Search the Community

When you choose a mod, it must restart with the keyword fs_game <mod name>, right? How would we do that and still preserve the DLL in the main mod? Or can we copy in the FM .pk4 within the mod and then restart our own mod from our mod using the same load mod GUI command? We might not even need a menu, just use that load mod GUI command as a way to restart after copying in the .pk4 that actually works.

That's all possible, copying in the .pk4, etc, but the problem is the D3 filesystem is only initialized once when you start D3. That is when the .pk4's are all read in, and if there's stuff in a .pk4 that overwrites other stuff, that is when those files are used instead of the ones they're overwriting. If you just copy in a .pk4, the stuff within the .pk4 won't be loaded into the filesystem (they would the next time you ran D3). There is a console command that is supposed to be used for this purpose, called reloadEngine. Ideally, you select your FM and copy it in from within D3, and call reloadEngine to basically restart D3 from within D3. What happens in reality is that the game crashes whenever you call reloadEngine. It doesn't work. I even tried it in vanilla D3 and it still crashed. However, there is something that does work: Loading a mod from the D3 menu. This must do something similar to reloadEngine, and it works. Whatever it does doesn't seem to be in the SDK, but maybe we can source hook something to see what it's doing?

Number 1 would still display all the maps in the 'selected' pk4, really no way around that. For a campaign though, I'm not sure how we can control that really. The player should naturally want to start at the beginning though.

Yeah, minimizing quake 3 wasn't possible without an additive tool. But in the early version of Doom 3 it was like that too I think. At least I tried to switch to the "doom 3 advanced graphics mod" readmefile while ingame to check for other commands and it didn't work, so I thought to myself "Id-software crap again" ... I guess they have fixed this issue with an update. Wow, I am really suprised. First they altered pk4 handling and now this... =)

I like #1. If a .pk4 contains multiple maps (a campaign), the player shouldn't be able to pick the map to start with. I thought there was a problem with DLLs loading, so that if a .pk4 contained a DLL, then once the engine started it was too late to copy .pk4 files into the darkmod folder, because the DLL wouldn't get loaded. Or did I misunderstand? If that's not an issue, we don't need a loader and all of this can be done from the menus.

I hope I do not sound like an asshole, but I don't feel comfortable with the thought of Potterr producing a loader for The Dark Mod. Given the amount of crashes people are experiencing with GL and Poterr's lack of presence and support on the TTLG forums for more than a few months are not really strong pro arguments in my book. Also, GarretLoader is probably one of the ugliest applications ever produced. I vote for doing this on our own, if it turns out that we can't handle the process from within the game.

Sorry if I'm covering old ground again, but I don't have time at the moment to review all the old map loading discussions. What holds us back from doing our map selections from within the Dark Mod menu? Are there things that we don't have access to in the SDK? From my limited knowledge, it would be adequate to have a window pop up where the player can navigate to where the pk4's are stored. From here we could do it two ways, if possible. 1. Select the pk4 directly and click ok, this would take us to the next screen and also copy the pk4 to the darkmod folder. The map would then be displayed and the player could select it and click 'play map', or some such thing. ....or 2. Select the folder where the pk4's are stored and click 'ok'. This reads the contents of the pk4's and gives the player a list of maps. Select the map from the list and click 'load map'. This could copy the correct pk4 into the darkmod folder and start the map. This has probably already been covered, it would just suck to have to use a front end though. Doom 3 has an interface for selecting mods from a list, so hopefully it's possible to tinker with this so it can be used to load maps as well.

Just when im doing the *.pk4 file, to see if everything is ok, i go to doom3 mod section, select the Darkmod and run the map from the pk4 file. The several times that i did this i never felt anything wrong.

Have I misunderstood something here? Since D3 cannot load in another map from another pk4 without closing down then only only pk4 will be placed in the darkmod folder at a time. Therefore, the DM menu needs only concern itself with 'knowing' the name of the current next map and displaying it. Presumably the Garrettloader type program will launch DM with a parameter to pass the name of the the map(s) within it and that will be displayed. I do not know how D3 handled different levels. Presumably it returned to the menu and displayed the name of the next map? So there must be some means for the DM menu to do the same. Is there a test pk4 with a two or three test maps campaign? If all the above is true then the DM menu will need to display only one name at a time: the next map (normally just the first and only.) Incidentally, it might help if provision is made for a general title plus a level title plus being able to leave that blank if not needed. This can be merged into one title if there is sufficient room left. It would also be nice if an optional banner graphic header might be made available for the general title. Let me clarify with the example of my own T2 FM. Its general title is "The Night Watch" and there are four maps named Infiltration, Elicitation, Re-orientation, Confrontation. To just show say, 'Elicitation' as the name of the game in the game menu does not look so good as... THE NIGHT WATCH (large centred text or even graphic banner heading provided by the mapper) Elicitation (centred below as a subheading in smaller text or possibly even another smaller graphic) In T2 I got round it by using "The Night Watch : Elicitation" which I could just squeeze in the field provided. On completion of the last map or at any time the player wants to quit then he/she exits DM and is returned to the Garrettloader program. Mr Potter will have to come up with another name if his program is adapted for DM! Probably TDMloader or something. Or a new custom program written just for TDM. [EDIT] I should add that the maps provided by TDM at launch will not constitute a 'campaign' but each be separate missions each to be selected by the player from the TDMloader. Possibly one might be called 'Trainer' else a mini campaign of three maps: Trainer plus two levels that follow one another.

Question about the New Game menu. Would the player ever be selecting the mission to play? It sounds like we're leaning towards a DM version of GarrettLoader (or something similar). Users would pick the mod, and GL would copy the .pk4, and delete other add-on .pk4 files (to prevent file collisions). So, does there even need to be a New Game menu? When the player hits New Game, the map that is loaded is not choosable. If the mod has just one map, then that's the map to play. If the mod is a campaign, then the map to play is the first of the campaign. Perhaps each .pk4 should contain a starting mission file, which contains the name of the first map in the mod (or the only mission in the mod, in the case of a single mission mod). So there is no mission choice for the player. New Game goes straight to the Difficulty screen. Now, we (DM developers, mappers, testers, designers, etc) need some way to load an arbitrary map. Maybe, if there is no starting mission file, that's when the New Game menu shows up, supplying a list of all maps in the map directory. This would really be seen only internally.

The DLL goes into the PK4 as well as any other file. There is no special rule for it. We just do it this way, because it needs to be in a PK4 file, while all the other files don't need to, which is the only exception I'm aware of. Otherwise you can deliver a single PK4 file with all the assets and a modified DLL included.

Yeah, that's how I think it will work. Of course. It doesn't matter what files you put into which PK4; they'll show up as part of D3's virtual filesystem just the same. (The one exception is dynamic libraries, like gamex86.so and gamex86.dll - they go in a special, separate PK4.)

OK, well at least it sounds like we can keep each mission packed up which is good imo. Then Garrettloader or similar can handle them, display the info, install as selected by copying the pk4 into the darkmod folder then launch Dark Mod which will deal with one mission at a time then exit back to Garrettloader. I never played D3 other than the intro section but there seem to be different maps in the original pk4 files so presumably D3 can handle different levels, ie, progress from map to map?

Putting to many PK4s into the directory is not a good idea anyway, as there potentially will be nameclashes. Each set of PK4 should eb an individual mission, and as such it should be in the directory, but not more.

We still don't have a way of restarting D3 after loading in a different pk4 for some FM (the default way they provided, reloadEngine, just crashes). So we may still need an external loader to copy in the .pk4 before loading D3. Putting many different FM .pk4's in at the same time wouldn't work if more than one of them wanted to overwrite a file.

While the gui is being looked at another thought comes to mind. IF it is decided that pk4 maps will be run direct without unzipping and IF no separate manager such as Garrettloader is needed (players can just download pk4 files direct into the darkmod folder) then the mission's readme info file ideally should be displayed. This is normally done by Darkloader or Garrettloader but if they are not needed then the player needs to be able to read this without having to exit and extract it from the pk4, etc. etc. Some will be plain text but really rtf or html is needed to do TDM justice. So mappers can put in different coloured backgrounds, text, fonts, and graphics (video?) Some of the info will be story introductory; some will be important info like 'Don't play this ironman! You need the broadhead and rope arrow to finish the game!'

The reason behind me saying you should use an alpha plane for details is that I imagined the details would be paint and/or goldleaf (or silverleaf) designs. In which case you really don't need normals (bumps) for the details. Also because the wood on a lute would be sanded very smooth so you wouldn't get woodgrain bumps thru the paint. It will also allow you to use an existing wood texture and ONLY make a texture for the details (256x256 is probably fine) If you painted the entire lute on a tex you'd probably need to make a 512x512. So it'll save space this way also. The 2 polys MIGHT add 2kb to the model, a 512 map would add at least 1 MB over a 256. I made a wooden sign which I wouldn't do this on, because it is made from rough boards. I want the paint to follow the shape of the cracks ect... So it needs to be applied to a wood texture that matches the normal map. @Max For the sword I'd probably NOT add planes for details. Instead you probably want to use a plain metal diffues (no details) and any shapes in the sword will be in the normal map. That'll make it look forged 'cause all the details show in the shadows. The specualr only makes parts shiny or not. So a leather handle specular would be black (not shiny), the polished metal blade would be white. A rusty blade would be specaled grey/white/black Well, in 3dsMax it is the material browser, a pop-up window that has slots for each texture. Each slots material has properties, one of them (the important one for games) is the map. This is where you load your texture (you can drag from a folder and drop into max). Then drag it onto the object. Then use the uvw tools to align it on the object. @demagogue, Since you are using LW you have NO choice but to triangulate if you want to import into D3. (3dsMax files work fine without this step). I'm not sure how LW works in this aspect. But in 3dsMax I can turn the edges in the center of a square that aren't outlined (they can be guessed as to their location, or seen from the lighting sometimes). But it is tougher, so triangulating them (turning into 3 sided polys in Max terms) just makes them easier to work with, that's all really. But sometimes it makes detailed models harder to work with cause there are so many lines on screen (that's the main reason to work with higher sided polys). A little unclear about what exactly you mean in that last part, hope I'm getting it right: The engine DOES care about how many polys you have, thus the need to be conservative and try to build as low poly as possible while still getting the desired shape and lighting props. Of course times are changing. In Max's 'something for ladies' post I posted a pic of a chest I made. The finish one for game is about 800 polys, maybe a little too high but it's a fancy chest that I hope won't end up in EVERY room of a castle. The high poly version for the normal map is 25,000 polys. It loaded in game just fine and could be used in a small area just fine probably, but overkill. I think I get what you're asking after reading again. The engine will render the light and shape based on how the triangle of the back of lute are. No matter if the are triangulated or not. They are there, just hard to see without being outlined. So I'd probably finish fleching out the basic shape and get it right where you want it. When you are done shaping, then triangulate and turn the edges. Always turn edges that need it. --------------------- This is why GOOD low-poly modeling is usually thought to be harder than high poly. With high poly you can add all the curves, shape, ect and make something look real. Low poly really makes you work to get a convincible and good looking object, textureing also plays a huge part because it can mask the fact that something is low-poly. This is a really interesting thread you guys might like, Low Poly Models : Polycount forums http://boards.polycount.net/showflat.php?C...;gonew=1#UNREAD You can see lots of great work there, along with pics of the maps and wire frames to get an idea what those guys are doing. This is one pic I thought was cool, old school low poly Oh yeah, @Max you probably only wnat to load a normal in the editor. Like in the pic of the doors, I used the normal for the hinge because that's where all the shape is, I wanted to align that. The diffuse is plain metal so it doesn't show you any reference. Then you need to make a material file, combining all your maps (diffuse, normal, spec) into a material. The name of the material is what you put on the object before export (in LW I believe - I know its different than 3dsMax, for 3dsmax I have to edit the object files with notepad and put the material names in myself). I think LW can handle the material names somehow, it is on the Wiki.

Interesting thread at TTLG. The Mystery Dev is back...this time releasing some old materials from the unfinished LGS game, Deep Cover. http://ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1621710#post1621710

Just got a good news alert for you guys. I read on Gamespot forums but lost the thread. Basically PC Gamer UK says it's one of the best games ever made. Also there's a pivotal moment in the game that was very shocking and cool. You know one of those gaming moments that never goes away and stays with you in your fond memories. Like playing Thief: The Dark Project and hearing the A.I. talk with themselves.

Ahhh, now I see. Sorry. That prefix thing is definitely good, but of course most mappers should already do it by default... Since we learned that the pk4 of the map has priority, it isn't needed that much anymore though. But still, better safe than sorry!! About that pk4 name. You can still just rename it. No problem!! You just have to hope the bsp files aren't called the same. With a bit of luck yes. To make sure it works, we'd have to achieve that that special file is loaded at last so that the files inside overwrite the beforeloaded files. But again renaming the pk4 could help out...

Yes, I agree and understand but didn't make my point clear. This idea might be obsolete now anyway but I'll clarify: What I was saying was that the Dark Mod team make a 'rule', ie, 'recommend', that all mappers should stick to. So, my own map might be called 'Manor Royale' (working title so far) so if I stick to the 'rule' then I name my pk files say, MRL.pk4 and files inside are prefixed MRL_. If everyone stuck to this rule then it would be impossible for there to be conflict between one FM and another's files because either they would be named differently or, if they happened to be the same (eg if someone by chance had 'Murder, Risk, & Loot' so also prefixed their names with MRL_) then it would be impossible for them to be in the darkmod folder at the same time because both pk4 files would be called MRL.pk4. Having said all that I don't particularly like it! Ditto about referring to the original texture files if you just change the diffusemap. I know you can; I'm saying should mappers be told not to do this. It's all a trade off as to (just) copying the other files and renaming them PLUS the overhead in pk4 size AS AGAINST a possible happy solution of avoiding conflict. I parenthesised 'just' because I don't know how often this is commonly done (dozens and dozens of files?) so how much of a nuisance. No such rule could be enforced but any FM issued with conflicts would soon be known and players would avoid putting it in with other FMs at the same time or just not play it... Probably.

Some FM authors might want to do just that, why not let them? It doesn't physically overwrite the files on the HD, just in that instance of the D3 file system. Assuming we have a loader that copies in a single .pk4 for the FM you want to load, and moves it / deletes it when done, there's no problem if an FM decides to replace the mainmenu GUI, or change player voices to female for a different character, or whatever. As long as the FM has a pk4 that moves in when it's selected, moves out when not, it should work fine. The only concern is they'd have to update their own mainmenu GUI version it we released a new TDM version with new mainmenu GUI functionality, since I'm sure there will be a few "patches" from us after we release.

Fidcal, the filename of a pk4 does only matter for the loading sequence. You can even save one on your TDM folder under another name. What matters are the filenames inside the archive. Also, if you just change the difusemap (or anything else) of a shader you can still refer to the original texture files. No problem at all!! But cheers to ID. I was as suprised to hear about the "map based pk4 priority" as New Horizon, but in the end, they did a really great job on this one. Although this implies, that modders/mappers may not include map-unrelated content into their fm, like a new mainmenu, because this would be loaded before the map and could possibly overwrite the tdm-default files. (To protect this from happening TDM could prefix their pk4s with an "AAA") [bTW, nice interesting discussion here]

I've uploaded a new pk4 to svn. Lean is now a hold, rather than a toggle. Still a bit buggy, though, if you quickly press and release the button.

You mean a new hud.gui in the unzipped folders? The pk4 with the map within it should definitely overwrite the one in the unzipped folders. I can't test that right now though, my system is in a ...state of dismemberment.