Search the Community

Ive decided to take my old 400 meg pentium and install linux on that, with no windows whatsover. If that works, then maybe Ill see about putting it on the new 2.3 gig pentium we just got a few months ago. Good news for me, the computer guy at my workplace does side work for cash and he is a big fan of Linux. Phew!

That's some damn awesome work, man I've got a few other ideas to throw into the mix as well. First off, a few sketches of individual buildings would help out on the modelling end as well as some more detailed closeups of city streets...probably from eye level like your first sketch. And also, I'd like you to do a concept of The Slough. Think similar architecture, but gone to ruin. The section of the city has been flooded, undesirables have moved in here and there, makeshift bridges have been put up between windows and over the flooded streets. Everything looks bent, broken, and grimy, but not totally destroyed. Think of something creepy and desolate, a place where only the desperate would dare tread.

No, they'll be fine. It's pretty common to convert heightmaps into normals...there really isn't any difference in quality other than the fact that with heightmaps you only have 512 shades to work with instead of 64,000. So you can't get AS detailed as you can with a normal generated from a model, but with textures that's not really much of an issue. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Some textures convert to excellent normal maps, like picture fames, wallpaper etc, and some need to be modelled for best effect, like windows. Bricks are a grey area, which definfitely look better modeled. I think the deciding dactor should be 'how difficult is it to model' If it can be done realatively quickly then it should be modeled.

ok I'll try to send them before sunday. windows: http://www.thedarkmod.de/real_texture/materials_vol5/

Mandrake is now called Mandriva (after acquiring Connectiva), and they have recently acquired Lycoris, so it will probably change to Mandrivicoris or something similar soon RH/Fedora Core has the advantage of being probably the most common distro, but I've heard it makes some things difficult (like setting up multimedia stuff - no non-opensource codecs included etc), and at 4 CDs, it just seems like it is a bit bloated for my tastes, although I'm sure the installer makes a lot of it optional, I would rather get the install done and then add bits as I find I need them. So small distros like Vector (390 MB .iso for the standard edition) suit me just fine... I guess I will see how I go with Vector... I am going to try out a few to see how different they are... It is good to know you can run some games like Doom 3 on linux machines. If only Sonar came in a linux flavour, I could just about dispense with Windows entirely should the urge overtake me...

Finally!! I can get back into the swing of things. Ever since a stick of my ram died, running windows server 2003 on 256 megs of ram has sucked. Can't really do much of anything. Today though, my two 512 meg sticks arrive and I'll finally be in the 1 gig club. Ahhh, the simple pleasures.

It's configured as a desktop of course but to answer your question, it's the best OS Microsoft has put out to date. It boots faster than XP, and is more stable. I don't know how it's possible but server 2003 ran faster on my wifes 600 mhz celeron than XP did. I also used XP pro for well over a year but after using Server 2003, I would never go back. Though it's a different branch of the NT line than XP, it still runs everything perfectly. I have all the Thief games, Doom 3 and other games all running flawlessly. Microsofts next version of windows was even built off of 2003 due to its stability.

Thanks, ill look into that. It never ceases to amaze me what a poor product windows is.

Why on earth do you run windows server 2003 on your computer?

The current hot topic as regards Linux is Ubuntu - comes with plenty of GUI tools so if you have any standard machine you should be able to avoid the command line. OTOH, a CLI is a very efficient way of doing certain tasks, hence I have a gnome-terminal window open at all times on a separate workspace. One big advantage of using Ubuntu is that it will be likely more up to date than your Lycoris version, and you'll be able to update easily to new versions of the distribution when they are released (every 6 months, IIRC) As far as I'm concerned, Linux is "ready for the desktop" depending on who is using it. If you're willing to learn, persevere, have things break and then fix them, and occasionally leap into that murky world of command lines, it's fine. If you want something as simple as Windows, I don't know whether most of the mainstream distros will provide that; perhaps Linspire or Lycoris.

Hell yeah, keyboard is much faster for a lot of things when you know your way around. Default windows interfaces are the only interfaces I know that anything you can do with the mouse, you can do with the keyboard. And they have to, for disabled people's special software. Then 3rd party programs miss the point and don't use the default interface, and I can't work as fast :/ And don't get me started on Mac's interface. Plus it's all very well to say Mac is so reliable and stable when it's hardly doing the variety of things that people do on PCs >. I would certainly use a Mac for video editing. But nothing else.

Actually, you can use windows without a mouse, Sparhawk, as long as oyu have a keyboard obviously.

I wouldn't say the system administrators are the sharpest tools in the shed, but they don't have anything to do with the quality of the software available for Linux... Linux seems to be OK when you customise it for a specific purpose, like a dedicated server, but for running a general purpose desktop environment it seems woefully inadequate. I don't know if you use KDE, but it is horrible to use IMO - it is a pooly designed GUI strapped to a command line OS and it lets you know it frequently by loading programs so slowly you have time to make and drink a cup of coffee before it is up and running. Maybe that is just due to incompetance on the System Administrator's part (I really don't know), but even if you can get it working smoothly, it doesn't change the fact that there is very little quality software that will run on Linux, or doesn't run better under Windows or Mac OS X. Otherwise I would jump on board Linux faster than you can say "free operating system", the price can't be beaten, and I do like the concept of not being dependant on Microsoft for every bloody thing...

That's where wall flattening would actually help you realistically [ Edit: Also, hiding in alcoves on the side of a hallway, behind load bearing columns on the sides of the hallway, inside curtains on hallway windows, etc. Again, it's up to the FM author not to screw up the gameplay in their mission. If the author puts in a long, absolutely straight hallway with flat walls (nowhere to hide on the sides) and a brightly lit wall at the end, then yes, it would be hard to go down that hallway and remain unseen, just as it would be in RL. I think the original Thief's deliberately put darker areas at the edges of hallways also to kind've simulate the fact that you're less visible when you stick to the edges of the walls, even tho their engine wasn't up to calculating silhouettes. ]

I am a satisfied Firefox customer, but I am still not used to tabbed browsing, because I always end up closing the browser down completely when I meant to just close one tab So I'm still opening pages in new windows when I could just open a new tab, oh well, I guess I'll get used to it eventually. But Firefox is all I need in a browser - still being on 56K, I am not all that interested in all the bells and whistles browsers offer, I just like the simple, clutter free design of Firefox. But IE is a heap of shit. I actually don't have any axes to grind with Microsoft, most of their products are very good, if a little expensive. IE is just not one of their better efforts.

Very nice. Windows are in short supply at the moment.

I'd agree with the making it your own game as something unique from thief. IMO thief did well on the first impression but then failed after that, and it was mostly the little things that triped it up, like the lack of interaction, stupid limitations (like exploration restrictions), graphically poor (painted on windows and doors anyone?), or generally silly things. and to be critical of looking glass/ion storm, they never really put the polish on their games, it looked acceptable for marketing/screenshots but after that you didn't have much to apreciate in it. i guess that was eidos's doing now when it comes down to magic i think it could be done REALLY well in thief. magic could be outlawed in the world, with the occasional trial for practicing magic, however only the stupid ones or the weak ones are put on trial for practicing magic because anyone who has real talent belongs to some mages guild or is too friggin dangerous to try to prosecute, but they can of course be killed. thus magic would be rare obviously, but you could get away with it in places like mage towers, underground caves, dungeons, crypts etc... where no one from the general populace can see and report it. furthermore, magic would try to be subtle, doing it's best to avoid the attention of someone (though obviously some examples will break with this theme, ie faery fire). so for a magical ever burning torch the flame might look exactly like a normal flame, however it never stops burning, if you try to put it out, it sputters a bit and then flares up again to the surprise of the player. when you get to situations like a tomb and the fires are still burning, they have an eerie colour to them making it all the more spooky. on the matter of the crystal arrows, they are definately magical, if you have problems with other magical items then the arrows will fall into the same category. i think the key is to not avoid magic altogether as an excuse but to spend alot of time defining it in the world, in a thief world magic would be obscure, known only by a few and subject to alot of rumour, stories, lies and is viewed as criminal by some. if you went to define a system that both restricted it's use but justified it's existance then when someone sees a torch burning despite the conditions they will oh and ah at it rather than say "well thats a cop out isn't it". BTW i ran a DnD campaign based on the thief world, i kinda stuffed it up by not planning it properly. But basically i used the DnD rules and said that the highest level character around is about level 10 (the trickster or victoria probably) and everyone averages a level of 2. The world doesn't have many magical items due to the distinct lack of high level mages or clerics (i made clerics and paladins hammerites, the druids and rangers were the pagans). The system worked for the most part, but yeah being the first time I DM'ed a game I didn't prepare properly and it fell apart :S

What's good about opera over IE? The one thing I can't live without now is mouse gestures, you can do all sort of things with various combinations of mouse holding and clicking - browsing through galleries, going to previous and next pages, or you can set it up to perform any function. Also the magic wand- it remembers your user name and password for any site, so you ony have to ctrl+enter to login -that includes sites that don't give you an option to save your password, being able to right click words and have a choice of 10 enginves to search it with. ctrl+d for paste and go, being able to start from a pevious session even if you have 20 windows open, most of the annoying crap out there is designed for IE and doesn't affect opera, it blocks all popups, being able to toggle off and on images/stored images on the fly, being able to toggle between author and user mode on the fly, a mouse scroll zoom function, tabbed pages, the transfers window has much more functionality than the popup you get when you start a D/L in IE...it's so long since I used IE I can't even remember just how shitty it is, so I've probably missied some stuff out.

Just to make sure there aren't too many or too dark or directional shadows or lighting. The best situation would be cloudy, muted daylight - NOT direct sunlight or interior lit by a bright indoor light. We could do with some general surfaces, ground, bricks, windows, pretty much anything.

I interested make mission for DARKMOD! I am not professional radiant user, but i have few editing skills. I not realy like d3 emty space logic i think, unreal and dromed solid space logic is better. I think how resizing the size of rooms, especialy windows dificultest than dromed and unrealed. Spite the Radiant using more confortable than dromed, Too!!!! I more like thief lightmapped lightning, doom3 realtime lightning looks for me too hardware eater, and dificult to use. No problem, i could optimize!! I very like vertex editing in radiant. This function wonderful. Comparable with dromed, radiant fast, and confortable! My best fm: Cop in the shadow This looks like average quality fm, but very optimized, most places the polycount 150-70 And not more than 220!!! The optimisation steal my time, this cause how my fm not a biggest quality! I spend many energy make good look lightning, and good scarry feeling!! Some screenshoots: http://thiefmissions.com/shots.cgi?m=CopInTheShadow2

Hey guys, I just found out about this mod tonight. Really excited about it, great idea, good engine choice, and the work so far looks incredible. Anyway, some of you may recognize me from TTLG, since I recognize some of you. So I dunno if any of you know, but I do 3d modeling and level design. I know you don't need any more 3d modelers, (don't think I could compete with what's on the site anyway) but I made this HL2:DM map. I made a tiny map for Thievery (Country Abode) a while ago too and had another much larger, nicer, map coming, but got side tracked with college. It's too bad I don't know a thing about the Doom3 level editor or I would like to apply to help out with that. Anyway, to get to the point of this thread, in my city (Portland) there are some old style gothic-ish looking churches that I've always noticed as having GREAT texture potential. I have access to this pretty nice digital camera that could take really high res photographs. If you guys want, I wouldn't mind waiting for a cloudy day (pretty much every day around here) and getting some photos to make into textures. Just from one specific church I have in mind, it has big stone walls with grout all between the stones (very old style, but suprisingly not worn out) beautiful windows and old oak doors, so it would fit perfect for this mod. I'm not that much of a photoshop master, but I had to ask, since I've been wanting to photograph these churches for a while.

true. most windows platform developers ive worked with have pc's that just fly, and as you said, i have seen the applications developed on those machiens run like a turtle on sunday on older pc's.

D3 actually has some good brittle fracture physics. Obviously it only does it in certain cases like windows, and you can't arbitrarily break an idMovable, but have you ever watched a window shatter in slow motion in D3? It's pretty awesome.

That sounds ok, but if my understanding of how it would be implemented is correct it might have issues. I guess the area of a wall/floor would have a rather strong loss characteristic to it. would you make the area sound characteristics dynamic? The funky part is where you have an open door the walls are 1 foot thick stone and a dude in the other room, without some sort of pathing system the sound would be nullified even though the person could quite clearly hear through an open door. But i agree with the ray tracing problem, it is similar to path finding. but how about sound nodes instead? Basically at key sound refraction points eg doorways open windows etc... you place a node, it will act like a proxy for the first emanation point of the sound by picking up sound intensity and re broadcasting it. it's a hell of alot simpler than ray tracing around obstacles and is much faster as well. the only drawback is that mission authors have to place the node in the toolset (unless you made it automatic some how). if you implemented the node system you could also alter the ai to go to the emanation point if it's what it is hearing from and go hunting from there.

That's what we want. Another thing that would be usefull is to link objects to each other. So we create a hierarchy "Texture->Wood->Floor->Marble01.jpg" and we add a normal map as well. Since usually we don't need to see the normal in most cases it owul dbe enough to link the normal to the texture so that you can easily determine which textures already have normals and which one will still need them. the state would determine how far the processing is done. So for textures we would define states like Created, Normalmapped, Gameready, maybe others. That's why I don't want to have states hardcoded. The best thing would be to allow creation of states as an independent object and then assign it to a class/group. So I create a group textures, create a bunch of states and then assign these states to the group textures. I could create another group "Models" and create some different states (needed, assigned, modeled, animated, gameready, ingame) and assign it to the model group. For sounds this would be similar. The problem is that if the states and groups are hardocded it will not be flexible. If I can create groups and subgroups I can cfreate any structure that I want without being locked on textures or models specifically. Unfortunately I have only seen one such a program once but this was done in NET for Windows. It abstracted the objects from their functional purpose, so that the program itslef didn't need to know anything about what a object means. It just needs to know about it's relation to other objects and a state. Some things that I forgot. It would be also usefull if objects could be linked to different groups. So for example I could create group for sounds textures, character models and animations. Each of these are an individual group, but if I can link them together I can create a kind of metagroup. So that I can link a character model to the sounds that needs to use without the need of mixing this in in groups where it doesn't belong. The problem is how to define the hierarchy. A sound is a sound. But if it is needed only for character models, should it go into the soundsection or in the character model section to the character it belongs to. We also need to add a description text as well (which should be easy). I can try to write a document where I specify what we need in more detail, I just wanted to give you an overview so you can estimate wether you can do it or not or if you think it would be to complex.