peter_spy

In other engines, static mesh class itself already has attributes like material path, skins, LOD settings, etc., but the model has to be imported first. So instead of having a separate "LOD entity", it would be better to have these attributes either moved to func_static class already, or, requiring models to be assigned to an entity with all the proper spawnargs.

I'm not sure if that's a best example, but I was trying to stress the physics system a bit. I'm using moveable ball models, all having that 16-polygon CM above. Just for fun I gave them friction 0 and bouncyness 1, to make physics work harder than usual. And I was able to get to 150 balls without going below 60fps: Given that this is a synthetic test, and in typical situations you won't need more than, let's say, 10 objects interacting with each other simultaneously, it seems to me that those limits could be raised like ten times, and it shouldn't hurt the performance.

That makes sense, but going from that to 16 polygon limit seems really extreme to me. In practical terms, you can't create a shape more complex than this: Since physics is done on CPU, it should be pretty scalable too. I doubt that mappers or content creators will want to go beyond something like a bowling mini-game So perhaps it would be worth trying to set it at, I dunno, 1024 polygons per CM, testing it on a few objects, and going down until the game works in a stable manner? Btw. I was trying to find any info on any hard CM polygon limits for engines like Source or UE3, but couldn't find anything.

Not DR but engine-related question: is there a reason for idMoveables collision model to have such low polygon limit? I know the game can be wonky, but it's impossible to make even a really basic round shape with such low limits.

As for the LOD confusion, it kinda seems like you created the problem yourself, moving stuff to very different folders. Typically, you don't have time for making more than one good (LOD1) version of your model, so the clutter in the model folder is usually minimal. What I've seen in TDM stock assets though, is that models can have unnecessary LOD stages, where e.g. LOD1 is 1500 tris and LOD2 is 1200 tris, for example. That makes little sense. The rule of thumb is to have around 50% vertex difference between each stage, so changing between models gives tangible performance boost.

Hmm, upon closer investigation, it's not like AAA titles handle it in a 100% consistent way either. For example, Dishonored 2 dropped the outline for doors altogether: And for windows, it's often visible only after you open them: Edit: I guess the reason for not having super tight outline system is that they might have been relying on an interaction prompts more (which I turned off and forgot about it):

I wonder why this is such a huge issue. Such outline is being used in tons of both AAA and indie games nowadays, and it works correctly. I bet it's something you can either find for free, or buy in a Unity or Unreal Marketplace for a few bucks.

That bloom and fog reminds me of Deadly Shadows a bit, good old mapping times

Outer Wilds is definitely on my list, it's been receiving nothing but praise and I've seen gameplay videos too, it's very intriguing

Nope, Parvati. Currently I'm on Monarch and I wonder if there's going to be anything interesting here.

I've been playing The Outer Worlds a bit, but apart from a one companion that's well-written and voiceovered, the whole game is flat and lifeless. I really hoped it would be more like FNV in space.

That^ seems like overthinking. If water arrow + torch = light off, players will expect it to work every time, whether it's moveable or not. I'd expect that just hitting a guard with it should make him drop the torch and start investigating. IIRC Thief 3 did that with both water and moss arrows.

At least when it comes to objects inside containers, it was always easier for me to just set them to hide 0 and use target links from openable element. Since the problem is with ignoring geometry when tracing frob entities, adding more geometry doesn't seem like a solution to me. Making objects invisible until container is open works every time.

There was a Splinter Cell installment where Sam could whistle to attract guards to a spot and then evade them. The sound range of this whistle was pretty small, so often it felt awkward that it isn't heard in larger distance, but IMO that wasn't the main problem. As we all know, stealth games like SC or TDM these are about scanning the environment, assuming a strategy and trying to execute it. The finite aspect of player resources is important and makes for different setups mappers can create. Whether it's a whistle or a mic-based sound, you're giving the player an infinite resource to cheese through your map, and it makes the gameplay awfully boring. I bet that the number of mappers that would want that is excatly 0. Exactly. Not to mention implementing the whole idea, which can easily get complicated, like guards reacting differently to different sound levels your mic produces, etc. Good luck making predictable player tool out of that, and then teaching the player to use it effectively (long story short, that's a hell no from me ).

This^ is actually an awesome find.

In the thread view, yes, but ideally I wouldn't want to see them at all. In the Activity view though, you have ignored users displayed in the same way as others, just with post content hidden. If I did block someone, I really had a reason, and those options to unhide the content are everywhere. IMO they're not much different from "Are you sure?" prompts (and equally annoying). Or, in other words: when someone has me on the ignored list, every time I post something, they get an equivalent of "hey, that idiot you can't stand just posted something, are you sure you don't want to see it?" That's still informational noise, and I'm pretty sure people who blocked me really don't need that in their lives.

That said, the way the ignore function works is kinda weird. I ignore some people because they're giant time and space wasters to me, so I really don't need any info on their actions, whether in threads or in other views. E.g. I really don't want to know or see that they posted a new topic or reacted to a post somewhere, or posted in a thread. That thing with having an option to unhide every blocked post in a thread is unnecessary. And, I can see whenever they're quoted in other posts, so hiding that would be awesome too.

Isn't it a question of order of operations? In modeling apps you can easily achieve both results, depending on what you need. The only difference is, that in the first example the modelling modifier would be placed before UV modifier, and in the second one it's vice versa.

Yup. A torch-like light might be good for a final preview, but for prototyping materials it's better to have neutral lighting without intensity changes. This way you can adjust things like specularity to avoid overblown highlights, etc. It's kinda like with photo studio lights, if it looks good there, it will look good in any lighting conditions. Thanks

One suggestion on Material Editor: by default it uses orange pulsing light_torchflame, which is probably the least useful choice when prototyping materials. It also reverts to it every time you close the window. I suggest either switching to atdm:light_base as a default, or making the editor remember the last used light type and color.

There is something in English/American manner of speaking that looks like tons of sugarcoating and beating around the bush, at least when you come from some other country. In other cultures, e.g. Polish or German, people are much more blunt. When they see shit, they call it shit, not "unfortunate bowel byproduct" There is such a thing as being too polite, and it's regarded as contrived or superficial. It can also be an easy way to disarm any criticism or discussion, regardless of their substance. I've seen it bumped to absurd levels on TTLG, where I saw responses like "you're not our friend, you can't criticize us", or "since you don't like it like we do, maybe Thief isn't a game for you". Fortunately TDM forums are nowhere near that level.

After several pages of patient discussion, posting relevant links and referring to facts, which he ignored entirely, since his subsequent responses were still the same make-believe? Yes, unfortunately.

It's funny that so many cultures associate speaking calmly as automatically being superior in a discussion. You can speak in calm tone and be completely clueless, while you can shout in anger and still have a point. That said, I don't think it's about messing on purpose, it's just his MO. You've already seen it in multiple bugtracker entries too. He barges in, usually without checking wiki or forums on certain functionality, makes up his own ad-hoc interpretation of it, automatically assumes it is canon, and then it takes several people to explain him the "historical context", or that he mistakes bugs for features, etc. Then either he lets it go, or, if he is stubborn, he'll reply with walls of misinterpretation until the other party has no more energy for it.

I am not making sense anymore? You seem to have a peculiar cognitive disorder, where you don't see difference between common knowledge and semantics, and what you make up about it in your hopes, dreams, and intuitions on any given topic. And then you mix it up and use in whatever convenient way you find at any given moment. Why do you think you should be the one who's constantly pushing for something, in a discipline where features or changes need to be meaningful and based on data, and not on feelings?

So, at least now you acknowledge that hiding lights is a new functionality. Last time it was a "limitation" and a "bug" to be fixed Although I have no doubt that you'll entertain us with another convenient explanation for that.