ATCSHD: high-resolution ATCS update

[jm82792]

(Ingar please feel free to tell me to can it or delete my posts if you think I'm mucking up your thread.)

I already stated that.
A new engine won't make anything look better without redoing assets.
You can't brew textures from crappy ones easily.
You can't make geometry from nothing.
You can't make channels from nowhere(you can derive them though) easily,
you need shaders and inputs to make them work properly unless you want grey everything
Did I say it was easy?
No.
But I did say if you get bump mapping in you need new textures,
then you will want more for the new texture effort plus you will still have the same old models.
In the end I concluded you'd get your best bang for your buck with XReal because you wouldn't be making new textures and have the same old limitations.
"Drop-in" isn't the proper word,
more like "porting with minimal work compared to some other foreign engine. And more than likely being easier than adding new features individually".

[Pazuzu]

here is the basics.
Basically my credentials are from Blender(not game engines at all), and I've been using Blender for 2 years, Maya for 2 years before.
So I have an idea of shaders and such.
getting bump mapping would be nice,
it would help however you need to add a normals/bump channel top the textures.
Bump mapping using bad textures won't look well.
You need new textures to make it look better.
Then with bump mapping you want more(the effort for new properly licensed texture is high or costs money),
say MD5s, higher vert count, etc.
Your better off looking into XReal at that point unless we can "easily' integrate features without much effort(heck if someone wants to add bumpmapping or such then do it!!!!).
Why XReal? It's practically a drop in solution for trem.

To me, that looks like you were advertising XReal as a drop-in solution for the above problems. Try and tell me it doesn't look that way, seriously.

because you wouldn't be making new textures

What will, then? XReal? New models call for new textures, unless the UV unwrap is completely identical, which means the model would have to be completely identical too.

But I did say if you get bump mapping in you need new textures,
then you will want more for the new texture effort plus you will still have the same old models.
In the end I concluded you'd get your best bang for your buck with XReal because you wouldn't be making new textures and have the same old limitations.

I'm not endorsing Sauerbraten over XReal (octrees? really?), but let me say this again: XReal is just an engine. To implement bump-mapping with any engine, you'll need the texture set from before, plus normal or depth maps. XReal is no different, unless it can magically make those normal maps for you, from the textures given. Maybe I just have no idea what you're trying to say about XReal. Is it even related to what you're saying about bump-mapping?

[CATAHA]

What will, then? XReal? New models call for new textures, unless the UV unwrap is completely identical, which means the model would have to be completely identical too.

AFAIK XReal support MD3 models, so u dont need any changes. Yes, its also support MD5 models.
 

I'm not endorsing Sauerbraten over XReal (octrees? really?), but let me say this again: XReal is just an engine. To implement bump-mapping with any engine, you'll need the texture set from before, plus normal or depth maps. XReal is no different, unless it can magically make those normal maps for you, from the textures given. Maybe I just have no idea what you're trying to say about XReal. Is it even related to what you're saying about bump-mapping?

Engine possibility for bump-mapping not forcing you use it always. Bump-mapping its just one of shader stages. No maps for this stage - bump-mapping not applied. So with improved (but compatable) engine you still can use old assets, but have tools for make better one.

[UniqPhoeniX]

PLEASE lets not post the same exact arguments in every thread that is somewhat related to graphical updates.

[StevenM]

i think everyone, including Ingar missed the point. ATCS is a terrible map. 1.2 and ATCS dont mix. Period.

[SlackerLinux]

i think everyone, including Ingar missed the point. ATCS is a terrible map. 1.2 and ATCS dont mix. Period.

atcs has always been a horrible map but atleast it looks good now

[jm82792]

ATCS has good gameplay....
Ingar feel free to delete my posts and tell me to shutup...

[Tremulant]

I'm still not sure that ATCS HD is an improvement overall, i like the lighting, the fog idea's ok, but so many of the textures just look out of place or unfinished.

Ingar feel free to delete my posts and tell me to shutup...

(Ingar please feel free to tell me to can it or delete my posts if you think I'm mucking up your thread.)

If you feel that you're so likely to be mucking up his thread why not just stop posting, of your own accord? I'm sure ingar feels free to remove anything he feels the need to, there's no need to give him permission.

[Odin]

here is the basics.
Basically my credentials are from Blender(not game engines at all), and I've been using Blender for 2 years, Maya for 2 years before.
So I have an idea of shaders and such.
getting bump mapping would be nice,
it would help however you need to add a normals/bump channel top the textures.
Bump mapping using bad textures won't look well.
You need new textures to make it look better.
Then with bump mapping you want more(the effort for new properly licensed texture is high or costs money),
say MD5s, higher vert count, etc.
Your better off looking into XReal at that point unless we can "easily' integrate features without much effort(heck if someone wants to add bumpmapping or such then do it!!!!).
Why XReal? It's practically a drop in solution for trem.

*deep breath*
No.

This assessment is true only if you want to look at the visual graphical portion of XreaL. Under the hood you have goodies like GPU Vertex Skinning, VBOs, support for many real-time dynamic lights(more than , and many other massive improvements to performance(no 25,000-30,000 poly limit). There is also a nice LUA-based particle system that's fast as hell.

In addition to the stuff you don't 'see', you get the following for free, without needing new assets:
HDR rendering that doesn't make the scene look horrible.
A nice bloom shader that doesn't make it look like you jizzed on your monitor('shine' shader is more accurate in this case imo).
Real-time shadow mapping that actually works.

Remember, these are all toggleable via cvar so they are optional. This includes the under-the-hood stuff too.

Like I've said 9,001 times before: you port it to XreaL, and make the assets later(or hell, let the community go nuts). You'll have a ton of features and speed improvements. Yes, you'll alienate a bunch of people who have ancient hardware. In my opinion, it's not fair that the entire community has to suffer at the expense of people who can't be bothered to enter the 21st century in terms of gaming computing. If anything, the devs could use a switch in the code to disable everything XreaL and release two binaries, one that's for ancient clunkers, and one that's for people who want to actually use their hardware.

[Qrntz]

alienate a bunch of people who have ancient hardware

* Qrntz looks at his ES1000 and cries.

[Haraldx]

You know what would be the the worst if we port to Xreal?
You get about 100 features but due to your computer you can't even turn on half of that, then you want a new computer again. This is extremely annoying... EXTREMELY annoying! So, all I have to say to my favorite Nvidia 6200 AGP 256mb VRAM... "sorry, but... bye my love..."

Besides, all that stuff togglable using cvars? Are you joking me? Cvars are for goddamn nerds! A casual player getting a new game, what would he do? Of course check the options, but for gods sake, not the freaking console! Who the heck does search for console commands and all kind of vars for a game that he ran only for 5 minutes?

[SlackerLinux]

are we going to get any more maps with a texture update??

[Odin]

Besides, all that stuff togglable using cvars? Are you joking me? Cvars are for goddamn nerds! A casual player getting a new game, what would he do? Of course check the options, but for gods sake, not the freaking console! Who the heck does search for console commands and all kind of vars for a game that he ran only for 5 minutes?

Guess what the options menu does? They modify cvars. Of course the menu would be changed to let you turn on the new features.

/facepalm

[CATAHA]

are we going to get any more maps with a texture update??

What map would you like to upgrade?

[KillerWhale]

What map would you like to upgrade?

I'd actually really like to see all of the default maps updated by various mappers around the community.

Your Face's take on Tremor, anyone?

[CATAHA]

I thinked about tremor too =) At leas fix that ugly glitch with bugbuilding in basement.
Well... Right now i'm on finish like of 'Rusty' map. Gonna think about default map improvements after b1 release.

[Meisseli]

At leas fix that ugly glitch with bugbuilding in basement.

IIRC that got fixed already some time ago.

[CATAHA]

Yeah... I think i saw 'fixed' map release. But in most cases servers use common map version.

[Tremulant]

Is bug building not affected by the glitch-building fix?

[SlackerLinux]

are we going to get any more maps with a texture update??

What map would you like to upgrade?

well as many as possible they all look good but would be great to just update the look to something a little different

Is bug building not affected by the glitch-building fix?

maybe they fixed it haven't tested it in a while also there is a similar one on transit that would be good to fix

[Tremulant]

Is bug building not affected by the glitch-building fix?

maybe they fixed it haven't tested it in a while also there is a similar one on transit that would be good to fix

Having never bug-built myself i'm unsure how to check, assuming you're familiar with bug building in those locations maybe you could give it a shot?

[mooseberry]

Is bug building not affected by the glitch-building fix?

maybe they fixed it haven't tested it in a while also there is a similar one on transit that would be good to fix

Having never bug-built myself i'm unsure how to check, assuming you're familiar with bug building in those locations maybe you could give it a shot?

They released a fixed version of tremor, but I'm not sure where it's actively in use. I don't think the glitch building fix would affect that particular instance, because the fix was to make sure the model and bounding box for a structure couldn't be too far apart. In the tremor basement glitch, there happens to be a pipe outside of the normal playable map which is reachable by ckit, but does not have 'nobuild' applied to it.

[CATAHA]

They released a fixed version of tremor, but I'm not sure where it's actively in use. I don't think the glitch building fix would affect that particular instance, because the fix was to make sure the model and bounding box for a structure couldn't be too far apart. In the tremor basement glitch, there happens to be a pipe outside of the normal playable map which is reachable by ckit, but does not have 'nobuild' applied to it.

Those areas just should have 'clip' brushes. =)

[Ingar]

No, no new release yet, but I need some help: I want to replace to toiletfloor, but I can't seem to find a decent
replacement texture. Suggestions are more than welcome.

I've attached the original texture used in atcs, and the replacement texture from atcshd.
What I'm looking for is something that looks like the original texture, but is at least 512x512
an has a permissive license.

(and yes, I moved the thread to Map Releases board  )

In bunker the horizontal lights shader atcshd/eq2lt_bmtl03light_300 blend image is .jpg, while the shader looks for .tga,
which I assume is what's causing the light come from the center of the shader, not where the light actually is.

Afaik the engine ignores the extension. The problem is that, with q3map2, light is always emitted from the center of the brushface.
The problem with eq2lt_bmtl03light_300 is that the actual light itself is just a small part at the bottom of the texture,
and it appears as the light is emitted from a solid concrete wall.

[KillerWhale]

If all else fails, there's always trak4_tile2a/b.

They look pretty close, if not exactly like the old tile.

[Ingar]

If all else fails, there's always trak4_tile2a/b.

They look pretty close, if not exactly like the old tile.

With some gimp magik, it does 
Thanks for the tip KillerWhale, and kudo's to TraK for the texture.

[vcxzet]

you could use more noise everywhere!

[Ingar]

If you had spend that time on actually making a texture, I would have used it, and you would have received credit.

[vcxzet]

I rushed so the result was disappointing.

[Ingar]

I rushed so the result was disappointing.

It's also a bit too small for the surface it represents, and might cause obvious tiling in-game.
(twice the size would be a later better). My edit looks quite useable though.

I still appreciate the attempt.