Tremulous Forum

General => General Discussion => Topic started by: Drag222 on January 23, 2011, 08:27:39 pm

Title: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: Drag222 on January 23, 2011, 08:27:39 pm
Wel first, let me tell you that it's the first map I ever madde on any engine, but the editor of this engine is so easy to use that I was able to barely do it.
It's made on the Natural Selection 2 engine, and since this game is set in the same context as Tremulous, I didn't need any new assets.

The map is not over Yet, i'd say it's 50% done, I still have to do the outside and add more details (like fans turning with dynamic shadows :D)
But It takes me a long time and I don't know when it'll be 100% done so I'll show you the human side :)
Also, note that i'm not happy at all with the lighting, but hey, I'm a noob mapper and so a noob light user... I don't know how to have a good lighting.
But everything is dynamic =)

This will give you a nice Idea about what tremulous could look like in your dreams =D
Also I know it's not proportionally the same as tremulous, but it's very hard to keep the same proportions especially for a noob mapper :(

Now after all this talk, here are the screenshots :
(http://img156.imageshack.us/img156/5523/atcs1.jpg)
(http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/3043/atcs2.jpg)
(http://img703.imageshack.us/img703/9880/atcs3.jpg)
(http://img820.imageshack.us/img820/5554/atcs4.jpg)
(http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/567/atcs5.jpg)

I hope that you like it =]
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: F50 on January 23, 2011, 08:37:51 pm
Hrm. Alternate ATCS textures are becoming common these days. Thankfully, they are also becoming awesome. Looks great.
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: Drag222 on January 23, 2011, 08:53:13 pm
Hrm. Alternate ATCS textures are becoming common these days. Thankfully, they are also becoming awesome. Looks great.
It's not alternate ATCS textures, it's ATCS on another engine, it's written everywhere, even in the title.
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: CATAHA on January 23, 2011, 08:54:42 pm
I wish such engine possibilities in Trem. =\
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: Drag222 on January 23, 2011, 08:58:48 pm
I wish such engine possibilities in Trem. =\
I made this just to make people drowl :D
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: CreatureofHell on January 23, 2011, 09:42:26 pm
If Tremulous looked like this in my dreams then I would be having a nightmare.
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: jm82792 on January 23, 2011, 09:49:31 pm
Bad lighting wreaks the best scenes.
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: Cadynum on January 24, 2011, 02:14:09 am
The textures and the gun looks nice but what the hell is up with the light?
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: cron on January 24, 2011, 03:25:02 am
The textures and the gun looks nice but what the hell is up with the light?

i'm not happy at all with the lighting, but hey, I'm a noob mapper and so a noob light user... I don't know how to have a good lighting.
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: jm82792 on January 24, 2011, 04:39:43 am
I know cron.
But I was more or less saying it would be much better with better lighting.
If this engine was open source it would be a choice but it's not so I see this as a dead issue.
However it does show what trem can look like!
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: Nux on January 24, 2011, 06:07:00 am
Is it just me who doesn't mind the graphical capabilities of trem and would at best like to see better assets (models, textures etc.) on the existing engine?
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: KillerWhale on January 24, 2011, 06:35:52 am
I made all of ATCS in Minecraft once, but I didn't have the paid version, so I couldn't save it.
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: jm82792 on January 24, 2011, 07:32:13 am
I'll do it in Blender maybe?
Just got the game engines shaders under foot as I've been primarily focused with gameplay stuff.
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: F50 on January 24, 2011, 07:52:37 am
Is it just me who doesn't mind the graphical capabilities of trem and would at best like to see better assets (models, textures etc.) on the existing engine?

No, its not just you. Graphics are merely the cherry on top, so to speak.
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: Aviator on January 24, 2011, 07:53:02 am
Is it just me who doesn't mind the graphical capabilities of trem and would at best like to see better assets (models, textures etc.) on the existing engine?
Yes. Because some people (such as me) don't have high end computers.
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: CATAHA on January 24, 2011, 01:21:59 pm
Is it just me who doesn't mind the graphical capabilities of trem and would at best like to see better assets (models, textures etc.) on the existing engine?
If I understood you correctly, then you should read the specifications of ioQ3, because the current engine is very easily lead to the limit of its possibilities. =] Not so easy to greatly improve the current engine with a still normal performance.

Yes. Because some people (such as me) don't have high end computers.
Can be used Odin's quote:
Like I've said 9,001 times (http://xspblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/over9000_small.jpg) 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.
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: gimhael on January 24, 2011, 02:03:35 pm
If I understood you correctly, then you should read the specifications of ioQ3, because the current engine is very easily lead to the limit of its possibilities. =] Not so easy to greatly improve the current engine with a still normal performance.

You have to understand that the Tremulous devs are interested in game development, not engine development. If you want engine improvements you have to either bother the ioquake developers/maintainers or switch to a completely different engine.

Switching engines probably means that the new and the old client will not be compatible. Even Xreal which is the closest engine to ioquake3 has (afaik) different cgame traps, shader syntax etc, so that having two 100% compatible clients for the low and high end is not easy at all.
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: Tremulant on January 24, 2011, 02:32:42 pm
Is it just me who doesn't mind the graphical capabilities of trem and would at best like to see better assets (models, textures etc.) on the existing engine?
Ah, another weirdo who, like me, doesn't believe that the current state of trem's assets is pushing the limits of ioq3's abilities, don't let cataha see you say this.
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: CATAHA on January 24, 2011, 02:40:21 pm
You have to understand that the Tremulous devs are interested in game development, not engine development. If you want engine improvements you have to either bother the ioquake developers/maintainers or switch to a completely different engine.

Switching engines probably means that the new and the old client will not be compatible. Even Xreal which is the closest engine to ioquake3 has (afaik) different cgame traps, shader syntax etc, so that having two 100% compatible clients for the low and high end is not easy at all.
1st - not engine development. Devs dont need develop own engine since a lot of ready exist.
2nd - is 1.2 client compartable with 1.1? =D
In any case... We're talking about ioQ3 limitations, not about engine upgrade right now. ioQ3 have it limits, so talking about 'more detailed models and textures' as Nux its just generally wasting of time. =D

Note 2 Tremulant: Im not saying current Trem state reached limits. It just fact that with every 'improved' model, etc we're getting much closer to it limits. And put on a 'huge uncompressed TGA`s and more-poly models' its just purchasing of minor improvements for the incredible price. =D
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: Qrntz on January 24, 2011, 03:05:26 pm
Oh my, did someone else notice THAT IS A REAL IN-GAME FLASHLIGHT?
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: Drag222 on January 24, 2011, 03:31:13 pm
Oh my, did someone else notice THAT IS A REAL IN-GAME FLASHLIGHT?
Yeah, I did notice that ! Did you notice that, even if the lighting is shitty as hell, and it's just screenshot, it's all realtime?

And to the others, if you could give constructive crit, what you think is totally wrong in the lighting, how to make it look better, I'd appreciate. Maybe I could make it look good :D
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: jm82792 on January 24, 2011, 06:10:36 pm
Baking it(well if it actually uses some nice lighting algorithm that can't normally be done real time) will help because you can do much more advanced lighting calculations like raytracing.
In the end you'd get color bleed and more realism.


Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: Drag222 on January 24, 2011, 07:18:05 pm
Baking it(well if it actually uses some nice lighting algorithm that can't normally be done real time) will help because you can do much more advanced lighting calculations like raytracing.
In the end you'd get color bleed and more realism.

Yep I agree, but still, it's a realtime engine, I can't change that.
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: DraZiLoX on January 24, 2011, 07:59:08 pm
/me drools at those picz!
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: jm82792 on January 24, 2011, 08:40:57 pm
Read up on lighting and you'll get the hang of it.
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: swamp-cecil on January 24, 2011, 10:23:59 pm
Epic! Also: The lighting ruins it. Trem should consider making it a legit game online. Wait...Im going off topic.
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: DeadMeat on January 25, 2011, 04:09:50 am
it looks good. now you can go and buy it.
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: jm82792 on January 25, 2011, 04:19:37 am
Unfortunately other than showing doubters nice looking stuff your wasting your time :(
Blender game engine anyone?
Not that bad.
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: Tremulant on January 25, 2011, 04:50:39 am
Blender game engine anyone?
Not that bad.
Seriously? Why's the BGE version of Yo frankie so unbelievably half-arsed and shitty, then? are there any decent games out there that use it?
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: jm82792 on January 25, 2011, 05:13:24 am
Blender game engine anyone?
Not that bad.
Seriously? Why's the BGE version of Yo frankie so unbelievably half-arsed and shitty, then? are there any decent games out there that use it?

I know what you mean, it was a demo kind of thing that was done 2(?) years ago and it doesn't look bad but it's a bad idea going for organics when you can make inorganic (trem stuff, indoors, metal, glass, etc) look much better with more ease.

No gameplay for YoFrankie that's worth mentioning, for games there have been a few commercial ones...
From what I've noticed from my testing(and hours of online reading) it can run fast on a newer computer(or disable settings), it does have networking capacity and finally it can look really good.



Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: Nux on January 25, 2011, 05:29:00 am
Yo frankie looks nice for real-time rendering! The gameplay sux, yes. So it didn't do much to promote the game logic system, but that could just mean they were focused on demonstrating the graphics and not the gameplay.
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: smeagle on January 25, 2011, 05:33:08 am
Blender game engine anyone?
Not that bad.
Seriously? Why's the BGE version of Yo frankie so unbelievably half-arsed and shitty, then? are there any decent games out there that use it?


Blender game engine and Unity have the same problem. Basically, it is the fact that many script kiddies go to them to be an "epic haxxor dood" who makes games.

Unfortunately for them, they are much more complex and flexible products than point, click then play.


There have been many brilliant games made with the BGE, and most likely with Unity, the only reason noone considers using them is because they have a bad reputation of being used by "script kiddies" and not major indie developers.



To see some of the amazing things done with BGE:
http://www.youtube.com/user/mpan3#p/u/8/RHBEJLlHz04

Everything with the title "game engine" in above channel.

And all game engine files in below link are amazing examples of what GE can do:
http://mikepan.com/files.php
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: jm82792 on January 25, 2011, 05:45:51 am
Thanks for broadening and elaborating on my key point.
First you see a "crapton" of bad games because Blender Game Engine is extremely good at rapid and easy prototyping.
Secondarily you need to refine and add detail, UI only(narrow thinking, UI only is a tar pit) noobs will fail :(


I am one of those UI people who has gone somewhere with logic however true scripting is what I wish to do.
I'm learning Python, it's irritating since I know what I wish to do numerically(Most 3D concepts are permanently branded into my brain) and my former(bleh just micro-controllers) programming knowledge conflicts.
Anyways a TON can be done without coding or logic bricks,
but to get nice shaders, a clean game and great performance you can't use logic bricks/hacks/whatever.
I am currently working on learning the inns and outs(got 2 years into Blender so far) of the game engine,
this will take months if not a year with what I need to learn to go from noob to semi decent.

I plan on doing something with it, game-play is my initial focus as making stuff look good(models, animations, materials, textures, lighting. Mostly my cup of tea minus modeling) is something that won't be a horrible task.
Getting a human running around can be done in a flash,
aliens well I have yet to see how Trem handles it and how to implement it.

Blender game engine anyone?
Not that bad.
Seriously? Why's the BGE version of Yo frankie so unbelievably half-arsed and shitty, then? are there any decent games out there that use it?


Blender game engine and Unity have the same problem. Basically, it is the fact that many script kiddies go to them to be an "epic haxxor dood" who makes games.

Unfortunately for them, they are much more complex and flexible products than point, click then play.


There have been many brilliant games made with the BGE, and most likely with Unity, the only reason noone considers using them is because they have a bad reputation of being used by "script kiddies" and not major indie developers.



To see some of the amazing things done with BGE:
http://www.youtube.com/user/mpan3#p/u/8/RHBEJLlHz04

Everything with the title "game engine" in above channel.

And all game engine files in below link are amazing examples of what GE can do:
http://mikepan.com/files.php
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: Tremulant on January 25, 2011, 02:25:54 pm
Yo frankie looks nice for real-time rendering! The gameplay sux, yes. So it didn't do much to promote the game logic system, but that could just mean they were focused on demonstrating the graphics and not the gameplay.
Oh, indeed, it's a very pretty game, but I got the impression that it was a game developed by artists and could have done with a programmer or two. Getting stuck in the ground with no way to escape without quitting the game, from just walking around the level, got a bit old.

First you see a "crapton" of bad games because Blender Game Engine is extremely good at rapid and easy prototyping.
No i don't, i see Yo frankie and that old hoverboard demo, which i actually quite liked, performed fairly well even on the hardware i had at the time, but was more "just a graphical demo" than hey frankie should be.

Blender game engine and Unity have the same problem. Basically, it is the fact that many script kiddies go to them to be an "epic haxxor dood" who makes games.
So that's what the Apricot open game project consisted of, script kiddies who wanted to make a game?

There have been many brilliant games made with the BGE, and most likely with Unity, the only reason noone considers using them is because they have a bad reputation of being used by "script kiddies" and not major indie developers.
Go on then, name them. This is the first i've heard of BGE's script kiddy reputation, personally.

To see some of the amazing things done with BGE:
http://www.youtube.com/user/mpan3#p/u/8/RHBEJLlHz04

Everything with the title "game engine" in above channel.

And all game engine files in below link are amazing examples of what GE can do:
http://mikepan.com/files.php
Um no, i want games, not graphical demos that amaze me.

So, if the excuse with hey frankie is that it was only supposed to be a graphical demo, why on earth did they bother? They even charged for pre-orders on DVD, surely someone was expecting a playable game at the end of that?

maybe we need to be split away from this topic, btw, mods.
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: Drag222 on January 25, 2011, 04:15:01 pm
Blender game engine anyone?
Not that bad.
Seriously? Why's the BGE version of Yo frankie so unbelievably half-arsed and shitty, then? are there any decent games out there that use it?

I know what you mean, it was a demo kind of thing that was done 2(?) years ago and it doesn't look bad but it's a bad idea going for organics when you can make inorganic (trem stuff, indoors, metal, glass, etc) look much better with more ease.

No gameplay for YoFrankie that's worth mentioning, for games there have been a few commercial ones...
From what I've noticed from my testing(and hours of online reading) it can run fast on a newer computer(or disable settings), it does have networking capacity and finally it can look really good.





Wel, I actually Tried the game, I don't know about the current BGE version, but YoFrankie, is bugged, collision system doesn't work well, It's full of aliasing, and it's not so "nice looking", textures are flat, it just fit the style they are having. However, I did see some games with Blender Engine that looked good, but still, just good. Wel actually, that game http://www.blendernation.com/2011/01/04/dead-cyborg-a-donation-based-sci-fi-adventure-game/

But Hey, the point of this topic is not to talk about BGE =O I'm not even thinking than anyone is going to implement trem in any other engine, I just wanted to show/see what ATCS would look like, I'm going to try to improve the lighting maybe this weekend, and then maybe i'll repost some screenshots :)
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: Patriotpie on February 26, 2011, 11:36:25 pm
@Drag222 that map looks amazing. Wish I could play it. I preordered NS2 a few months back and it's been exciting watching it become a better and better game (from a technical standpoint)

Unfortunately, its network code is horrible and most rounds are still noticeably impeded by lag. It's getting better though with each successive beta.
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: jm82792 on February 27, 2011, 06:56:59 am
Yeha I've known about BGE's capacities for a long time.
It takes a coder to get anywhere, basically lots of time for a bonehead like myself to learn proficiently.
Documentation sucks for the API, lots of brick walls to get anywhere.
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: Tremulant on February 27, 2011, 12:26:29 pm
So, do you recall any of that ""crapton" of bad games" yet?
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: OhaiReapd on February 27, 2011, 03:23:07 pm
This is a good concept of another, possibly better, FREE Trem. However, if I were to ever pay for Tremulous, as you would have to with NS2, I would want it on a different engine. It would have to look and feel much better than how it does now. The best engine for something like this would probably be the Halo engine or the original CoD4 engine, although, I don't know how anyone would get that kind of engine for Tremulous. No, I hate CoD and Halo, but the graphics and physics of the game are amazing.
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: + OPTIMUS + on February 28, 2011, 09:26:33 am
as our developers are doing the project for free in freetime and just for fun (so as the communtiy), moving to something contemporary would just make things more useful to use as a reference in their future.
like, i could paint in photoshop with the mouse instead of tablet, to say how cool i am to push the limits, even if the result is crappy.
just to say.
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: jm82792 on March 01, 2011, 07:07:20 am
as our developers are doing the project for free in freetime and just for fun (so as the communtiy), moving to something contemporary would just make things more useful to use as a reference in their future.
like, i could paint in photoshop with the mouse instead of tablet, to say how cool i am to push the limits, even if the result is crappy.
just to say.
As in a more modern engine?
I understand that, Quake is really old and not many people know how to develop it.
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: Tremulant on March 01, 2011, 02:03:34 pm
Quake is really old and not many people know how to develop it.
Thank god we've got the q3 engine, then.
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: Odin on March 07, 2011, 05:45:24 am
Quake is really old and not many people know how to develop it.
Thank god we've got the q3 engine, then.
God, as in John Carmack.
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: Haraldx on March 07, 2011, 04:00:52 pm
Don't want to start engine wars, but if you want a better engine, then choose Quake 2 :P Not the vanilla of course, I mean Berserker@ Q2.
Berserker is a Russian guy who made an EXTREME graphics mod for Quake 2, it includes many things that are seen in 2009 and 2010 titles. These features are - Bump-mapping (however, never liked it), real time shadows (walls and everything else has real time shadows too), higher quality textures and models, distortion, reflections and other things! Basically, it's the most beautiful mod for Quake 2 ever made. I heard Berserker is also making Berserker@ Q3, however, I don't understand Russian, so I just skipped his forum.
You can take a look at this video to see the power of it, everything is adjustable - on or off.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02sCWmly60Q
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: Qrntz on March 07, 2011, 08:54:27 pm
I don't understand Russian, so I just skipped his forum.
Well, I do.
The Q3 Berserker mod is already public, but (I believe) it's still being developed. A bit picky to graphic drivers.
I'm not sure if it's stable enough already, but those are the features:
- unpure (sv_pure 0)
- uses GLSL instead of ARB fp/vp as in vanilla q3 (the minimum requirement for GPU is something along the specs of GeForce 6xxx - supports 4 color buffers, a lower amount won't do)
- no symmetric multi-processing
- shadow maps
- per-pixel dynamic lighting via pre-light pass deferred shading
- parallax maps and (micro-)bump maps
All I got from around 7 pages, was too lazy to skim over the rest.
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: Tremulant on March 07, 2011, 09:45:04 pm
A better title for this thread would have been "look wot i did with NS2", it seems to have confused a few people.
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: jm82792 on March 08, 2011, 04:34:14 am
Hmm.
In the end we need a GAMEPLAY port to a capable engine that's free/open source?, and overall works.
The charismatic leader or small team would show off the simple GP version(gameplay with old assets or cheapo fillers) that would hopefully get people like myself and other fired up. They'd make assets(this forum has a few gem people but advertising on the Blender forums or CGartists might be wise), and we could have a full port that looks pretty decent.
That's how I see this happening if it ever does.
I want Trem to live for a long time and this is the only way to give it more lifetime.

Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: Drag222 on March 08, 2011, 04:57:35 pm
A better title for this thread would have been "look wot i did with NS2", it seems to have confused a few people.
I don't write like that, but anyway lots of trem players don't even know about NS2, and since it's about a remake of ATCS on a better engine, any title would probably have started the same thing...
Title: Re: ATCS on a better engine (Screenshots)
Post by: Tremulant on March 08, 2011, 05:15:00 pm
A better title for this thread would have been "look wot i did with NS2", it seems to have confused a few people.
I don't write like that, but anyway lots of trem players don't even know about NS2, and since it's about a remake of ATCS on a better engine, any title would probably have started the same thing...
I didn't mean to imply that you do, it just seems that the thread's getting hijacked by engine top-trumps enthusiasts again. How's the ATCS remake going, are you still working on it?