Welcome to CMM

The CMM forum software was recently upgraded, some things may have changed and some things may be broken or not working. Please let me know by PM or on IRC if you have any problems using this forum.

Also, I've removed the skybox and shader links for now, the shader generator page was being abused and as we're moving towards a ue4 mapping base, they're redundant.

Mapping for UrT HD

General mapping discussions
bludshot
Posts: 111
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2011 12:12 am

Re: Mapping for UrT HD

Postby bludshot » Sun Oct 16, 2011 11:06 pm

.
Last edited by bludshot on Thu Aug 02, 2012 5:16 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Delirium
Posts: 366
Joined: Sat Aug 27, 2011 8:37 am
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Re: Mapping for UrT HD

Postby Delirium » Mon Oct 17, 2011 7:02 am

Well the thing is, is nothing has really changed from a mappers side. All theyve done done is batched surfaces which now get rendered by the GPU and same with models. this allows for a lot more detail and minimal hinting needed. Bumpy has been around for the last 3 or 4 years so its nothing real new, people are just finding new ways to make bumpy look a lot better.

Which is why I have no idea why people have been talking about it so much. Its nothing to worry about, you can add more detail and thats about it, nothing else has changed...
Image

User avatar
Rayne
Site Admin
Posts: 623
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2011 5:22 pm

Re: Mapping for UrT HD

Postby Rayne » Mon Oct 17, 2011 7:10 pm

First off there is nothing fundamentally different between making a map the old school way verses a “requirement” to make a map for HD. A HD based map is more ideological in nature than practical in application and rather than replacing Radiant, which you still need for entity placement and clip brushes, the ability to use outside resources makes performance improvements as well as faster workflows hard to ignore.

We can talk about performance improvements all day but the reality is one cannot consolidate all of the improvements into a single idea with out doing the work necessary to prove the point. This of course is a time consuming process if one is thinking about making a map from concept to completion and it’s easy enough to talk the talk but how improvements needs to be made are based on the two ideals of increased performance and faster workflows.

So

There is nothing different between a map made for 4.X and a map made for HD and labeling it as such is done so as to be a container, a point of reference, than makes it easier to relate both performance and workflow improvements.

Fact.

Either way you go does not really matter as the magic is preformed in the compiler and not the application that you use and as long as you can get it into Radiant in the first place then the output can be targeted to what ever version of the game you wish.

Second although performance, faster workflows, as well as resource recovery is a huge consideration these alone are not motivating factors as compared to our needs as a collective to be able to develop content for the game in a manner that fits the needs of the individuals on our team as well fits in with the demands of or asset pipeline.

We are probably one of the few or even the only development team that caters to the needs of the content and asset creators that has an asset pipeline that is flexible enough to be able to move the work from concept to completion with out the need to become overly concerned over their personal preferences as to how they like to work using the applications that they are familiar with.

So

Based on the need to support the efforts of the talent and rather than creating yet more application dependencies the “desire” to add external application support is a lot more valuable in the creation of usable assets with in a team of individuals who can all model in a 3d application like 3ds Max and as many individuals who can model can work on a single map at the same time with out everyone getting in the way.

The overall benefit to the 3rd party mapmaking community is maps can now be made using team dynamics to build a map much in the same way a collective of individuals use their talents to build a house and labeling a map as being HD is about the ideals of process rather than being forced to change how things are done.

In conclusion

How the individual wishes to create a map, be it for 4.X or HD, does not matter as it relates to results and being able to create with out concerns to application dependencies is where things are heading in the world of 3D graphic in general with out the need to label the artists based on the result.

So the choices are there not based on requirements but on creative intent and as such one can chose to sit around and wait to see what happens or be the first one to create something insanely great.

FrankieV

RedSnappa
Posts: 323
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 12:10 pm
Location: North Carolina (USA)

Re: Mapping for UrT HD

Postby RedSnappa » Wed Nov 30, 2011 4:12 am

Rayne wrote:Blender IMO is crap. Very user unfriendly and difficult to learn. Where max is easy to pick up and easier to learn than radiant, at least it was to me.

I don't have $3,500 to spend on 3dsmax though, and I suspect that few mappers do. In just a few hours I have made some decent inroads in learning Blender. As soon as I finish this Spacestation map I am going to delve deeper into it.
[LCDLC]Snappa
LCDLC Mapmaking Dept.
Maps finished: Hellhouse, Sorry, Worrior 1-20
Maps modded: CubeOrigin
Maps in release candidate: Blockforts, Cannons 1, Hotzone, Icecastle
Maps in beta: Arctica, Cannons 2, Cerulean-River, Igloo, Skygarden, Spacestation
Maps in alpha: Merlin, Totem

User avatar
Rayne
Site Admin
Posts: 623
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2011 5:22 pm

Re: Mapping for UrT HD

Postby Rayne » Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:55 am

RedSnappa wrote:
Rayne wrote:Blender IMO is crap. Very user unfriendly and difficult to learn. Where max is easy to pick up and easier to learn than radiant, at least it was to me.

I don't have $3,500 to spend on 3dsmax though, and I suspect that few mappers do. In just a few hours I have made some decent inroads in learning Blender. As soon as I finish this Spacestation map I am going to delve deeper into it.

You can get max for free now. All you have to do is join their education community.
http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/do ... eID=123112

RedSnappa
Posts: 323
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 12:10 pm
Location: North Carolina (USA)

Re: Mapping for UrT HD

Postby RedSnappa » Wed Nov 30, 2011 1:14 pm

Rayne wrote:
RedSnappa wrote:
Rayne wrote:Blender IMO is crap. Very user unfriendly and difficult to learn. Where max is easy to pick up and easier to learn than radiant, at least it was to me.

I don't have $3,500 to spend on 3dsmax though, and I suspect that few mappers do. In just a few hours I have made some decent inroads in learning Blender. As soon as I finish this Spacestation map I am going to delve deeper into it.

You can get max for free now. All you have to do is join their education community.
http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/do ... eID=123112

That is a huge relief. I'll have to see for myself which is better then. I feel like anything will be a sharp learning curve for someone who has only modeled in Radiant though.
[LCDLC]Snappa
LCDLC Mapmaking Dept.
Maps finished: Hellhouse, Sorry, Worrior 1-20
Maps modded: CubeOrigin
Maps in release candidate: Blockforts, Cannons 1, Hotzone, Icecastle
Maps in beta: Arctica, Cannons 2, Cerulean-River, Igloo, Skygarden, Spacestation
Maps in alpha: Merlin, Totem

RedSnappa
Posts: 323
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 12:10 pm
Location: North Carolina (USA)

Re: Mapping for UrT HD

Postby RedSnappa » Tue Dec 06, 2011 12:48 am

Getting 3dsmax now. I see I can download some other things, like Maya. Anything else I should get?

EDIT: I decided to get Inventor as well. It looks like it may help me with some ideas I have floating around in my head.
[LCDLC]Snappa
LCDLC Mapmaking Dept.
Maps finished: Hellhouse, Sorry, Worrior 1-20
Maps modded: CubeOrigin
Maps in release candidate: Blockforts, Cannons 1, Hotzone, Icecastle
Maps in beta: Arctica, Cannons 2, Cerulean-River, Igloo, Skygarden, Spacestation
Maps in alpha: Merlin, Totem

User avatar
theRipper
Posts: 223
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2011 1:57 pm
Contact:

Re: Mapping for UrT HD

Postby theRipper » Tue Dec 06, 2011 3:06 am

free trial or full?
Image

RedSnappa
Posts: 323
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 12:10 pm
Location: North Carolina (USA)

Re: Mapping for UrT HD

Postby RedSnappa » Tue Dec 06, 2011 4:15 am

The full one you can get with the student program.
[LCDLC]Snappa
LCDLC Mapmaking Dept.
Maps finished: Hellhouse, Sorry, Worrior 1-20
Maps modded: CubeOrigin
Maps in release candidate: Blockforts, Cannons 1, Hotzone, Icecastle
Maps in beta: Arctica, Cannons 2, Cerulean-River, Igloo, Skygarden, Spacestation
Maps in alpha: Merlin, Totem

User avatar
johnnyenglish
Space cake
Posts: 892
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2011 9:23 am
Location: Nottingham, England

Re: Mapping for UrT HD

Postby johnnyenglish » Tue Dec 06, 2011 6:40 am

We're still waiting for a fuller description of how to bake rendered shadows into map textures, I'm sure a lot of us would like to experiment with this technique but are missing a few key points.

Perhaps you could enhance the CMM wiki with this information, or at least pass the information on to Rylius or myself and we'll add it.


Return to “Mapping Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron