Author Topic: WW_Bunker & MrSnowman  (Read 5232 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Akinaro

  • Flagrunner
  • ****
  • Posts: 749
WW_Bunker & MrSnowman
« on: February 25, 2016, 04:52:17 am »
...
« Last Edit: September 25, 2016, 12:04:55 pm by Akinaro »

Offline duz

  • Flagrunner
  • ****
  • Posts: 586
  • Old nick: HunterZ
Re: WW_Bunker & MrSnowman
« Reply #1 on: February 25, 2016, 06:21:07 am »
Bunker looks good as fuck! I'd like to test the map and post some feedback...
The MrSnowman's rooftop could be removed, it's ugly!
2002-2007 / 2009-2012
HunterZ The Movie I / II / III
Awards

Offline %%%%%%%

  • Soldier
  • **
  • Posts: 205
Re: WW_Bunker & MrSnowman
« Reply #2 on: February 25, 2016, 12:19:19 pm »
The MrSnowman's rooftop could be removed, it's ugly!
F12

Offline L[0ne]R

  • Soldat Beta Team
  • Rainbow Warrior
  • ******
  • Posts: 2079
  • need a life. looking for donors.
Re: WW_Bunker & MrSnowman
« Reply #3 on: February 25, 2016, 12:21:18 pm »
One thing I don't quite understand - why do you keep polygon shading so sharp and angular, like it's still done with polygons? With your method of texturing you could do much more detailed and realistic-looking shading without any angles. Is it a deliberate choice of art style or are there some technical limitations?

And yeah, I don't see the point in keeping the roof on Mr Snowman. It doesn't do a whole lot except limit player freedom and look ugly.

Offline Bistoufly

  • Soldat Beta Team
  • Flagrunner
  • ******
  • Posts: 782
Re: WW_Bunker & MrSnowman
« Reply #4 on: February 25, 2016, 12:33:57 pm »
How would you keep players from going off-map without the roof?

Offline %%%%%%%

  • Soldier
  • **
  • Posts: 205
Re: WW_Bunker & MrSnowman
« Reply #5 on: February 25, 2016, 01:10:47 pm »
How would you keep players from going off-map without the roof?
Magic(invisible polygons and less jet fuel)
Invisible polygons on the sides only; leave the top open (maybe increase height of map to prevent being warped back/re-spawned) and don't change jet fuel.

Offline Bistoufly

  • Soldat Beta Team
  • Flagrunner
  • ******
  • Posts: 782
Re: WW_Bunker & MrSnowman
« Reply #6 on: February 25, 2016, 01:35:03 pm »
Invisible polygons are never a good solution.

Is there any other possible way to go about it?

Offline %%%%%%%

  • Soldier
  • **
  • Posts: 205
Re: WW_Bunker & MrSnowman
« Reply #7 on: February 25, 2016, 01:51:10 pm »
Invisible polygons are never a good solution.
Why not

Offline duz

  • Flagrunner
  • ****
  • Posts: 586
  • Old nick: HunterZ
Re: WW_Bunker & MrSnowman
« Reply #8 on: February 25, 2016, 02:08:29 pm »
Invisible polygons are never a good solution.

Is there any other possible way to go about it?

Maybe the map being part of a big glacier and the sides being the dangerous part (hurts and kills you)...
I like the middle background, but it could be more noticeable to make more sense.

The bunker with a spotlight (flashing) gif would be cool :P
« Last Edit: February 25, 2016, 02:13:31 pm by duz »
2002-2007 / 2009-2012
HunterZ The Movie I / II / III
Awards

Offline Home

  • Major(1)
  • Posts: 43
Re: WW_Bunker & MrSnowman
« Reply #9 on: February 26, 2016, 12:21:29 pm »
Killed by a blizzard when moving to high would be really epic.

Offline soldat-game

  • Camper
  • ***
  • Posts: 402
Re: WW_Bunker & MrSnowman
« Reply #10 on: February 26, 2016, 01:26:08 pm »
bunker very good, snowman :/ can be better

Offline duz

  • Flagrunner
  • ****
  • Posts: 586
  • Old nick: HunterZ
Re: WW_Bunker & MrSnowman
« Reply #11 on: February 26, 2016, 03:42:26 pm »
I have no words for your remake. It's the best Bunker remake ever made (sorry L[one]R :/).

Your texturing process makes the final file size almost 4x bigger than the other maps. Suposing that you gonna remake a lot of maps and everyone is using this proccess. Worth it? (Soldat w/ 4x the current size)
You can't do the "same" thing with Polyworks? Or with the next version of it?
2002-2007 / 2009-2012
HunterZ The Movie I / II / III
Awards

Offline urraka

  • Soldat Developer
  • Flagrunner
  • ******
  • Posts: 703
Re: WW_Bunker & MrSnowman
« Reply #12 on: February 26, 2016, 06:02:30 pm »
End results always the same: drops in frame rate and Loots of problems with small polygons that had to be set as doesn't collide and need even more normal invisible bigger polygons to use them as a ground.

Even on my dedicated nvidia card I had visible drops in fps and results where not even close to this method.

FPS drops are likely to be caused by the collision code (not so much the rendering - even 3000 triangles should be nothing for a modern gpu). In an ideal world we would have collision stuff and visuals separated, to avoid the extra fancy polygons affect the physics code.
urraka

Offline L[0ne]R

  • Soldat Beta Team
  • Rainbow Warrior
  • ******
  • Posts: 2079
  • need a life. looking for donors.
Re: WW_Bunker & MrSnowman
« Reply #13 on: February 26, 2016, 06:30:23 pm »
The number of sceneries remade is far from "small part". Currently there's 388 default sceneries, out of which 308 have already been remade, and there's no way the missing 80 will weigh more.

Your texture also isn't designed for 4k resolution which is a standard now, whether you like it or not, and whether you can see the difference on your monitor or not. A texture made using your method and designed for 4k would be about 7mb on average per map, depending on the size and amount of detail, and that's after optimizations and re-using pieces in multiple spots. An asymetrical map with distinctly-themed areas would require an even bigger texture.
Your method also requires a unique texture for each map. Right now there's only ~40mb worth of textures which are shared between 97 maps.  With unique texture per map, 97 maps would need ~680mb worth of textures alone (at best), not counting any of the sceneries. If other mappers used the same method, your Soldat install would quickly bloat up to a few gigabytes from the custom maps you download.

I agree that visually the results are much superior when using your method, but it's extremely inefficient from technical point of view. I'd rather see a proper multitexture support added at some point which should basically bring together the best of both worlds.

BTW, I think Soldat does actually support .jpg textures, or at least it did in the past. Support for them might've been removed due to crashes, though I don't know for sure. JPG artefacting is awful either way, so I wouldn't touch them even if they were supported.

I have no words for your remake. It's the best Bunker remake ever made (sorry L[one]R :/).
Don't apologize, I like the looks of this one much more too, especially the bunker design. Once again though, the problem is that colliders and hiding spots don't stand out well enough amongst background sceneries. This is really important if you want a good gameplay on this map without forcing players to remember which sceneries are what. There are indeed some issues with movement too, though I find it actually has some charm of the older maps which weren't designed around "parkour". Texturing method of course remains the biggest problem. If not for that - I'd much prefer this for the remake.
« Last Edit: February 26, 2016, 06:32:42 pm by L[0ne]R »

Offline %%%%%%%

  • Soldier
  • **
  • Posts: 205
Re: WW_Bunker & MrSnowman
« Reply #14 on: March 08, 2016, 01:17:13 pm »
Sorry for bumping but I forgot that I made that MrSnowman with open top. It turn out that its not that good as I expected.
Definitely better than with a ceiling, though.

Offline jrgp

  • Administrator
  • Flamebow Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 5033
Re: WW_Bunker & MrSnowman
« Reply #15 on: March 09, 2016, 11:36:26 pm »
Sorry for bumping but I forgot that I made that MrSnowman with open top. It turn out that its not that good as I expected.

That looks quite good. I always like maps that put effort into drawing detailed areas that aren't reachable ingame. (The parts of the map on left and right beyond the walls)

And yeah, clouds > polyceiling.
There are other worlds than these