "talk about the wonders of EDuke32 and the new renderer"
#2690 Posted 19 February 2012 - 12:29 AM
#2692 Posted 19 February 2012 - 07:11 PM
TX, on 15 February 2012 - 09:12 AM, said:
I hadn't downloaded EDuke32 for a while, and then I went to do it. I probably clicked that 'button' for ten minutes. I felt stupid.
#2693 Posted 20 February 2012 - 01:31 PM
This post has been edited by Spiker: 20 February 2012 - 01:32 PM
#2694 Posted 20 February 2012 - 02:58 PM
However, it is a very useful feature nevertheless. Downloaded maps are almost always in zips, and being able to put those directly in the map folder instead of extracting the maps first saves hassle.
#2695 Posted 20 February 2012 - 03:03 PM
Spiker, on 20 February 2012 - 01:31 PM, said:
The ZIP needs to be located in autoload of course. Accompanying OGGs and MHKs will be loaded for example.
The feature of r2370 is just about the font color in the map selection screen.
Helix - r2375 / crosshair coloring works. Thanks.
This post has been edited by LeoD: 20 February 2012 - 03:10 PM
#2696 Posted 20 February 2012 - 03:18 PM
#2697 Posted 20 February 2012 - 03:21 PM
#2698 Posted 20 February 2012 - 04:45 PM
Hendricks266, on 20 February 2012 - 03:18 PM, said:
Well I never tried putting a zip in my maps folder so I didn't know it had ever been added. Now if you really wanted to shock me someone could add support for JPG screenshots instead of those unwieldy TGAs.
#2699 Posted 20 February 2012 - 09:18 PM
DeeperThought, on 20 February 2012 - 04:45 PM, said:
There is .PNG support, but I think you need to compile the source code yourself to get it to work.
#2700 Posted 22 February 2012 - 08:45 PM
#2701 Posted 26 February 2012 - 10:44 PM
James, on 17 February 2012 - 09:20 AM, said:
Thanks for that James. Life gets better though, and the next 12 months are looking to be awesome for me so I'm really stoked!
James, on 17 February 2012 - 09:20 AM, said:
Thanks for that, I'll go check it out tonight and see what they've come up with
I've got some ambitious ideas planned that are already putting me in over my head in the conceptual phase... But I'm excited to give things a try!
This post has been edited by Sobek: 26 February 2012 - 10:45 PM
#2702 Posted 26 February 2012 - 10:54 PM
EDIT: Never mind I found it.
This post has been edited by MusicallyInspired: 26 February 2012 - 10:55 PM
#2703 Posted 27 February 2012 - 02:58 AM
Sobek, on 26 February 2012 - 10:44 PM, said:
Hey, if you don't mind, I could take a look at them and see if that's fixable. I'm always interested in weird map corruptions.
MusicallyInspired, on 26 February 2012 - 10:54 PM, said:
Plagman implemented TROR support for Polymer a while ago. The most acute problem with it is the drawing glitches with intersecting translucent masks, IMO.
#2704 Posted 27 February 2012 - 06:04 AM
#2705 Posted 27 February 2012 - 07:00 AM
#2706 Posted 27 February 2012 - 07:41 AM
EDIT: Never mind. This issue is completely non-existent in polymer. New mapping possibilities just opened up for me with the map I'm working on. Where's the thread that explains how TROR works again? I can't seem to find it.
This post has been edited by MusicallyInspired: 27 February 2012 - 08:08 AM
#2707 Posted 27 February 2012 - 08:11 AM
Plagman, on 27 February 2012 - 07:00 AM, said:
Oops, indeed, it's occlusion I meant.
#2708 Posted 27 February 2012 - 12:17 PM
MusicallyInspired, on 27 February 2012 - 07:41 AM, said:
EDIT: Never mind. This issue is completely non-existent in polymer. New mapping possibilities just opened up for me with the map I'm working on. Where's the thread that explains how TROR works again? I can't seem to find it.
Yeah; Polymer is the renderer of choice for TROR: that's where the initial design came from. All the information is probably in that thread:
http://forums.duke4....room-over-room/
It's very diluted, though. Ideally someone would create a complete TROR guide/documentation on the Wiki.
#2709 Posted 27 February 2012 - 12:49 PM
This post has been edited by MusicallyInspired: 27 February 2012 - 12:51 PM
#2710 Posted 27 February 2012 - 01:33 PM
#2711 Posted 27 February 2012 - 01:43 PM
#2712 Posted 27 February 2012 - 03:19 PM
Micky C, on 27 February 2012 - 01:33 PM, said:
Hit it! http://wiki.eduke32....m_Mapping_Guide
#2713 Posted 28 February 2012 - 08:42 AM
#2714 Posted 28 February 2012 - 10:37 AM
This post has been edited by Diaz: 28 February 2012 - 10:38 AM
#2715 Posted 28 February 2012 - 01:16 PM
@MuciallyInspired; No, not yet anyway.
@Diaz; yes, HUD sprites are not affected by polymer lights, but not sure about the glow mapping.
#2716 Posted 28 February 2012 - 05:24 PM
There's other crazy things you could do too like detect the nearest light and have a series of definetints/pals (for coloration) and shift the shade around based on the expected brightness.
I'm talking out of my ass now as I'm a bit tired, but hopefully it's helpful anyway.
#2717 Posted 28 February 2012 - 08:13 PM
Mblackwell, on 28 February 2012 - 05:24 PM, said:
There's other crazy things you could do too like detect the nearest light and have a series of definetints/pals (for coloration) and shift the shade around based on the expected brightness.
I'm talking out of my ass now as I'm a bit tired, but hopefully it's helpful anyway.
You know, I once tried something just like that... I wanted to try and see what a phaser rifle would look like as a sprite only, because I had an image of one that looked brilliant (in the 'ready to fire' first person position too), but I wanted the Polymer HUD lighting to work on it. What I did was create a flat plane basic model and with a little DEF tinkering, got it properly rotated for first person view (hard to explain, but I positioned it where the gun WOULD be and rotated it to the right about 30 degrees on the centre axis). Then I just applied the texture of the rifle to it, had a look in-game, warped the perspective of the texture a bit in photoshop, looked again, warped again and so forth until it looked almost completely normal in first person mode... Then with a normal map on, the lighting was almost perfect on it.
Unfortunately it was just too much work for every weapon and every animation, and then the model went kaput randomly one day and I lost all that work (it was a one-off test, no backups) so I just didn't bother and instead fixed my phaser rifle to a really nice full 3d mesh. My point is that with a fair deal of work, time and effort, it can be done and it can look great. I just wish I'd taken some screenshots... But I never felt it was finished
*edit* I just whipped this up in about 1 minute based on what I remember doing last time. You could simplify the model plane drastically but that's not the point. What I did was fire up the phaser rifle model from a Google Sketchup mesh, rotate it roughly how I wanted, took a screenshot, cut out just the rifle and stuck it on a blank canvas in photoshop with a transparent background, saved it as a PNG, then applied it as a texture for the flat plane mesh in Milkshape3D and... voila. It's totally basic but with some further tinkering you can nail it down awesomely. Stick on a normal map and it's great;
This post has been edited by Sobek: 28 February 2012 - 08:37 PM
#2718 Posted 28 February 2012 - 11:24 PM
Yes, it does take a lot of work.
This post has been edited by Tea Monster: 28 February 2012 - 11:26 PM
#2719 Posted 28 February 2012 - 11:59 PM
Tea Monster, on 28 February 2012 - 11:24 PM, said:
Yes, it does take a lot of work.
You mean for taking the initial snapshot of the model to use as a texture? I used Sketchup & Milkshape in my example above but originally gave Blender a whirl (did a highres render with the ambient occlusion baked in and lots of AA applied for the best quality). As you say, it's a lot of work, but the results can be pretty spectacular!

Help
Duke4.net
DNF #1
Duke 3D #1


