nbohr1more

Those arguments should work for your requirements Biker... but the performance benefits may be (?) inconsistent due to the "typo bug" in 1.02 (they should also work in 1.03 AFAIK).

@Aida Yes, I've brought it up a few times... These are the Spawn Arguments: "hide_distance" "If set greater than zero, this entity will hide itself when it is greater than this distance from the player. WARNING: Performance can be impacted if too many entities in a map use this feature." "dist_check_period" "If hide_distance is used, this sets the interval between distance checks, in seconds. Default is 0.5 (500 milliseconds)." "dist_check_xy" "If true, the LOD distance check is only done orthogonal to gravity, i.e., vertical distances aren't counted in it. Useful for things like rain clouds turning off/on." ...that's for the system that's currently available in 1.02 (options = either visible or invisible). Tels made an example entity definition and passed it along to Fidcal from what I recall. It's also broken due to a typo in the distance check period? (causes FPS to fluctuate wildly...). More details in this thread: http://modetwo.net/d...round-zero-mod/ (Try to ignore some of my raving and ranting ) (edited to exclude redundant internal syntax)

Have you guys been in contact with these folks? Doom 3 Mega-Texture Mod V2 From what I can tell you might need ETQW to author the megatexture but I was reading about some other methods that seemed to do away with that requirement (reading comprehension was low as usual )

So "lightFalloffImage" is always Z bound? (Otherwise as a layman I would say that the material definition looks just like combining two XY textures.... There's nothing else that seems to specify "This texture get's this direction while this one gets the other...").

I get it now! The makeIntensity keyword says "Shine this bright this far away from the light" The map keyword says "You can go this far left, right, forward, backward"

Already stuck (it was hard to avoid the pun from your username...):

lights/aa_1_sky1 { lightFalloffImage makeIntensity( gfx/lights/1_sky1_z.tga ) { forceHighQuality map gfx/lights/1_sky1_xy.tga red Parm0 * 2 green Parm1 * 2 blue Parm2 * 2 zeroClamp } } so it's just a material definition eh...? I am returning to the idea that this may not be so bad...

Light Texture tutorial? Got my hands a little dirty and started writing my own http://wiki.thedarkmod.com/index.php?title=Light_Textures_and_Falloff_Images

@plasticman I think I over-estimated my comprehension of this one. I suspect that to do this you would need to make your own vpf using the ones in the Strombine pk4 as a template? Is this technique possible with what is available in Dark Radiant? Would you be willing to create a wiki article? (I will get off my duff and take another peek tonight to see if I can stretch my noodle a little. )

Looks good HC! If there's any resemblance to RailGun's "Trapped!" I'll be all over it.

Probably related to rounding issues in the CSG math. Perhaps when the engine is Open-Sourced the CSG precision can be given more bits to work with? http://www.modwiki.net/wiki/CSG

This is probably controversial but I think the team members should either be immune to Rep from us normal folk or have their own Rep system. I find it ludicrous that the primary architect of Saint Lucia has any negative rep.

This reminds me of my thoughts on Star Trek style replicator/transporter technology and it's consequences for God having to manage the "supply of available souls". I am disappointed that a stronger opponent on the Pro-Religion side didn't come to the fore. I was trying my best to muster a "Devil's Advocate" (or actually God's Advocate... ) side to this discussion but Springheel's and Sotha's elegant prose and logic were too enchanting to my Scientific side to want to drive into the metaphysical archives for anything resembling a good counterpoint. Then Mortem simply conceded that religion is irrational but left us with his take that some irrationality is good (and left us the homework to re-read Immanuel Kant... ). While I give him props for his skills, I think that Springheel knew that his debate tactic would probably be an easy win here. (But I also know he was hoping for a worthy counter....). 1) People equate "rational" with intelligence and logic 2) Use your exemplary skills in those two areas to show that your opponents are lacking 3) People will feel that you've proven your point about the opponent's stance because of step 1. I also know that Demagogue could have provided the Devil's Advocate side in spades but I think he was also too enamored of the pro-Science side. He was only drawn in to defend modern philosophy in general.

This is great! Going from: 1) Not possible. to 2) Possible! ...but lots of custom Asset creation. to 3) Possible and practically automatic. Rich, rebb, OrbWeaver, and Serpentine all deserve kudos for their part in the investigation! And Tels gets credit for this tangent on foliage decals! Great work all!

I think Springheel feels strongly about people using religion to help themselves work out real-world issues. I think it's valid that he would try to make sure that those who espouse the practice know his rebuttals. This is actually an act of Morality because he is looking out for the world at large when he is trying to steer this debate his way. I don't personally agree with the way he conveyed all this but I respect that he has the character to stick to his message and purpose in spite of whether it makes him look like a big jerk. I respect your weathering his comment for your own stance as well jdude.

r_showLightCount ?

If I were Plasticman I could probably explain in full detail how to make a Light texture so that one big light source looks like two or more different ones but alas my Jedi skills are not yet ready :(

I think the rule of thumb is: "If it can't be scissored by a visportal then draw it all at once to reduce batching and draw calls" So I'd say yeah... ??? The Performance wiki seems to confirm (with caveats):

These are my thoughts: 1) There is always a natural occlusion so having a fixed blob rather than a dynamic one is fine. 2) The moving blob is not worth the performance hit especially compared to adding more foliage which seems to be more of a win for improved visuals??? 3) If anything, the stalk shadow is really the key to the immersion for the moving shadow unless you are prone or coming up from a sewer-pipe (etc). The blob is kinda nice for it's intended use but doesn't pack the punch that the stalk shadow does. 4) It probably wouldn't be worth it to script having all foliage remove the shadow mesh when the light source is below a certain height??? New one looks great BTW

Yes! My work filter opened-up again and let me see the screenie!

Yep. As Baddcog recently schooled me ( ) Patches and Models also use Vertex Normals while Brushes do not. So the only way to get curvy looking Brush work without going triangle-crazy is Normal Mapped textures but it's very hard to re- UV-map complex Normal Maps back to a Brush. That is why my holy-grail is to have some reasonable work-flow that can let you break apart a Normal Map from a model and easily re UV-Map it to Brush work. Bikerdude is so good with Brush work that he probably wouldn't need any models at all for any level of complexity

See the following article: http://www.modwiki.net/wiki/Models_vs_brushes

I think these are valid concerns and concede the logic of them almost entirely but I also think that if you believe in God you might as well read as many different works of literature that reference this deity including the Bible to get an idea of what humanity has said about the matter thus far (...and perhaps God himself?). Another tangent: "Thou shalt have no other Gods before Me" Implies that other Gods exist, no? If we add that idea to the Islamic idea of Jinn we have an inkling of the idea that the Abrahamic faiths conceal a sort of taboo pantheon...

I tried to give you a Plus Rep for that one (haven't been using them silly Rep buttons in this discussion either) but I forgot I used up all my positive Rep quota giving props to Rich_is_Bored for his Translucency Thread :laugh: