I have a suggestion for the Elite. Try making the gap between the toes taller. Somewhere a bit below those blue dots.
Printable View
I have a suggestion for the Elite. Try making the gap between the toes taller. Somewhere a bit below those blue dots.
Nice work laggy, also funny hat
The problem with the Elite's feet is that the top of that armor is flat. make it more curved so it maches the shape as if the elite was bare like the rest of his armor is.
nekked elites. nuf said
for some reason, the bottom building with the power line coming out of it reminds me of something from HL2 (specifically highway 17). at any rate, looks sweet (but post pics of your first map skinned D: )Quote:
Originally Posted by Massacre
Unless you had an interspecies foot fetish, I don't see how that would be a big deal. who's looking at feet anyway?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay2645
http://ishallsmitethee.googlepages.c...lite3-full.jpg
Feet need to be more like hooves, you've made them big and chunky like feet.
OMG HOW'D YOU KNOW?Quote:
Originally Posted by n00b1n8R
:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:
From this will come my new avatar. :vQuote:
Originally Posted by teh lag
EDIT: :awesome:
That made my day.Quote:
Originally Posted by teh lag
You should replace the Food Nipple Grunt with the British Elite.
And no photoshopping either! Sucks that I can't get those post-filter effects to work for me. :(
you just go into the damage effect and change the screen effect :/
Actually no, he gave it a custom post filter effect using DXTweaker. It's actually really cool, you should download it (if you don't have it) and try it yourself. The results can vary from :gonk: to :awesome: though.
I've gotten the hang of the pixel shader coding or whatever, and I was able to write up this:
http://img115.imageshack.us/img115/17/96170454ip2.jpg
Looks a bit cooler when you can see the whole map. It's a different look; very bright and airy.
Now I wish DXTweaker could work alongside Battery :(
Link to info on this DXTweaker pl0x
How the fuck??
thats like epic, reminds me of halo 2 bloom lighting lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Conscars
looks like fake bloom O_o
that's the best idea everQuote:
Originally Posted by Jay2645
And give him like an obnoxious british voice that says "ALLO! MOI NAYM IS 'ARRY PO'AH, AND ROIGHT NOW, I'M STONED OUT OF MOI MOIND!"
tune down the brightness/add more contrast, anything so i can see the shield meter and sky at the same time--then i wanna try it out.
But that voice doesn't fit with a monocle :/Quote:
Originally Posted by Muki Hyena
No, he has to sound like an upperclass twit, hence the monacle.Quote:
Originally Posted by Muki Hyena
"mmmhmmm, indeed Charles, I think the shade of the demon's armor is absolutely appauling, indoubtably the least handsome shade of sage I have ever layed my eyes upon. Although I must commentate that it is perhaps my monacle which, ever so slightly, obscures my vision, and the artistic definition of the lines may well justify such a shade de la vert, so unattractive in initial appearence. However I do suppose so hideous a pigmentation certainly invites his mandatory extermination; with gladness and ease I would deign to join him in combat, what nonsense is this theory of his infategibility."
do u c wut i did thar
i c wut u did thar
+REP, holy fuck. :haw:Quote:
Originally Posted by Massacre
FFS YOU SHOULD BE A SCRIPT WRITER
Guess whats done (kinda, just ingame left to do)?
:awesome:
Now, let me explain the cliffs. Since this is a max render, I can't apply detail maps to the level. The cliffs are using an alpha blend bitmap. This way, I can get the cliffs and the cliff tops to blend perfectly, as you can see. In game, I will have a very hi res cliff texture being tiled where you can see the grey there on the cliffs, and a nice snow detail map being tiled where the white is. On the alpha channel, this is represented as black and white, as you all should know. Black being my cliff detail, white being my snow detail.
As far as I'm aware, this is the first CE map to do this. That is, using not only an alpha blend bitmap for the ground, but for the cliffs as well.
More maps need the cliff done like this. There is no seam between ground and cliff in the real world.
as far are you're aware thats the only map that's done it...
;)
As far as I'm aware, unless some really underground nub map no ones ever played did it. If so, screw them.
Also added a pic.
Also, I think the map needs more hidden meme. Nah, fuck that secret room shit.
Although, having a giant football style scoreboard saying in big giant letters, "You got anally molested by a sideways pinecone, dickcheese" when someone was killed would be quite awesome.
try, unreleased sandbox map. Also, i think you should make the gradient between ice and rock between cliff and snow a bit more defined, it looks way too blurred and spread out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ð4ÑØ *
Yeah, thats cause it's a 512 texture Wol :/
It'll look plenty defined once it has the detail maps on it. These aren't your average detail maps btw. The cliff detail map being applied is essentially just an x and y axis tiling regular cliff bitmap, but moar resolution. It's not some black and white thing.
no nigga, i mean the actual transition from snow to rock.
Oh you want it to be more abrupt?
But snow melts Wave O' :(
but snow also does not gradually melt in a GRADIENT, it CLUMPS.
i think i smell a custom brush...
What? A smooth transition and you call it a custom brush? Wouldn't a globby look be more assumed of being a custom brush?
Also, I get what you mean now. I did it pretty quick this thing, didn't think about that. Though it will be hard to make that not seam with the uv layout i have.
Also I never use custom brushes, unless it's for things like scratches and things like that. These are custom brushes I made though.
How I'm doing this is a nulled version of my snow detail map as a top layer, and I'm simply rubbing it out with the eraser to expose a nulled version of my cliff detail map underneath.
i meant that you should try using a bloody custom brush, twit. but the null/eraser thing might work. we'll see.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ð4ÑØ *
That ring-like object that's over the middle doesn't look that good. I think it would look better without the 3 rows of faces smoothed together.
I tried massacres angle method and this is what I came out with.
Ignore the error on the door in the first one, Ive already fixed that.
http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/d...7/telebase.jpg
http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/d.../telebase2.jpg
A second structure I made, Referenced it from a model Il duce made.
http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l4...aseentry-1.jpg
And the Two joined.
http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l4...wotogether.jpg
Good job Selentic ;) Better than I could do, but then again I don't 3DS at all...
Something I noticed:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ð4ÑØ *
>____>Quote:
Originally Posted by selentic
Yeh, I almost 100% plagiarized it :D
Cept Mine has a little bit of a different cliff forming, as they go right to the frame around the door, and theirs goes farther out.
Now, i love what Ð4ÑØ has done with everything, it looks amazing.
Now the layout...etc is good, but i wish some of the modeling was up to par with his texturing :( It's nice none the less though, his texturing/skinning makes it look uber so...alls good.
Now...a lesson in boredomness....(yes its a word :rolleyes: w/e)
Ð4ÑØ's Image
selentic's Image
http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l4...aseentry-1.jpg
btw your count on those little thingys is out
Now, thing about this base model, other then it been unique, is that is pretty simple to make...
5mins later...after typing the above ^^
Yea, that really did only take me 5mins to make...
Not even close to what i could have done in like an hour, but i just that fast, now its effective i'll admit, but lacks in 'gameplay gimmicks' but we'll see when Ð4ÑØ actually finishes this bad boy and gets it ingame what it plays like.
Oh and a word for the wise...I HATE that people have to steal other peoples ideas, such as this base, because there imagination is so limited they can't even concept a frickin base design by them self.
kthxbi!
HAHA. Well the model wasn't originally sapposed to be textured by Dane. Me and Mass were going for more of a H1 detail model. Just alittle better. And then dane came in and sexified it.
But those bases are not our idea either. They are taken from h3 and changed a bit.
The map does play exalent. We did not want to make much to the base because the gameplay is meant to get the person to relise that the open spot is at the base making them defend themselve sin the center so less base camping and more awsome fire fights. Plays awsome in CTF. Originally designed for a FFA map because we lack good maps like them. And just a plain 1v1 map. So yes this should have some awsome gameplay and shall work good for everygametype. Now that I think about it. KOTH would be fun on this map too. But we still have to test that.
I'm working on a video that is like a UI but is being done in 3DS. Will be released soon.
If you are putting this into Halo, it can do 2048x2048 fine. My cliff textures are 2048x2048 with dynamic lighting and a 512 bump-map, and i get 80 FPS looking at it with an 8500gt. Just don't over-use that resolution, but it will do fine in certain places. It looks AMAZING!Quote:
Originally Posted by Kalub™
Not really. You are still dealing with 2048 x 2048 pixels, there is no way to get "sub pixel" detail in a texture. If anything it's better to paint it at 2048 x 2048 first instead of scaling it down because Photoshop (at least Version 6.1, which is what I am using) murders details when you size something down and turns it into a blurry mess.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kalub™
No Kalub is right, Photoshop shrinks them in a specific way which gives it a nice effect.
http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/5...nshot00ur5.png
The AA effect is not coming from the bloom.
That's awesome.Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrickssj6
is that with an app or are you going the same way as ballscars?
http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/192/negavisioniz7.jpg
Halo PC Mod with the sniper rifle. Nega vision makes stuff negative so there more noticeable.
iirc there's a thing in photoshop that resizes it nicer then simply using the scale tool.Quote:
Originally Posted by legionaire45
you're not cool enough to say ballscarsQuote:
Originally Posted by n00b1n8R
OH SNAP
Edit -> Image Size
?
n00b, I think Patrick's picture is simply PS'd.
Yea, it is.
I suggest you retry that whole reading thing....
If you are talking to me, n00b asked if he was using the post-filter effect on halo to get that effect, and I replied with that it was simply PS'd. You should retry reading n00b's post.
e:Quote:
Originally Posted by n00b1n8R
Your not the boss of me :saddowns:Quote:
Originally Posted by Conscars
also, can't blame a guy for hoping :p
Only faked bloom added in PS. The AA is coming from the 1024i resizing.
Also, funny thing is, no one notices the strange thing in the picture. xD
lol I got it. I can't believe I didn't notice that immediately. How'd you do that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrickssj6
skinswapping?
Imagine the situation...getting high with Kalub a year ago..doing some memory crap in Halo...realizing Bungie did a bad job at that point...and...Quote:
Originally Posted by sever323
tadaaaaa...there you have it. :D
Do I look like "HMT" is a word I have in my dictionary? Oh wait...Quote:
Originally Posted by n00b1n8R
Starts with a B, ends with an luearrow
wort
You people are all stupid. Making a higher res texture and shrinking it down doesn't improve it's quality. It worsens it.
Also, I'm not making a 1024 alpha blend map ontop of all the other 1024 architecture textures I have. Almost all the architecture textures are 1024 a piece. The cliff detail map I'm applying will be 1024x1024 and TILED. I want this map to play great on everyones PC's, and look great. Sometimes I have to make sacrifices.
Even still, the map will look a hell of a lot better than all the original Halo PC maps.
Because the map is so open, therefore making portaling quite ineffective, I can't smash up the res on everything. Compromise people!
:|
Why make high-res architectural bitmaps, and then ignore the attention to cliffs?
detail mapsQuote:
Originally Posted by Kalub™
That is completely stupid to paint at twice the res if you know your going to have it at half the res. Just paint the dam thing AT the res you are going to. ??????????Quote:
Originally Posted by Kalub™
Also, what Con said. NO DETAIL MAPS YET MANG.
Dano be on aim tommorow, I need to talk to you when I get off work so be on around 7pm thats eastern time idk what time it be where u are.
Well that won't teach you anything mister Croccydoccy :mad:
Also, Terror, piss off.
Look how PS resizes pictures and you'll learn. It doesn't just delete unnecessary pixels.
Of course it doesn't delete them, it makes them all fucking smaller, therefore prone to more stretching when applied to the same surface as a higher res version.
Why on EARTH do you think a term called "hi resolution" exists?
Larger resolution textures with more pixels have more detail IF PAINTED SO. If you've painted a 1024 texture to be very detailed, and apply it to a surface, then you half the image size to 512, and view it on the same surface, notice how it looks worse?
If you paint a hi resolution texture and hope for the scaling down to improve your texture, your stupid.
Wasn't this common sense?
People need to stop being lazy and just paint at the same resolution as they intend and put the proper detail in. If they didn't put detail into spots on a hi res, how on earth do you think that it's going to invent detail for you out of nowhere in the exact same space, while shrinking it?
Really, wow.
Im a no0b, get off me... :(
http://img176.imageshack.us/img176/1...screen0aj5.jpg
http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/7...screen0ka7.jpg
http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/3...screen0hn4.jpg
Just shots from a little something i've been working on.
Halo Editing, especially Halo scripting alone wasn't easy for me. Then kokori's halo launcher inspired me to create this app. It's coded in c# and it was a log effort too (no really, i had to do this only knowing how to do basic IO programming in C++) so not only did i learn a lot about c# in a short amount of time, i also got better at online research and extracting answers from multiple sources. a release will come soon (i'm just working on making the scrip template buttons work). i'm hoping that this app makes life easier for everyone (suria's been delayed, the model got deleted when i lost my flash and my computer got haxored with a virus just a longer wait this time guyies, i promise the remake will be better, layout and all) back on topic, just a little while longer on this app, got school and work coming up so it shouldn't interfere too much. oh and BTW HAPPY NEW YEAR 08
Nope it's not common sense since that statement is wrong in the first place.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ð4ÑØ *
It makes the texel info smaller and resamples. Choose a different resampling method if you don't like the results.
Bored...I just thought it would look good:
http://img176.imageshack.us/img176/9...nshot00qb3.png
once again patrick i wished halo could look like that either by mods or haxoring
i can't + rep right now (sometimes the system's so screwed)
Does Photoshop count? ;)
:vQuote:
Originally Posted by Ð4ÑØ *
Pixels cant change is size, a pixel is a pixel.
Ex:
Same pixel, one is just painted at higher resolution, right? Correct me if I'm wrong.Code:|_| 1x1 pixel |_||_| 2x2 same pixel
|_||_|
That is correct.
Let me try to show you what happens and why DANO is WRONG:
(sorry for the optical illusion in there but you can clearly see that is does NOT resize pixels or delete them, it tries to find a transition which is the effect Kalub and me were talking about)
http://img86.imageshack.us/img86/6580/qsdawdxs5.png
shrinking a texture just makes you LOSE detail.
SHRINKING does not ADD anything. at all.
painting textures at a resolution you're not going to use it at is just DUMB.
people used to do it, because they thought it gave them sub-pixel detail everyone knows thats bullshit thats why nobody does it anymore.
I dont see how thats a better result......
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Quote:
Originally Posted by Tweek
So yah, the only real reason is to blur out mistakes.Quote:
Ben Mathis:
True resolution vs. Double Size
When painting a texture, many times people will paint at two times the resolution, then size it down. Meaning if the final map is a 512x512, they will paint at 1024x1024. I recomend staying at true resolution whenever possible.
If you are just starting out at texturing, painting at the actual resolution is a good habbit to get into. There are many reasons for this. First and formost, is the time factor. You do not have to worry about any details that cannot fit into the end result map, because it IS the end result map. If the pixels hold it, it will show up in game (if the camera/player gets close enough) Secondly is how crisp your end result will be. I have said before, and Ill say again, you as the artist, want the control. any uniform application by a computer will end up looking piss poor compared to the same sort of effect applied by a skilled artist. Each pixel in the resized map is the result of the average of four pixels at the larger size. You can place single pixel highlights, as well as razor sharp single pixel seams and shadows. They will not be blurred to obscurance by photoshops algorithms.
Common reasons people argue for painting at double res:
But I can be messier/faster/scribblier and then size it down and it looks "right". This is not true, it only makes your mistakes less apparent. Their is a reason that art teachers tell you to "draw big" It is because it makes your mistakes apparent. If you cannot make it look right at the small res, you are not making it look right when you resize either. It is just that your mistakes become less apparent.
But I can get subpixel detail! Again, not true, there is no such thing. A pixel is a pixel is a pixel. You can have detail that is implied as smaller than a pixel, but it is just as reproducable at res, as it is double size, you just have to know how to do it. and it will read better because you did it at true res, than if you resized down. One particular thing that people like resizing for is hair. A good way to learn how to do implied sub pixel detail, is to actually resize something, and look to see what the pixels are doing that implies that thinner than a pixel detail. Once you learn these "rules" you can use them or adapt them for your needs, and be faster because you are painting them at res.
Again, if you are already fantastic at texturing, and you resize. By all means, continue doing it. It is, and always will be, the ingame results that count.
That post coming from someone who doesn't paint textures, and this post coming from someone who does, I can say that is one of the single most retarded posts I've read in quite a while, Croccy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kalub™
It takes more time to paint a bigger texture, than a smaller one. If you half assed the detail on a "hi res" and hoped for shrinking to improve it, your not going to get any more detail on the lower res version. Your going to get a lower res, blurrier and undetailed piece of crap, which took you ages to make because you painted it at a stupid resolution to begin with. Basically, worse. The only thing you improved on was filesize. You lost in all other areas.
You paint at the resolution your going to use, so you KNOW what it's going to look like. What happens if you've got a texture budget, of 512 for a bitmap, and you paint the thing for AGES on a 2048, you shrink it down, and it looks like complete crap. You just wasted your time.
Logic people.
*e* oh shit Llama, someone deserves a spanking of + rep :awesome:
I believe, that by looking at Dano's signature, and suddenly realizing his natural talent is painting textures, that there is no point in arguing with him.
Create your works at what you are going to use them. Don't make them any better, only to make them worse. You get the detail you aim for. It's exactly how you'd want it.
On a side note:
http://i11.tinypic.com/7w8yjxx.jpg
This screenie is a bit special, and it's not the same as the ones from the same old hallway.
In it, is pure dynamic lighting, ZERO lightmaps. It has a 128x128 squared cube-map on the walls, and the floor, that reflect the exact environment it's in, custom created. It also has a dynamic mirror. It uses a 1024x1024 sized bump-map and wall texture, which was created at 1024x1024, not 2048 and down-sized. And the game, well, it runs with less FPS loss than Damnination.
I think that's the max I can get, in my work-in-progress to obtain the best Halo can look. I don't know what else I can do. It has everything the game is capable of. Including particles. The rest is simply applying it, the best it can be applied, and releasing all the information so that everyone else can do the same to their own works. I feel satisfied. It's done.
I think it's a little too bright at the end of that hallway considering that I can only see one light in the area.
Which end? The darker end is visible because of reflection brightness/cave-lights. The super bright end has a multitude of lens flares placed along it. The single light is supposed to be powerful and contrasting. It's not supposed to be the usual generic light, but a single one which is meant to be strong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Conscars
I mean it looks TOO strong for a single light. Maybe a strip of more lights to help the brightness make sense?
Dano, I paint things, not textures. But, I'm not claiming to be a god at it.
" Common reasons people argue for painting at double res:
But I can be messier/faster/scribblier and then size it down and it looks "right". This is not true, it only makes your mistakes less apparent. Their is a reason that art teachers tell you to "draw big" It is because it makes your mistakes apparent. If you cannot make it look right at the small res, you are not making it look right when you resize either. It is just that your mistakes become less apparent. " Isn't this what I was saying? Its what I thought I was.
If you're serious, I'm pretty sure that statement is trying to discourage resing down the texture. It isn't fighting for its (down resing) defense.
/sigh
Nevermind. All I was trying to say was this:
But I can be messier/faster/scribblier and then size it down and it looks "right". This is not true, it only makes your mistakes less apparent.
And that I used the technique/suggested it. Either way, its done and over with, and I can fix this little argument in a few seconds.
That teaches nothing though. You don't better yourself. You plateau.
Also, Sunny, WOW. It looks like theres some sort of motion blurr effect happening?
It looks ACE.
yea but super sunny your map runs slow as hell due to all that high-res stuff (which is nice to look at might i add), but won't the dropping framerate have an effect on multiplayer?
Did you intend Valkyre to be a jaw-drop gorgeous map to look at, or a fun map to play?
Or otherwise, did you intend the level to be a benchmark for how far the community has come and a foothold to where we could push the engine in the future (hopefully the near future)?
I keep repeating this, but I'll explain it again.Quote:
Originally Posted by demonmaster3k
The map is easy as hell to speed up. It just requires portalling, which I have added in. Now FPS is stable and runs like damnination.
It has been my project to make it look as best as possible. I'm done with that. Now I'm working on design/layout. The screenshot shown in this thread is not intended to be something about the map, it's intended to be something about Halo itself. The map runs much faster than before, simply because I portalled it.
Now, obviously, it's a bad idea to work on the looks of a map first. The reason I did that was to set a standard on how a map should, graphically, look in Halo. I didn't just create shaders, I worked on optimizing specifically how shaders can work with Halo to make a map look better, for all future projects by me and anyone else who would like to learn how to use them.
The layout I can worry completely about now. It's my intention to make it as fun and playable as possible.
Because of the disparity between the old game development standards for consoles and the "limitless" bounds of PC titles. The consoles needed small textures because of their hardware limitations while the PCs could easily be expanded with the release of new hardware before the year was out. Compared to the 64x64 textures used in consoles (which were perfectly fine in the 480i displays of consoles of the time), the 256x256 textures used for computers running games at resolutions at least 800x600 were 16 times the size.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ð4ÑØ *
That's why the term "hi* resolution" exists
*: it's high resolution, not hi.
wow, nitpicky much Zef?
I think everybody in this thread needs to chill the fuck down, pull the pinecone out of their anus, and perhaps laugh at a noob like SVC.
Do you guys remember his map with box buildings? i know i do.
IAWTP, not that it counts for much.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wave of Lag
I chilled, why do you think I back down and deleted all my posts (Pardon the Quotes)?
:D Also, Wave, needs more funny faces of "pineapple in anus"
*sigh* Tweek and Ð4ÑØ on the same boat, who would have known?
No reason to argue anymore because it's plain down-right stupid. So I guess us inferiors should leave them alone. :rolleyes:
